Umohinyang: Security is fundamental to the responsibility of any government because the protection of lives and property is one of the primary responsibilities of the state. So, when you assess any government, security is one of the key areas you must look at. But we also need to understand the complexity involved in tackling insecurity. The weaponry required to deal with insecurity cannot simply be picked off a shelf. Orders have to be placed, production has to take place and delivery has to follow. In many cases, personnel also have to be trained to use the equipment.
There are also international dimensions to defence procurement. You may have the resources to buy weapons, but diplomatic relationships and other considerations can determine whether those weapons are made available to you. Nigeria has experienced this before. During the Jonathan administration, there were difficulties in procuring some of the weapons needed to confront Boko Haram because of our relationship with the United States. The Buhari administration subsequently worked to rebuild that relationship, and we saw greater cooperation. I think the Tinubu administration has also demonstrated maturity in managing Nigeria’s relationship with the United States, particularly around recent concerns over insecurity and allegations of religious persecution.
Q: You believe the President handled that diplomatic situation well?
Umohinyang: Absolutely. You saw the maturity with which Mr President handled that issue. Rather than allowing it to degenerate into unnecessary confrontation, the administration engaged diplomatically. The result is that we are seeing greater cooperation between Nigeria and the United States in addressing security challenges. That is important because terrorism and transnational crime are not problems Nigeria can solve in isolation. We need the support of international partners, but we also need to strengthen our own capacity. Until we begin to see our country as our property, until we move away from the narrative that Nigeria belongs to the elites and collectively agree that this is our country and we must stay here and salvage it, we are not going to make meaningful progress.
Q: Former Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Musa, has urged Nigerians to provide intelligence to security agencies. Do you agree with him?
Umohinyang: Yes, but there is an important issue we must address. You must close the gap of distrust. You must restore trust between citizens and security agencies. How do you expect someone to give information to the security agencies when that person is afraid that his identity may eventually be exposed? There have been situations where people who provided information were allegedly exposed, and some of them paid dearly for it. If you want citizens to provide intelligence, you must assure them that their identities will be protected and that their information will be handled professionally.
Q: How can government encourage more people to provide intelligence?
Umohinyang: We must begin to look at intelligence gathering differently. Intelligence gathering has value and, in some countries, people are financially rewarded for providing useful information. I believe we should also explore that model. Intelligence gathering is monetary; it has to be monetised. We must begin to do that so that people can be encouraged and incentivised to share information. But beyond incentives, there must be confidence in the system. The resources to tackle insecurity are primarily in the hands of government, not citizens. Citizens have a role to play by providing information, but government has the institutions, personnel, equipment and resources required to act on that information.
Q: You have spoken about prevention. What exactly should government be doing differently?
Umohinyang: We must begin to nip insecurity in the bud at the preventive point, not the reactive point. You react when people have been taken. You prevent before it happens. That is why intelligence is so important. If you have information that an attack is being planned, the security agencies should be able to act before the criminals get to their targets. We cannot continue to wait until people are abducted before we begin to mobilise.
Q: The abduction of schoolchildren has again generated national concern. What is your assessment of the situation?
Umohinyang: It is extremely disturbing. These are children whose only offence is that they went to school. We have seen this before with Chibok and Dapchi, and it is unfortunate that we are still confronting situations where criminals can enter communities and take children from schools. But we must also recognise the difficulty involved in rescuing them. These children can be used as human shields. So, the security agencies have to strike a delicate balance between rescuing the children safely and neutralising the criminals responsible. We cannot afford a situation where, in the process of trying to rescue the children, their lives are put in even greater danger.
Q: Do you think the government is doing enough?
Umohinyang: Government is not sleeping. The government has acknowledged the situation and has shown concern. This is not a government that is denying that there is a problem. The President is concerned about what has happened and steps are being taken to rescue the children. Of course, government must be held accountable for the safety of citizens. But when government takes steps to address a problem, we should also acknowledge those efforts. So, while we ask questions about how the abductions happened in the first place, we should also commend efforts to rescue the children and return them safely to their parents.
Q: There are suggestions that insecurity may worsen as the 2027 elections approach. Do you see a political dimension to the current situation?
Umohinyang: I think we need to be careful about reducing every national problem to 2027 politics. Security is a national issue. It affects everybody, regardless of political party or affiliation. Of course, opposition politicians will challenge the government. That is the nature of democracy. But the opposition should also present alternatives. You don’t expect Atiku Abubakar to go on television and say President Tinubu is doing very well when he wants to contest against him. He wants the office. But the responsibility of the opposition is not merely to criticise. If the government in power is not doing well, yours is to bring out your policies. Tell Nigerians what you will do differently. That is how democracy should work.
Q: So, what should Nigerians expect from opposition parties ahead of 2027?
Umohinyang: They should present their manifestos and policies to Nigerians. Take fuel subsidy removal, for example. If you believe the government handled it wrongly, tell Nigerians what you would have done differently. What is your alternative? You are selling your policy. You are selling your manifesto to Nigerians. These are the same Nigerians who have the power to bring you to office and remove the incumbent. Opposition parties should therefore focus on offering credible alternatives rather than simply throwing punches at the government.
Q: Let us move to the political parties. How would you assess the state of Nigeria’s democracy at 27 years of the Fourth Republic?
Umohinyang: We have not made enough progress in terms of our political ideology and culture. Too much of our politics is about how much you can run down your opponent and grab power. It is no longer sufficiently about the people. We need to develop a political culture where people understand that political power is a means of serving the people, not an end in itself.
Q: Do you see the 2026 Electoral Act as capable of addressing some of these problems?
Umohinyang: Yes. I commend the National Assembly for some of the provisions, particularly those dealing with party primaries. The issue of party primaries has been one of the major problems in our electoral system. With indirect primaries, you can have a situation where a few people control delegates and determine who emerges as the candidate. That has produced a lot of disputes and litigation. The movement towards direct primaries and consensus arrangements can help, but the provisions must be implemented sincerely.
Q: What sanctions would you recommend where party primaries are manipulated?
Umohinyang: There must be consequences. Where there is clear evidence of abuse, the primary should be cancelled. If abuse is observed in a particular ward, the entire process in that ward should be cancelled. That will serve as a deterrent. Political parties must also establish proper checks and balances before primaries are conducted. We should not wait until a crisis has emerged before trying to resolve it.
Q: You have spoken about political culture. What, in your view, is the biggest weakness of the political class?
Umohinyang: People want to get into leadership positions without any modicum of decency. As far as I am concerned, morality has taken a flight. We need people who understand that leadership is about service. One of the things that worries me is the ease with which some politicians change their positions. Someone can spend an entire election season attacking a particular person, telling Nigerians why that person should not be supported, and shortly afterwards become one of that person’s strongest supporters. That raises questions about what really motivates people in politics. Is it the country or the stomach?
Q: Are you suggesting that politicians should never change political allegiance?
Umohinyang: No. People can change their minds. Politics is dynamic. But there must be principles behind those changes. What worries me is when people take completely contradictory positions without explaining why they have changed. You cannot tell Nigerians yesterday that somebody is unfit to lead and today tell them that the same person is the best thing that has happened to Nigeria, without explaining what changed. That is why citizens become confused about whom to trust.
Q: You have also criticised some lawyers and public commentators for changing their political positions. Why is that particularly important to you?
Umohinyang: Because people listen to them. When you are a lawyer, commentator or public intellectual and you speak on political and electoral issues, people assume that you are speaking from conviction and knowledge. People come to you because they want to understand what is happening. They want to know who they should support, what the law says and what a particular political development means. So, when your position changes dramatically, you owe the public an explanation. You don’t really know who to rely on when people who once presented themselves as strong advocates suddenly take completely different positions. That is why credibility matters.
Q: What, ultimately, is your message to Nigerians as the country moves towards 2027?
Umohinyang: Nigerians must take ownership of their country. We must strengthen our institutions, improve our security architecture, encourage intelligence sharing and demand accountability from everybody in leadership. But citizens also have responsibilities. We cannot continue to behave as if Nigeria belongs only to politicians. It belongs to all of us. Until we begin to see our country as our property and collectively agree that this is our country and we must stay here and salvage it, we are not going to make meaningful progress. The political class must serve the people, opposition parties must provide credible alternatives, and citizens must be prepared to participate actively in the democratic process. That is how we build the Nigeria we want.