‘Emergency rule can be considered in Nort East, North West, but…’
Dennis Amachree is a national security analyst and former Assistant Director, Department of State Security, DSS. He speaks on the efficacy of declaring state of emergency as a way of tackling security challenges in the country. Recently, there have beenrenewed calls for a state of emergency to be imposed on parts of the country […]
Dennis Amachree is a national security analyst and former Assistant Director, Department of State Security, DSS. He speaks on the efficacy of declaring state of emergency as a way of tackling security challenges in the country.
Recently, there have beenrenewed calls for a state of emergency to be imposed on parts of the country ravaged by insecurity. What is your view on that?
A State of Emergency is a temporary measure enacted in response to a critical national crisis, such as terrorism, civil unrest, or a major natural disaster, that suspends democratic structures and the Rule of Law. I have always advocated for a state of emergency in the North-East and North-West, as the protracted terrorist and bandit crises in these regions have resisted conventional military solutions for over a decade.
State of emergencies have been imposed on certain parts of the country in the past but with varying results. How do you think it will pan out if used this time?
- Digging for survival: The story of Plateau underage miners
- State of emergency over insecurity: Where, when, how?
Nigeria has imposed States of Emergency before, and while some declarations proved effective in restoring temporary order, others sparked controversy over abuse of power and democratic principles. The critical point many citizens overlook is that an SoE essentially establishes martial law. Since we claim to be a practicing democracy, we should be relying on our existing democratic institutions and legal frameworks to manage and resolve internal security challenges, rather than resorting to the suspension of those very structures.
The security situation differs from place to place. For example,the situation in the North East is different from the ones in the North West, North Central and South East. Should the same measure be applied to all?
The security challenges across Nigeria are inherently distinct and cannot be solved by a single measure like a blanket State of Emergency (SoE). A more nuanced, regional strategy is required. North-East; this region calls for a robust, full-scale military approach to suppress the established insurgency. North-West: The government must thoroughly investigate the origin of the banditry, specifically determining how and who facilitated the entry of these groups into Nigeria. The priority here should be a strategy to deport these foreign elements. North-Central, the crisis in this region is primarily a struggle over land and water resources. The solution lies in an impartial and conscious dialogue among all affected parties to address the root causes of these conflicts. South-East: To achieve lasting peace, the government needs to take the crucial step of formally ending the Biafran Civil War. Despite General Gowon’s post-war declaration of “No victor, no vanquished,” the persistent marginalisation of the South-East suggests the conflict’s underlying issues remain unresolved. This requires honest, high-level dialogue to fully integrate the region.
The last time it was used as a measure in Rivers State, people faulted the context saying it is political. What should be the ideal situation for a state of emergency to be imposed?
The Rivers State State of Emergency (SoE) serves as a troubling example of emergency rule within a democratic system. The declaration itself is arguably unconstitutional, and the actions of the subsequent military administrator remain largely unclear to the public.
This lack of transparency has fuelled concerns about the potential misuse of state resources. More broadly, this SoE highlights a critical danger: emergency rule can enhance corruption and lead to significant economic losses for the state
What process should be followed?
I would never vote for a State of Emergency. The lasting solution requires a fundamental shift, the Federal Government should limit its focus to national sovereignty and external defence. Simultaneously, power must be devolved to state governments through the creation of specialised, well-trained security outfits, namely State Police and Local Government Sheriffs, who are equipped to directly address the specific security issues within their jurisdictions.
Many argue that a state of emergency does not imply the sack of elected officials like the governor, how would you react?
While it is often argued that a State of Emergency (SoE) does not necessarily require the removal of elected officials (such as governors or legislators), historical precedent in Nigeria, specifically in Borno and Rivers States under different administrations—shows that this practice is common. My firm conclusion is that no elected official should be removed under an SoE, as such an action fundamentally overrides the democratic will of the electorate
As an experienced security expert what would be your recommendation for solving the various threats in the country?
As a security professional conversant with these issues, I urge state governments to take greater ownership in finding solutions. They are geographically closer to the problems and must adopt both an all-of-government and all-of-society approach. I agree with the Chief of Defense Staff, General Musa, that the ‘all-of-society-approach’ is the correct strategy, not a State of Emergency (SoE). Since the military is already deeply involved in the fight against insecurity, declaring an SoE won’t make a significant operational difference, but it will certainly increase the risk of power abuse.