Last week, the Director of Defence Information, Major General John Enenche told Channels that the Nigerian Army will now monitor the social media for anti-government and anti-military speeches. As a Nigerian, that may be a reasonable avenue to clamp down the many societal and national ills bedeviling the country; but looking through the eyes of the world, that’s a statement that was not necessary.



A week before the Director’s statement, the Vice President had earlier told Nigerians and the world at large that hate speeches would be treated as acts of terrorism. The Vice President said; “Silence in such situations can only be seen as an endorsement. Hate speech and the promotion of the same through history from Nazi Germany and the extermination of Jews to the Rwandan genocide succeeded in achieving their barbarous ends by the silence of influential voices. The silence of leaders at this time in our country will be a grave disservice to our country, its peace and its future.” In countries that prioritize the security of their citizens and understand the working of silence on terrorism, the Vice President’s speech would have been enough.



I’m not trying to say the Nigerian Army has not prioritized the safety of Nigerians. In fact, they deserve the respect of all Nigerians considering the risks involved in nation-guiding and countering the Boko Haram menace; that is no small task. But I believe they have gone about the social-media-monitoring the wrong way. I also believe that the ordinary Nigerian share my sentiment. Most people are afraid to speak for fear of being arrested by the military.



The functions of the Nigerian Armed Forces (which the Army is part of) are well spelt-out in the Nigerian constitution to be;

(a) defending Nigeria from external aggression;
(b) maintaining its territorial integrity and securing its borders from violation on land, sea, or air;
(c) Suppress insurrection and act in aid of civil authorities to restore order when called upon to do so by the President but subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly.
(d) Perform such other functions as may be prescribed by an act of the National Assembly.
These functions do not include intelligence gathering within Nigeria; as I know of. What then are the roles of the Department of State Services (DSS)? Are they no longer saddled with intelligence gathering within our borders?



It is an open secret that the DSS gathers information within the country. They do these covertly, in most cases. That’s the beauty of the Service. The DSS operates in a way that leaves their steps untraceable. They are trained to spy. The Armed Forces are trained to fight.



I believe it wasn’t a good idea to have announced the monitoring of the social media activities of Nigerians. The reasons for making the decision to monitor the social media may have been defeated with just that statement. I strongly believe the FBI, CIA, MI6, SVR et al monitor even people’s personal lives without such monitored persons ever finding out. That is intelligence gathering. People who normally write on social media about their actions before carrying out same will put it in check. I have read online about situations where real terrorists leave messages about their terror acts on social media before carrying them out. The DSS would do well to deal with this.



Generally, statements by government officials should not ignite distrust between the government and her citizenry. Nobody wants his/her privacy intruded. We can do things the right way without raising the government-citizens distrust bar. We are Nigerians. We can do this right!





Aroso Akintomide Adedamola,
tomidearoso@gmail.com.

I have a proposal to officially make to the Admin of Nairaland.

Please, can someone link me up with him or send me his personal mail?

I can be contacted via 'tomidearoso@gmail.com'.

NIGERIA AND 'NIGERIA'.

Let's get this right; I'm a Nigerian. I'm from Asin-Ekiti, Ikole Local Government Area of Ekiti State. That been said, I'm from Nigeria. But there was Nigeria, and there's 'Nigeria'.

Nigeria is a country that exist in the minds and hearts of beautiful and visionary citizens of a state amalgamated, almost against their wishes, by the colonial masters. 'Nigeria', on the other hand, is where we live in at the moment.

The fight for independence (and subsequent transition to a Republic) was for Nigeria; a self-governed state of opportunities and freedom where everything is done in accordance to set laws of the land, and orderliness is the anchor-act.

But, we live in 'Nigeria'; a self-ruled state known for her institutionalised acts of corruption, moral decadence, cultural dis-orientation, religious misconceptions, and vices those who fought for independence wouldn't have thought possible to find amidst the citizens of Nigeria, for whom they fought with the pen and might, even putting their individual lives at risk.

We are where we are. I once read someone say the problem with 'Nigeria' is 'Nigerians'. I also once heard a revered man of God speak about how badly 'Nigerians' are viewed abroad so much so his police commissioner-friend in the United Kingdom assumed there are three sets of people in the world; the whites, the blacks, and 'Nigerians'.

How did we get here? How did Nigerians get to become 'Nigerians'? Isn't this the country that once had the best military in Africa? Isn't this the nation whose Head of State once told the world money isn't the problem with us, but how to spend it? Do Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe, Emeka Anyaoku, and others in their league not have their roots here? Maybe they grew up in Nigeria, and what's been left for us now is 'Nigeria'. What a transition.

Nigeria began her shameful transition to 'Nigeria' from the First Republic. It just didn't seem so at the time. It takes time for a diseased leg to rotten; and smell afterwards. The military coup that ended the First Republic didn't even help matters. As bitter as it is to admit, that singular act of forceful Power-grab by the military which led to the emergence of the then General Officer Commanding of the Nigerian Army, Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi as military Head of State is what keeps haunting the Igbos. That, on its own, is a special discuss.

From the collapse of that very founding Republic, the country - Nigeria began her unenviable developmental decline to the nation - 'Nigeria'. This is not to say the country was perfect in their days, but the country was better at that time. They had a vision, even if they lacked the political will to drive it through. Visionaries were calling the shots and doing the dig in sharp contrast to what's visibly seen in 'Nigeria'.

What's the way forward? Simple; it's all about leadership. It is generally assumed that 'if the head is faulty, all other body parts will not be well'. Leaders from the Second Republic to this present crop of leaders haven't really had the interest of the nation at heart. The General Ibrahim Babangida-led administration clandestinely institutionalized corruption.

President Muhammadu Buhari, during his electioneering campaign, promised change from the status-quo. How much has he faired? Has he been better off than his predecessors? On a personal note, he may be trying his best but that is not enough for this nation. 'Nigeria' doesn't need a leader who fights just corruption alone, but a leader who along with the fight against corruption also offers leadership in the true sense of the word and deeply thought-out solutions to the very numerous problems of our country.

We can be great again. We can be the envy of all nations. Personally, I believe the journey to a better Nigeria starts when we, as a people, acknowledge we all contributed one way or the other, directly or indirectly, to make Nigeria the 'Nigeria' we live in today. Having done that, we should as a nation seek the face of God. Only God can raise a David for us. These Sauls we ask for will always run us down.

Only God can make 'Nigeria' become Nigeria.

Aroso Akintomide Adedamola,
tomidearoso@gmail.com,
(+234) 7032479491.