 Governor of Benrey State Samuel Orton and the Presidency engage in a battle of words on the issue of insecurity and cattle grazing. A survey reveals that the trust of Nigerians in the regime of President Muhammad al-Buhari is rated at 26%. This is cross-quality, and I am Mary Anne Hall. The battle of words between the Governor of Benrey State Samuel Orton and the Presidency is still on. This time the Governor said the language employed by him, Garba Shehu, the special assistant to the President on media and publicity, is engaging people or in engaging people rather, is exposing the quality of leadership that he, Garba Shehu, represents. He faulted the response by the Presidency to the comments he made in an earlier interview saying it should address the issues he raised in the interview instead of attacking his person. Shehu had accused Governor Orton of promoting ethno-religious politics, and still on the issue of insecurity, prominent Nigerians including the Sultan of Sarquotu and the President General Nigerian Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs Al-Hajjis-Ad-Abubakar III advised the federal government to sit up and urgently address the challenge. What's running us to discuss this is, at Chike Chude, he is a political analyst, Kwanum Terence is a security expert and Tunji Abdulameed is a legal practitioner. Thank you very much gentlemen for joining us. Thank you for having me. Great. So I'm going to start with Kwanum because you are the security person and we're talking about insecurity here. The question I always ask every security person is, the way we're going about this issue of insecurity, hashtag Boko Haram, hashtag Unknown Gunmen, hashtag Bandids and all the United States actors. Is it the best option that is on the table? Thanks for having me. Obviously it can never be the best when the global terrorism index of 2020 have ranked us as the biggest terrorist country just behind Afghanistan and Iraq when we are living in our neighborhoods with the 40 million terrorist groups, which is the Kwanum Haram. And then we have the leadership that is not confronting this issue properly, that is rather looking for soft landing to give terrorist that have been recognized more over. And so when you begin to lack leadership in this kind of separations, you are going to have colleges and you are not going to have the direction. And so we have lack total political leadership in trying to curb the issues of insecurity in the country. In spite of the efforts that our security, our patriotic security people have put in to make sure that these things are not escalated without the political leadership and the way to confront this issue, which is the challenge that we have on our hands at the moment, because every country that is dealing with security challenges within these borders have been deployed pro-active actions to be called back, even to the extent of using technology to call those security challenges that they have, even to the extent of involving the international community. The way you begin to hide the challenges you have for political reasons that is how they are going to be escalated. And we live in a country where we have a lot of ungodly spaces that are left there for these criminals to occupy and commit us and we are refusing to use technology. We are refusing to involve the international community. We are lacking in political will. I think we have a long way to go and it's quite sad. I'm curious, and the next question is for you, Achike. Why do you think that this is so highly politicized, because the security expert is telling us that there is no political will in the first instance, because you need that if you are fighting this kind of warfare, which is not a conventional one. Why do you think that there's more of bickering between governments, both at the center and the state, instead of coming to a table to have a conversation that would be in the best interest of Nigerians? Well, Nigeria is a federation. The 36 states are federating units and so there's that linkage and obviously what affects one state really has a way of affecting the other states, especially when it comes to issues of insecurity. We have seen the surges is that small in Boronau state and then slowly spread to other parts of the country, not just the north, but every other part of the country, including the south of Nigeria. So that makes it natural for governors whose states are also affected as chief security officers in quotes of their states to also weigh in on what is going on. I think basically this issue would have been handled in a more professional manner, but for the disposition mainly of the federal government whose primary responsibility is the protection of the territorial space of Nigeria. And by virtue of that, the federal government has been given the force of arms to be able to use that to keep Nigeria safe regardless of the state. And so with the federal government failing in that primary responsibility, it becomes a problem for all the other states of the federation. And that is why they are weighing in. And of course, you know, other states, other state, few state executives have also looked at the fact that the federal government has not been able to fulfill their responsibility to the people and have been pushing for a way for citizens within their states to be legitimized when it comes to the issue of their arms for self-protection. But the federal government has also made that very difficult. If not impossible. In fact, warning them about the criminal consequences of amending themselves for the purpose of self-defense. And so, you know, it becomes a very big dilemma if the people, the government whose responsibility it is to defend life and property in the country fails woefully to do that. And the governors who are supposed to be chief security officers in their states are not able to, you know, provide that protection. Then it becomes a problem between the governors and maybe the federal government. And more so, Benoist state that has been at the receiving end, at the center of the violence that has gone on in this country, they have suffered a lot of, you know, a lot of losses. And you see the governor almost crying, putting his hands in the air, because he feels so important when he comes to protecting the citizen. So that has naturally resulted in him holding the federal government responsible for what is going on. And then you cannot, you know, fail to hip a majority of this blame with regard at the doorstep of the federal government. Look, there should be a general broad-based consensus among, you know, the various states and the federal government, you know, when it comes to looking for ways to curb the insecurity in the country, because everybody is affected. So it is this inefficiency on the part of the government that really makes it very difficult for the state, some of the states to be in harmony with the federal government in terms of their perception of how the government is handling insecurity in their states. Abdulhamid, one of the, let's just basically look at the concerns of Governor Autumn, one of which is that he feels that Mr. President is seemingly stoking the tensions in his state according to him. He's stoking the crisis in Benway because he thinks that the President wants to declare a state of emergency. Again, let's not also forget that he's disagreeing with the federal government on grazing routes, which he has also initiated a lawsuit of sorts, taking the federal government to court to deal with that issue from a legal perspective, aside from the fact that there seems to be a war of wards. Why do you think that Governor Autumn is taking this position legally and otherwise? Regarding the grazing route or the disagreement with the President on the grazing route issue, I think the best approach is to go to court and let the court interpret or give the interpretation of what it is to do it. For me, I think the government is on the right path, because I am aware that, look, by section one of the land use ads, the administration of land use in all states is vested in the Governor as trustee for the people of the state. In other words, I am not aware that the federal government has a land and look at it as federal land. So those lands that are accepted, except for those lands that were bought in the land use as federal land at that time. Yeah, so what about the federal highways? That's land also, one way or the other, and that's why they're called federal roads. So is that not something that can be... Except those at the federal road, federal lands in the land, because that's from land that's recognized, the one eaten by the what's called, by the federal government at the time when the land use was completed. Some of them were allowed to retain those lands. Except those lands, most the lands in the states are basically vested in the Governor. In other words, the manner to deal with the land, the who to give the land to, the what to do with the land is vested in the Governor. The Governor is ordinating trust for his people. So in other words, if the federal government requires any land in any state, he must approach the state or the Governor to request for that land. And if the Governor grants the land, there should be it. The if is not granted, there's nothing they can do. It is the right of the Governor to determine who to give the land to. I will not give the land to. So the Governor, to me, is right to go to challenge the pronouncement of the President that certain lands will be recovered for what's called, for what's called as bracing routes. So in fact, the law being relied upon by the federal government, that actually not federal government now, the President, is out of 1963, is out of 1964, 1965. That law, as far as I'm concerned, does not apply to entire federation of the country. It applies only to northern region at that time. And as of 1978, when we have the land used as that provision of the law, as far as I'm concerned, it's no longer applied to any land in the country. So you cannot rely on an awful little law that has no longer in effect, if it does not affect any longer to take land for anybody. So if the federal government wants land, he needs to liars and with the Governor and see how it can happen. But because maybe probably because of the political difference between them, this is not being possible. You can see in the most case, there's no crisis regarding the with the position of the Governor as to what the President says is in alignment. Well, maybe that's because the Governor just backpedaled recently. I mean, he just made headlines that Governor Uzzadima is pushing back and saying that there is no ban on open grazing in his state. I think we lost him, but when he comes back, we'll go back to that. But let me come back to you, Chike. Many have wondered why the Governor has decided to take this position after Southern Governors had taken a clear stand on the issue of open grazing. What do you think could have changed his mind? Well, it's politics, obviously, and it's not politics of emo state in general, but politics of the Governor. He's some personal politics trying to ingratiate himself to the federal government, mainly the president of the country, because he was not casual, although coerced into having the broad-based agreement with all the Southern Governors. And so it is the pressure that has been brought to bear on him. And it is a decision he has taken that is diametrically opposed to the people of emo state, who have also expressed anger with the issue of open grazing. So obviously, the Governor is acting on his own, and there is not acting a tandem with the promises he made to the people of emo state. So I don't think we need to flog the matter. It is pure politics. He wants to ingratiate himself to the federal government. That's what it's all about. It's not about the welfare and the security of his people. And do not also forget that this decision by him is a decision that is capable of causing problems. He's not going to be involved in all the forests, for instance, and all the routes that this... If they are going to graze that they are going to go through. And so what it means is that the clashes that we have seen in the past, some parts of the country, especially in the Southeast, are going to reoccur one way or the other. And that is why he needs the input and the buying of the people when he wants to do something like this. If he does not do that, then he cannot guarantee a peace in emo state. And that is the way I see it based on the current situation as we understand it in the Southeast. I'm going to come back to you. Let me go to the security analyst. Now, there are many concerns as to what's going on in the country now. At first it used to seem a bit far-flung from us because you heard 300 people were killed by Boko Haram, 10 people were killed by Boko Haram, but now the numbers seem to be increasing. And the shift of these bandits is shifting, it's hitting a bit more close to home. And we saw what happened in Platu State the other day. We're seeing videos of what happened in the NDA and it's getting all kinds of reactions. I spoke to a security person yesterday, a retired military officer. And he said that first things first, it's a national embarrassment. It's a message that these people are sending because they've seen that maybe our governments are weak and are not dealing with the issue. But as a security person who's seeing everything, either from the inside or from a bad eye view, all that's happening. And the political standings or the angles with which our government and security agencies seem to be taking this from. Can we say that we are really going to be able to deal with this situation before 2023? Because what we see most of our politicians doing is campaigning or trying to realign for 2023. But then more people are dying every single day. Is this something that we can conquer anytime soon, seeing the divisions and the lines that are not blurred in any way? Yeah, I think the reaction of my view to the situations that are happening at the moment is quite impressive because they are not allowing the federal government ineptitude to attain the issues of security. Just go by because they are resisting and they are coming after the federal government so hard because most of the things that are happening is just poor leadership that is being offered by the federal government. We've done actually involving the state governments in serious issues of security because if 17 governors of this country could wake up and go into a meeting and resolve that they all want to go into action to be able to resolve security, common security challenges within their borders. And the federal government still refuses to abide by it. And it's also frustrating the situation for a governor to wake up one day and say, yeah, that's pulled out of that agreement. And that's why they... It then means that the issues of security still lies with the federal government because there is a commander-in-chief. He gives directly to all the seven chiefs and the seven chiefs in turn insist that even the security commanders that are operating within this state take directly from them before they operate. So at the end of the day, the security meetings that we have at the state are just mere conglomerate of siphoning our public force because at the end of the day, the decisions are not effective if they go contrary to what the people in Abu Dhabi are thinking. The embarrassing issue that took place in India, obviously, is an inside job. And that we keep warning issues of security within our formations because you don't, because of religion, open your gates on Friday for everybody can hurry to walk into all our military formations in the name of prayer. You don't open our messes in our security formations for everybody to wake up and be a member. And so obviously, for that kind of attack to have happened, the operation was planned from within for them to be able to execute that successfully and go to this moment that we are speaking, nobody has been apprehended. That is telling the sophisticated of that operation. Consecration of that operation. So he's quite sad that we have a leadership that is overlooking these issues and giving these criminals the audacity to come after even our reverse racial establishment that meet us who we are today. So it's quite a very sad situation but like I said, Nigeria's are not taking this lightly any longer. They are resisting it. Even the leadership in most of the states are coming up with strategies that are going to bring solutions to their own states, even resisting the compromise of the federal government. We applied to comment what the governor of the state is doing because that is how the leader is supposed to do. You need to expose activities happening around you. You need to expose the compromises that are happening around your people. For Nigeria has to know and these things are not happening just within the state. The governor's life life is the same and that's why the governor's state that are cooperating with the federal government is still not the difference story because we hear of killings from the states every now and then we hear kidnapping in Niger and everywhere these governors are not fighting the federal government. They won't be different. But rather the governors that are compromising with the federal government are having the western, the governor of the state that is there they say to be at long ahead to the present. So by and large the leadership at the center every Nigerian wants to do away with this insecurity. Every Nigerian wants to start a security from the neighborhood where they can be able to enter for security agencies to use the way the federal government is still resisting. The federal government feels that this community policy takes effect. They are going to conspire against it or ex wipe it or so. We don't know why they are fighting security at the lower level for us to be able to generate interference and figure out this criminal and then we commend what Nigerians are doing because the resistance alone is going to make the federal government sit up and be proactive in tackling this challenges. Okay in closing Tundji because you went off for a bit because of your connection I'm just going to give you a few minutes to quickly answer this question because our time is almost up. I got a report yesterday talking about the fact that there have been people in this government and highly placed public officials who have a hand in the insecurity that we're facing today people because of course you know how much a Kachkinkov cost one AK-47 cost almost a million Naira and the average herder cannot afford it. So but then the DSS which is the Secret Service has come up to say that yes they have information on these people but they're waiting for a go-ahead by Mr. President to be able to deal with the issue. So does it mean that the President is not in any way willing already to deal with the insecurity that we're facing in the country and my question is how many more people have to die for us to deal head on with this issue as we wrap up? I will not agree with the DSS that the security and that the President they're not doing anything because of the lack of the President to give them to go ahead because I'm aware that when they're bossing to people say who they came to be for one Naira or to be what's he called Yawu Yawu they don't seek for President's permission for doing that. So if you have an allegation against a top officer you don't have to wait for President's a directive for you to do your job your job is to get information and take action regarding that. So what I think they are waiting for President I think it's out of the way and also similar I tend to also agree that probably the President is not interested when an allegation is made against people within his government because when the point is the serious allegation is being made against people who are in your government you need to let them step aside and let them be investigated so that you will know whether or not what they are saying is correct there was an allegation against a minister of large economy or so there are so many other allegations regarding that nothing has been done to date so it appeared from the the conduct of the President it appeared the President is not also interested in dealing with people who have been alleged to be to be compromised in this insecurity issue so probably that is why we are getting we are not we are not we are not winning the war because we are not doing the right we are not we are not taking action against people who have the finger in this act we are the other we are going to arrest people who are agitating for their for their rights I think I think it's our I tend to agree that look the President is not it's not serious in fighting this corruption in fighting this insecurity in that regard it really bids me because this is the President campaigned to fight corruption to deal with insecurity and put an end to Boko Haram and for all that you have all said is it falls down to the fact that there is no political will but I want to thank you guys because we are out of time Achika Trude is a political analyst Tunji Abdulamid is a lawyer and of course we also have Kwanum Terence who is a security expert thank you gentlemen we appreciate your thoughts thanks for having us all right well we'll take a short break now and when we return we're going to be discussing more Mr. Presidents because Nigerians say to not trust Mr. Presidents so we'll get to find out how to use this stay with us