Maritime security: Stop this legislation

Recently, there were reports that some members of the National Assembly were mulling plans to review the existing legislation to create an opening for private security organisations to secure Nigeria’s maritime environment. This is, frankly, a very bad idea. Among the arguments being made is that the “monopoly” being enjoyed by the Nigerian Navy (NN) […]

Recently, there were reports that some members of the National Assembly were mulling plans to review the existing legislation to create an opening for private security organisations to secure Nigeria’s maritime environment.

This is, frankly, a very bad idea. Among the arguments being made is that the “monopoly” being enjoyed by the Nigerian Navy (NN) needs to be rolled back. First and foremost, this is a patently false claim – the navy does not enjoy monopoly when it comes to securing Nigeria’s maritime environment and Exclusive Economic Zone.

The Armed Forces Act, which gives legal backing to the existence and the operations of the military, outlines the specific roles and responsibilities of the navy – in addition to the primary role of defending Nigeria by sea.

The navy is particularly charged to enforce and assist in coordinating the enforcement of all customs and laws, including anti-bunkering, fishery and immigration laws of Nigeria at sea.

The act also charges it to enforce and assist in coordinating the enforcement of national and international maritime laws ascribed or acceded to by Nigeria, among others.

It is very clear from the foregoing that there is a strong emphasis on the “coordinating” function of the navy in the maritime environment of Nigeria. This coordinating function presupposes the existence of other government agencies.

The document: “Harmonised Standard Operating Procedures on Arrests, Detention and Prosecution of Vessels and Persons in Nigeria’s Maritime Environment 2016”, clearly outlines the various federal government agencies that in one way or the other have responsibilities in the maritime environment, including the Nigerian Armed Forces, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF), the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) and Nigeria Customs Service (NCS).

So, clearly, the navy’s role is a leading and coordinating one, not a “monopoly” as being alleged by some.

The second important point to be made is that it is inconceivable for any branch of government in Nigeria to be exploring a way to legislate private security organisations into the security architecture of the country whether land, sea or air. No country in the world modifies its laws to give private operators powers that are similar to that of its constitutionally established and empowered military.

That is not to say there is no room for private players to operate in supporting roles. But these are discretionary matters that relevant government officials can make routine decisions on as needed. There is absolutely no basis or need to amend a country’s constitution or laws to make this possible.

At the moment, a number of private players have been engaged by the government to support and assist with pipeline surveillance and monitoring as part of the fight against crude oil theft. These companies have been working with and supporting the navy and other law enforcement agencies under the auspices of various security operations and initiatives.

Therefore, there is no room for any illegitimate forces that seek to rival or even supplant the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Legislating private companies into Nigeria’s maritime security architecture is akin to enlisting mercenaries to do the work of the Nigerian military. They can continue playing the supporting roles that they have always played. All over the world, navies traditionally take the lead in securing offshore waters. This is not different and should be no different in Nigeria.

This is, therefore, an open call to the leadership of the National Assembly to not entertain any attempts by any person or persons to push a nefarious agenda through the hallowed chambers of the assembly.

In addition, it is a reminder to Mr President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, that, in the event that any such legislation is sent to him for assent, he has a duty to safeguard the integrity of Nigeria’s Armed Forces and also to safeguard his own legacy by standing firm against any and all attempts to legislate and legalise mercenarism or any other form of private security arrangement in Nigeria’s security architecture.

The existing arrangement, where private security support is enlisted, especially at the level of surveillance and monitoring of oil infrastructure in the nooks and crannies of the Niger Delta, is the way to go, and additional efforts should be invested in refining this arrangement and improving its effectiveness.

Anything else, as being suggested by some, would be tantamount to endorsing and legislating illegality in ensuring and achieving the security of the country.

 

Tunde Bamise wrote from Abuja.