Bandits Are Indeed The Sacred Cows Of Nigeria 

BY Kosisochukwu Nwigwe

Introduction:

 The treatment of bandits in Northern Nigeria compared with the treatment of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) in the Southeast exposes deep contradictions in Nigeria’s security and governance framework. These differences highlight issues of ethnic bias, state complicity, and selective application of justice. This assertion has led credence to the age-long suspicion that government is behind the atrocities being perpetrated by bandits in Nigeria. Bandits are heavily armed criminal groups responsible for mass killings, kidnappings, and destruction of communities across states like Zamfara, Kaduna, Niger, Katsina, and Sokoto.

 Their actions amount to terrorism under any legal definition. Unlike Boko Haram or ISWAP, bandits typically lack a formal ideology such as Islamism or separatism. However, there is increasing overlap – some bandit factions cooperate with jihadist groups, share weapons, and exchange intelligence. The bandits are loosely organized groups of armed men, mostly from local ethnic groups such as Fulani and Hausa, though not all Fulani or Hausa people are involved.They are often made up of Rural youths with limited education or economic opportunities.Former cattle herders who lost their herds due to drought, conflict, or rustling.Criminal opportunists who exploit the weakness of the state.

In some cases, ex-militia or vigilante members who turned to crime.

IPOB, on the other hand led by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, is primarily a political and separatist movement demanding self-determination for the Igbo people. While the group has been accused of violent acts through its security arm, the Eastern Security Network (ESN), many of its activities began as peaceful agitation for referendum and autonomy.

Nigeria Government’s Approach To Bandits:

The federal and northern state governments have often adopted negotiation and appeasement strategies. Several state governors—such as those of Zamfara and Katsina—have offered amnesty, cash incentives, and reintegration programs to bandits.In some instances, officials referred to them as “our misguided brothers” or “freedom fighters”, avoiding the label “terrorist” for years.

To IPOB:

The federal government took a militarized approach from the onset. IPOB was declared a terrorist organization in 2017, even before widespread armed resistance emerged.The military launched Operation Python Dance, which led to numerous killings, disappearances, and human rights abuses in the Southeast. IPOB members and sympathizers are often arrested, tortured, or killed merely for flying the Biafran flag or attending rallies.

Media and Official Narratives Bandits:

Mainstream media and government officials frequently use soft terms like “bandits,” “gunmen,” or “unknown assailants,” even when attacks kill hundreds. There’s an effort to frame the crisis as criminality, not terrorism, possibly to avoid stigmatizing the North.

IPOB:

IPOB is often portrayed in the media as violent, extremist, or secessionist, with little distinction between peaceful members and violent actors. The group is routinely blamed for insecurity in the Southeast, even when evidence is unclear or lacking.International and Legal Responses.

 Bandits:

Until recently, they were not formally designated as terrorists under Nigerian law. Even after the 2021 court ruling classifying them as terrorists, state actions have remained lenient, focusing on disarmament and negotiation.

IPOB:

The group’s proscription was swift and politically charged, without due process or sufficient evidence. Its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has been detained in violation of international human rights rulings, including those of the UN and Nigerian courts calling for his release.

Impact on Communities,  Northern Communities:

Despite thousands of deaths, bandits are often allowed to regroup and control rural areas. Victims receive limited justice, and displaced persons struggle in silence. Some communities even pay taxes or ransoms to bandit leaders for safety.

Southeastern Communities:Communities face collective punishment. Entire villages are invaded by security forces, markets shut down, and civilians killed under the guise of fighting IPOB. This approach has alienated the populace and fueled resentment toward the federal government.

Implications:

The contrasting treatments reinforce perceptions of ethnic favoritism and marginalization in Nigeria’s security policies.They deepen the North–South divide, erode national unity, and weaken public trust in state institutions.

The double standard undermines the credibility of the government’s war on terror and legitimizes separatist narratives that the Nigerian state is inherently biased against the Igbo and other southern groups.

Conclusion:

The stark contrast between the leniency toward northern bandits and the brutality toward IPOB and southeastern civilians reveals a troubling imbalance in Nigeria’s governance. True national stability will remain elusive until justice, equality, and uniform rule of law are applied—not based on region or ethnicity, but on the nature of the crime.

*KOSISOCHUKWU PRAISEGOD NWIGWE is a freedom fighter and a political activist.