Human rights lawyer and activist, Deji Adeyanju, has cautioned that extending forgiveness to terrorists runs contrary to the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, warning that ongoing negotiations and concessions granted to bandits and terrorist groups pose serious risks to Nigeria’s national security.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Adeyanju described such actions as “alien to any serious state” and argued that “the continued negotiation, payment, forgiveness, and appeasement of bandits and terrorists by the government amounts to indirect financing of terrorism.”
He maintained that armed groups responsible for widespread violence should not be treated as parties to dialogue, stressing that “Terrorists do not repent, and banditry is not a misunderstanding that can be settled across negotiation tables.”
According to him, some state governments have worsened the situation by engaging criminals in talks in a bid to restore temporary calm.
“These are criminals who should be arrested, prosecuted, and jailed, not hosted in Government Houses or rewarded with concessions,” Adeyanju said. He warned that granting forgiveness to terrorists creates a dangerous signal, noting that “It sends the message that taking up arms, killing citizens, and destabilizing the country pays.
It encourages more criminality, as others will be emboldened to bear arms knowing the government will eventually negotiate, compensate, and beg them.”
Adeyanju also drew a comparison between terrorists and separatist agitators such as Nnamdi Kanu, pointing out that while Kanu did not personally kill anyone, thousands of Nigerians have lost their lives to terrorist attacks, yet the perpetrators are allegedly being courted by the government.
He concluded by warning that such policies erode justice and weaken the country’s security framework, with long-term consequences for national stability.
What you should know
Nigeria has struggled for years with insurgency, banditry, and terrorism, particularly in the northern regions, prompting debates over whether dialogue or military action is the best solution.
While some governments have opted for negotiations to achieve short-term peace, critics argue that such approaches undermine the rule of law and embolden criminal groups. Deji Adeyanju’s comments reflect a broader concern among civil society actors that appeasement of violent groups contradicts constitutional principles and weakens deterrence.
The debate continues as the country balances immediate security needs with long-term justice and accountability.
