There is a growing outrage over the graduation and planned reintegration of 744 former terrorists under the Federal Government’s De-radicalisation, Rehabilitation and Reintegration programme, Operation Safe Corridor.
The beneficiaries, drawn largely from conflict-affected states, completed the programme on Thursday, with 597 of them from Borno State, while others came from Adamawa, Yobe, Kano, and several other states across the country.
The development has triggered widespread debate over transparency, accountability, and the impact of reintegration on victims of violent extremism.
Reacting, the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Afam Osigwe, said the policy, though not inherently bad, raised serious concerns over secrecy and lack of oversight.
Osigwe stressed the need for balance in the process, warning that failure to address victims’ grievances could endanger both communities and the reintegrated persons themselves.
He said, ‘Reintegrating persons who may have unleashed violence or burned properties or committed other criminal activities into communities without addressing the hurt of the victims would appear as compensating perpetrators while overlooking the victims.
‘We have to ensure that the communities that have experienced the brutal effects of some of their activities do not experience it a second time as a result of the return of these persons’.
Osigwe also called for stronger monitoring mechanisms, including parole-style supervision and livelihood support, to ensure reintegrated persons do not return to violent groups.
The Country Director of Amnesty International in Nigeria, Isa Sanusi, said, while international law supports the reintegration of those who surrender, the Nigerian process lacked transparency.
Sanusi said, ‘There are serious concerns that some of those called repentant sometimes go back to what they do. The government must be transparent about who they are and their level of involvement. Tell the people who these people are, what kind of terrorism they were involved in, and whether they were informants or killers. These things have to be made very clear’.
Similarly, the Chancellor of the International Society for Social Justice and Human Rights, Omenazu Jackson, faulted the programme, describing it as lacking accountability for crimes committed.
‘The biggest mistake any society can make is when there is no accountability for crime. What happens to families affected by their acts of terrorism and children made orphans?’
Jackson warned that reintegration without punishment could encourage repetition of violent acts, insisting that justice must serve as deterrence.
A security expert and founder of Beacon Security and Intelligence Limited, Kabir Adamu, said rehabilitation remains a key part of counter-terrorism strategy but requires independent evaluation.
He noted concerns over military dominance in the process and the absence of a credible assessment to determine effectiveness.
The Coordinator of Operation Safe Corridor, Yusuf Ali, defended the programme, insisting many of the participants were victims forced into insurgency.
‘These people were victims of terrorism. Some were taken at gunpoint and later surrendered. Under international law, once they surrender, you cannot kill them’, he said.
He added that the participants underwent psychological, religious, and social rehabilitation before reintegration to ensure they do not pose a danger to society.
Similarly, the Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, maintained that the government was not rehabilitating terrorists but individuals abducted and coerced into joining insurgent groups.
He said, ‘Government is not rehabilitating terrorists; these were people that were abducted and forced to carry arms against their will’.
