By all standards and definition, the abduction of schoolchildren and teachers in Oriire Local Government Area of Oyo State ranks among the darkest moments in the state’s contemporary history.
Beyond the trauma inflicted on innocent children, parents and communities, the incident also ignited political accusations, conspiracy theories and counter-accusations that threatened to overshadow the search for truth.
Governor Seyi Makinde’s decision to invite the United Nations and other international human rights organisations to undertake an independent investigation has therefore generated intense debate so far.
While critics have portrayed the move as unnecessary or politically motivated, there is another perspective that deserves equal critical attention.
A careful examination of Nigeria’s political history suggests that such requests by the governor are neither unprecedented nor inherently unpatriotic as being projected by critiques.
It is very important to also nott that an independent investigation is never a “vote of no confidence”. In fact, an independent investigation does not automatically amount to a declaration that Nigerian security agencies are incompetent as many critiques have tried to allude.
Across democratic societies, independent inquiries are often established precisely because matters involving mass casualties, terrorism, kidnapping or allegations of official complicity require public confidence beyond ordinary criminal investigations.
The purpose is simple: establish the complete facts; determine institutional failures; expose every individual involved;
identify sponsors and collaborators; and
recommend measures to prevent recurrence.
Such investigations are not designed merely to find culprits; they are actually designed to restore public confidence in government and its institutions.
If Governor Makinde publicly requested an independent inquiry, such investigation would logically examine every institution and every public official connected to the incident including the governor himself. That exactly is precisely why an independent inquiry carries credibility.
It is also important to state here that no individual is presumed innocent merely because of office and no individual is presumed guilty because of politics, everyone is subjected to the same scrutiny.
One of the most overlooked aspects of the governor’s request is that nowhere in his request for an independent investigation particularly by the United Nations mechanisms, did he seek exemption or immunity from the exercise.
What this should communicate to every genuinely and sincerely concerned person or group is that the governor just want the truth established, know the lapses in the state’s security architecture, and design measures that will help prevent future occurrence.
In a very simple term, it is an independent international inquiry expected to naturally examine:
actions of the Oyo State Government before the incident; intelligence available before the attack if any; response time;
conduct of security agencies; local collaborators; political actors; possible sponsors; alleged financiers; and every allegation made publicly.
In effect, the governor voluntarily opened his administration to external scrutiny.
That is hardly the action of someone seeking to conceal the truth and trying to play politics with the situation as critics have alluded. If anybody is playing politics, it is those working hard to silence the voice seeking the truth, transparency and accountability.
Recall that the political atmosphere surrounding the Oriire abduction changed dramatically when former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose publicly alleged that Governor Makinde may have masterminded the kidnapping to discredit the president.
In law enforcement, this is not just a mere politics or political rhetoric, it is a grave allegation that requires both the accuser to provide proof of allegation and the accused to prove his innocence. But due to peculiarity of the Nigerian political landscape, such heavy allegation was blatantly ignored by Makinde’s critics.
That was no ordinary political criticism,
It was indeed an allegation implying that a sitting governor orchestrated the kidnapping of schoolchildren under his own watch.
Also recall that prior to the Oriire abduction, similar abduction of Nigerians took place in Borno and Ekiti states. It was interesting to note that, former Ekiti governor, Fayose remained perpetually silent on both unfortunate incidents in the two states.
Can it be safe to then deduce that Fayose’s heavy allegation against Governor Makinde was politically motivated or it was part of a bigger script to ‘put fire in Oyo state’? Whatever the true intention of such allegation by Fayose is left to the public to determine.
This is so because such an accusation, by its very nature, transcends partisan disagreement, it demands evidence and an impartial investigation by an independent body such as the UN.
Secondly, this is also so because once allegations of such gravity are made against a serving governor, the issue ceases to be merely about rescuing victims.
It becomes about protecting the integrity of public institutions and ensuring that truth, not speculation or political rhetoric prevails.
In that context, an independent investigation becomes necessary. If the allegation is false, an impartial inquiry would expose it, and if there is substance, it should equally be uncovered because in the end, the truth will benefit everyone.
Before the Oriire incident, the political relationship between Governor Makinde and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, had deteriorated considerably following disagreements within the Peoples Democratic Party.
During that period, Wike reportedly made remarks suggesting he possessed the political capacity to “put fire” in Oyo State because of his disagreements with Makinde.
Although such statements may have been received by the public as a political rhetoric, they inevitably became part of public discourse once the kidnapping occurred.
Compounding matters further was the emergence of allegations from Fayose, a politician widely perceived to have maintained political alignment with Wike since the PDP crises began.
Whether such perceptions are justified or not, they created an environment in which conspiracy theories flourished.
It therefore became even more important that facts, not political narratives, should determine public judgment, and an independent investigation offers precisely that opportunity.
Ironically, many voices criticising Makinde today supported similar international engagement during previous national security crises.
The most notable example remains the 2014 Chibok schoolgirls’ abduction.
Following the kidnapping of more than 270 schoolgirls in Borno State, opposition leaders repeatedly sought international intervention.
Leading figures of the then opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) accused President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration of incompetence, outright failure, and therefore, demanded greater international involvement in the search for the girls and investigation of the tragedy.
Delegations of opposition politicians engaged foreign governments, international organisations and global media, urging increased international pressure on the Federal Government.
The #BringBackOurGirls campaign itself became an international movement involving governments, the United Nations, foreign diplomats, international human rights organisations and global civil society.
No serious democratic observer argued back then that international involvement amounted to surrendering Nigeria’s sovereignty.
Rather, it was presented as necessary because the incident had become a matter of global humanitarian concern.
If international engagement was acceptable then, consistency requires that similar principles should not suddenly become unacceptable today merely because political actors have exchanged positions from opposition to ruling party.
Nigeria’s political history contains several instances where opposition politicians petitioned foreign governments, international organisations and diplomatic missions regarding governance, elections and security concerns.
Such actions have often been defended as legitimate democratic advocacy rather than acts of disloyalty. Democracy thrives on consistency not political biased driven by mere convenience.
Standards should not change depending on who occupies office. What was acceptable when one political party was in opposition should not suddenly become offensive because another political actor adopts a similar approach.
Independent investigations often achieve outcomes unavailable to conventional probes.
This is true because they can:
reassure victims that justice is impartial;
reduce political interference with investigation; strengthen public confidence in the process; expose institutional weaknesses; identify policy failures; improve future emergency responses; and provide recommendations accepted across all political divides.
Most importantly, independent findings often enjoy greater credibility among the public because investigators are perceived as having fewer local political interests.
The greatest injustice would be allowing politics to eclipse the suffering endured by innocent children, grieving families and murdered teachers. Two teachers lost their lives.
Children spent weeks in captivity, entire communities lived in fear throughout, such a tragedy deserves more than political point-scoring or just moving on without any reviews and further investigation to establish the truth surrounding the entire saga.
Whether that truth vindicates Governor Makinde, condemns him, implicates security failures, exposes criminal networks or clears every public official, Nigerians deserve to know it.
Justice should never fear investigation, neither should innocent public officials because democracy requires courage even in the face of daunting situations.
Inviting independent scrutiny is not, in itself, an admission of guilt, neither is it evidence of weakness. In many democracies across different parts of the world where true democracy thrives, leaders voluntarily submit themselves to independent commissions precisely because public confidence matters as much as legal conclusions.
If Governor Makinde is innocent of every allegation surrounding the Oriire tragedy, an impartial investigation offers him the strongest possible vindication from the allegation leveled against him by the likes of Fayose.
If there were failures anywhere within government, security institutions or political circles, Nigerians equally deserve to know. The search for truth should never be mistaken for disloyalty.
In a constitutional democracy governed by the rule of law, transparency is not an enemy of sovereignty; it is one of its strongest pillars without which such democracy has no root.
Retired Commissioner of Police and Executive Assistant on Security Matters to the Oyo State Governor, Sunday Odukoya, writes from Ibadan.