Northern leaders and several senior lawyers have opposed moves by some state governments to grant amnesty to terrorists and bandits operating in the North. Their reaction follows reported plans by Katsina State governor, Dikko Radda, to grant amnesty to about 70 terrorists as part of a peace deal in the state and neighbouring areas.
The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, through the Special Adviser to the President on Communications and Publicity in the AGF’s office, Kamarudeen Ogundele, noted that governors have constitutional powers to grant pardon, provided the offenders were prosecuted under state laws. The Lagos State Attorney-General, Lawal Pedro, SAN, agreed that governors can exercise clemency but stressed that they must consider public opinion, public policy, and the likely reaction of citizens when doing so. He added that Lagos, for instance, has a policy against granting clemency to convicted sexual offenders, and said he would also expect governors not to extend amnesty to convicted terrorists to avoid sending the wrong signal.
However, several senior lawyers argued that governors cannot legally grant amnesty for terrorism because it is a federal offence. Kunle Edun, SAN, explained that terrorism is created and governed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, a federal law, and that states have no power to grant amnesty, pardon, or any reprieve to suspects tried or convicted under that law. He said only the Federal Government, through its agencies, can take over and handle such cases as federal crimes. Another SAN, Dayo Akinlaja, and other lawyers, including Olugbenga Ephraim, maintained that governors’ prerogative of mercy applies only to offences created by state laws, not terrorism. They described it as a constitutional anomaly to assume governors can grant amnesty to terrorists convicted under federal legislation.
Abuja-based lawyer Nasiru Suleiman clarified that no governor can pardon convicted terrorists but said a governor, as chief security officer of a state, may adopt a carrot-and-stick approach, including dialogue, for suspected terrorists who have not yet been charged to court. Once a terrorism charge or conviction is before the courts under federal law, he insisted, no state governor or state Attorney-General can intervene or grant amnesty.
Several northern socio-cultural, religious, and civil society groups also strongly rejected amnesty for terrorists. The Arewa Consultative Forum said any amnesty proposal is ill-defined and premature when the state has not clearly prevailed over terrorists. Its National Publicity Secretary, Professor Muhammad Tukur Baba, argued that criminal groups in the North are fragmented, driven by crime rather than ideology, and are unlikely to respond meaningfully to amnesty. He questioned what amnesty would mean for victims and warned it could lead to a lack of accountability for serious crimes against citizens and the state.
The Coalition of Northern Groups, through its National Leader, Jamilu Charanchi, also opposed blanket or unconditional amnesty, saying it is not a sustainable response to worsening insecurity. Charanchi warned that amnesty without addressing root causes could legitimise criminality, weaken trust in the justice system and demoralise security forces. CNG leaders in states, including Kebbi’s Manssor Isah Guruza, described amnesty as a grave injustice to victims and called instead for fair trials and firm action against bandits. They recalled that earlier amnesty programmes did not stop banditry and urged the courts to prosecute those arrested while security forces pursue those still at large.
Christian leaders across the North also condemned proposals for amnesty. The Northern States Christian Elders Forum chairman, Elder Sunday Oibe, who is also a leader in the Christian Association of Nigeria in the 19 northern states and the FCT, called such proposals dangerous. He said bandits and terrorists have waged war on their own communities through killings, kidnappings, and extortion, and warned that negotiating with them would embolden more criminals. Oibe insisted that the federal government must show stronger political will by properly equipping and empowering security agencies, arguing that soldiers can defeat terrorists if given full support. He believes amnesty would only encourage more people to take up arms.
The Middle Belt Forum, led by its National President, Dr Bitrus Pogu, rejected any notion of amnesty, insisting that killers must be treated strictly as killers. Pogu said granting them amnesty amounts to tolerating continued violence and undermines the rule of law. He argued that politically motivated support for such groups, under the guise of non-kinetic approaches, should stop and that the military should deal decisively with those responsible for attacks.
Several Muslim and Christian clerics also voiced strong reservations. Muslim scholar Sheik Isah Alarama, Special Adviser to the Adamawa Muslim Council on Internal and External Issues, condemned calls for amnesty, saying those behind such proposals may be sponsors of the terrorists and bandits. He warned that without firm action against the groups and their backers, the North and the entire country risk being overwhelmed. Plateau State CAN chairman, Rev Dunka Joseph Gomwalk, and Kwara State CAN chairman, Bishop Sunday Adewole, said amnesty would further undermine justice, keep communities in fear and allow criminals to return to violence after receiving state pardon. They insisted that strict enforcement of the law and visible punishment for offenders are essential to deter future crimes.
Some voices, however, support carefully structured engagement with armed groups under strict conditions. Nomadic Rights Concern (NORIC) and Professor Labdo, an expert in Islamic political thought, argued that before any amnesty is considered, authorities should first listen to armed groups to understand their grievances. They believe that properly managed dialogue and rehabilitation, carried out with caution and accountability, could contribute to a long-term solution, but they also accept that persistent, unrepentant offenders must face the law. Other Islamic scholars, such as Ustaz Hassan Danmama, emphasised counselling and preaching to those who may have joined criminal groups out of ignorance, but still called for firm constitutional measures against unrepentant bandits.
Former Minister of State for Foreign Affairs and ex-High Commissioner to Namibia, Ambassador Bagudu Hirse, rejected amnesty entirely and advocated capital punishment for bandits, kidnappers, and terrorists, noting that many of those involved are believed to be foreigners from neighbouring countries. He and other northern leaders insisted that sustained, decisive action, respect for the law, and justice for victims are more important than any amnesty arrangement as Nigeria seeks to end terrorism and banditry.