Government Duty, Activism and the Need for Evidence

The main job of any government is to protect its people and their property. This includes keeping public order and ensuring the country's safety. To do this, governments depend on security bodies like the military, police, and other law enforcement agencies.

In Nigeria, issues like terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, communal violence, and organized crime challenge the state. The role of these security institutions is very important. Every day, many security personnel work in tough and sometimes dangerous conditions, making big sacrifices for their country.

These sacrifices deserve to be acknowledged.

However, recognizing the dedication of security personnel does not mean they should be above questioning. In a democracy, accountability is key. Any claims of misconduct, corruption, abuse of power, or links to criminals must be carefully investigated. If wrongdoing is proven, those responsible should face the law.

The problem arises when serious claims are presented as facts without proper proof.

This issue has come up again after comments made by social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), during the 2026 Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association in Rivers State.

While discussing Nigeria’s security problems, Otse allegedly said that politics is at the core of the country’s insecurity. He claimed that some government bodies benefit from ongoing crises. Most notably, he accused some military and police members of working with kidnappers and other criminal groups.

Reports say he claimed that some police officers at highway checkpoints give criminals information about travelers, including their identities and movements. This helps criminals carry out kidnappings and demand ransoms.

He was quoted saying, "The root of insecurity is politics. The government benefits from this. The police benefit. The military men benefit. Since insecurity started, generals get higher pay."

These are serious claims.

There is a clear difference between criticizing security bodies and accusing their members of working with criminals. The first is a valid part of democratic oversight. The second is a severe claim that needs solid proof.

It was not surprising when a military representative at the conference reportedly warned against making claims that cannot be backed up.

The Nigeria Police Force, through its Force Public Relations Officer, CSP Ani Iniedu, also asked VeryDarkMan to provide evidence for his claims.

Public bodies have a duty to look into credible allegations and also protect their staff from unfounded claims that could harm their reputation.

The issue is not whether citizens can criticize security agencies, they absolutely can. The real question is whether people with significant public influence should be held to the same standards of accountability they expect from others.

This is not the first time VeryDarkMan has faced controversy over serious claims against security officials.

He once accused Assistant Inspector-General of Police Moshood Jimoh, who was overseeing Zone 2 Command in Lagos, of blocking investigations into serious criminal cases, including murder and land disputes.

After the claims, the police asked him to back up his accusations. He did not respond in Lagos. Instead, he and the senior police officer were later invited to the Force Headquarters for further discussions.

Reports say that investigations later cleared the police officer Jimoh Moshood of the allegations. Despite the serious nature of the claims, there seemed to be no legal consequences for the activist if he could not prove his claims.

Another incident happened when VeryDarkMan publicly criticized the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) regarding the questioning of a retired military officer accused of being involved in a coup plot. After sharing parts of the interrogation online, he criticized the intelligence officers' professionalism and the evidence linking the retired officer to the alleged crime. His comments risked making security and intelligence services look bad.

Again, citizens have every right to question government actions, especially about national institutions.

But claims related to national security, senior officials, and ongoing investigations need to be handled carefully. Such allegations should be backed by verifiable evidence and addressed through the right legal and institutional routes.

This is not just about safeguarding institutions. It is about maintaining the integrity of public discussions.

Where proof exists, those involved must be investigated and prosecuted, regardless of their rank. If allegations turn out to be false, reckless, or malicious, the law should also act. Accountability must apply to both institutions and individuals.

The goal should not be to silence dissent, investigative journalism, or civic activism. Democratic societies rely on strong public scrutiny.

But activism works best when it is based on facts, not guesses.

The rise of social media has made this responsibility even more crucial. Today, an allegation shared online can reach millions instantly. Sadly, corrections or investigations rarely get the same attention. As a result, reputational damage may last long after false claims are disproven.

In this light, the Coalition for Security Awareness and National Stability (CSANS) has raised concerns about campaigns that seem to unfairly damage the reputation of security institutions and their staff.

Whether or not everyone agrees with all the coalition's views, its general concern is worth considering.

Public trust in security institutions is a vital part of national security.

The Nigerian Armed Forces, Nigeria Police Force, and intelligence agencies include thousands of dedicated officers who face terrorism, insurgency, banditry, and organized crime in very tough situations. Their combined sacrifices should not be overshadowed by unproven allegations.

Also, effective policing relies on public cooperation. Communities provide information, report suspicious activities, and support law enforcement because they trust security agencies are acting in the public's interest.

If that trust is damaged by unverified accusations, criminal groups will benefit the most. Distrust between citizens and security institutions weakens intelligence gathering, slows down investigations, and ultimately empowers those who threaten national security.

This does not mean criticism should stop.

Instead, criticism should be based on evidence, responsible, and constructive.

If anyone has solid proof that security personnel are working with kidnappers, terrorists, or other criminal gangs, that evidence should be shared with the right investigative bodies. If wrongdoing is proven, prosecution should happen without hesitation.

On the other hand, allegations that can't be substantiated should not become widely accepted just because they have gone viral. The law requires that accusations be verified through evidence rather than public feelings.

Nigeria needs a more mature national conversation about insecurity, one that respects the sacrifices of security personnel, demands professionalism and accountability from security institutions, and insists on responsibility from those shaping public opinion.

Activists must speak truthfully to power.

Security agencies must respect citizens’ rights and respond professionally to criticism.

Both must follow the law.

At a time when terrorists, bandits, kidnappers, and organized crime groups exploit weaknesses in Nigeria’s security system, the country cannot afford ongoing disputes between security institutions and their critics.

What Nigeria needs now is not louder accusations or defensive responses, but verifiable facts, clear investigations, institutional accountability, and responsible public engagement.

Facts must win over guesses.

Evidence must beat sensationalism.

Accountability must replace impunity.

And most importantly, the national interest must always come before personal conflicts.

Only by sticking to these principles can Nigeria build trust in its security institutions, strengthen democratic accountability, and create a safer nation.