Culled from The News (Lagos), June 19, 2000. By Segun Gbadegesin

Lagos - Young, promising and innocent Dayo was only 14 when he was mercilessly gunned down in front of the mother whose only child he was, even as she pleaded that she be taken out instead. They had taken all the valuables she had-money (perhaps a few thousand naira) and jewelry. They were not satisfied.

Yet, they would probably have left with what they took. The innocent family would still have lost their goods, but they would have been thankful to their God. The loss would not have been unusual in a country not mindful of any fundamental, moral principles of the right of citizens; a country which, even after flag independence and republican constitutions still has leaders as tin-gods and citizens as their creatures that can be taken out at will; a country which, even after a harrowing experience of a dictatorship that is unsurpassable in its callousness, still can boast of democratically-elected leaders ordering innocent citizens to be shot at sight; yes, a country whose elected leaders can arrogate to themselves the power of sovereign which in a republican constitution, only belongs to the people. No, those armed bandits that took the life of Dayo can only operate without hindrance in a country in which citizens are subjects and thus subject to the will of politicians who now see themselves as synonymous with the nation’s sovereignty.

Perhaps, the robbers that pumped bullets into the small head of a 14-year-old boy could have pitied the mother and left with their stolen valuables. They would not spare him because that other institution of a monumental national disgrace decided to make its own contribution to the forced demise of the innocent. NEPA struck after the robbers had collected their loots. The armed robbers panicked after the disappearance of light, thinking that one of their victims was trying to play tricks on them. They would not take any chances, or take any one for granted, not when they perceived their lives to be in danger. What a paradox! Do you recall the case of the robbers who asked their victims whether they had provided them with everything they had? And when the victims responded affirmatively, the robbers decided to do a thorough search themselves? Well, they discovered some more loot. And what did they say to their victims? "Shame on you! You can’t even tell a simple truth. That’s what is wrong with Nigerians. They cannot be trusted." These were robbers! Can anyone match this with the agonizing final verdict of Ken Saro-Wiwa: "What kind of country is this?"

The robbers had to find a culprit for NEPA’s ‘’lack of respect for their right to light to operate in the dark.’’ Their perception was that their victims valued their property so much that they had planned to have them arrested. The bandits asked no questions; they just assumed; and that was as good for them, for their assumption had the finality of reality. To teach their victims a lesson, the robbers decided to take out the invaluable of the house. And so, Dayo was gunned down, and a wailing mother was left crying over the lifeless body of an only child she had cared for single-handedly for 14 years. A mother who, keeping the faith, decided to invest her time and resources on a child that had become the meaning of her life while the father was struggling for papers to bring the family together. What kind of country is this, where an innocent child had to pay supremely for the ineptitude of governmental institutions? Does anyone care?

I was reflecting on this tragedy when my attention was drawn to a news report about a "crowded press conference" addressed by Mike Okiro, the Lagos State Commissioner of Police. No rational person can read this report without anger and resentment. This is a man who appears to have abandoned substance and reality in favour of myth and shadow. This is a man who has failed to acknowledge his real enemies while bowing to an insane demand for the head of true patriots. This is the representative of a security organization that ignored the genuine warnings of vigilante groups regarding the hideouts of robbers and the complaints against individuals in uniforms who may be aiding and abetting hoodlums. At the press conference, Okiro was telling the whole world that he is in control of security in Lagos State even when the most simple-minded person knows that he is not. Hear him: "We have been confronting them (meaning robbers) once we get information. We are aware that they now go in groups. What we are doing is that after arresting one or two of them, we intensify investigations which normally lead to the arrest of all the members of the gang."

I am not sure whether Okiro gave any indications about the number of arrests he and his officers had made. I know that a few days after this news conference, he paraded some people for publicity. It is the contradictions in the statement of Okiro as reported by the media which belie the claims of a newly-found police effectiveness. For, Okiro admitted without saying it in so many words, that the robbers are in charge, not the police. Hear him again:

"We are also embarking on the intensification of patrols in all the nooks and crannies of the state. This is because we have been having a running battle with them. If we focus attention in an area, they will shift to a new place. But what we are doing is to arrest them one by one through relentless investigations. However, we have been having problems of the paucity of manpower and inadequate logistics."

Why is this man unable to come out and tell the public: "I have serious problems because I do not have enough manpower and resources to provide security for the good people of Lagos State. Please, help me tell the administration to help me secure your life and property." In civilized communities, where the right of citizens to adequate protection is taken seriously, this man and this administration will be out of the window in a flash! The contradictions are just mind- boggling.

Hear Okiro again: "I believe, however, that what government is doing now by providing logistics and recruiting more hands will improve the situation in no distant time. We are certainly equal to the task of protecting members of the public at all levels." But for goodness sake, Mr. Okiro, you are simply just not equal to the task, and it is evident in the death of innocent Dayo. If you claim that "what government is doing... will improve the situation," how can it be true that you are now "certainly equal to the task"? A future dream can only be taken as present reality in the warped thinking of a soothsayer. That the present reality will not go away for day dreamers is evident in various news reports since Okiro’s press conference. Thus, as I am writing this, I am reading a story of 13 May, according to which "robbers shoot retired colonel, two policemen in Lagos." Is the police "certainly equal to the task of protecting members of the public at all levels"? The answer is blowing in the wind. Young Dayo’s parents know it.

Mike Okiro, the Lagos State Police Commissioner, believes that "what government is doing now by providing logistics and recruiting more hands will improve the situation (of insecurity of lives and property) in no distant time." Leaving aside his gaffe with regard to the present realities, a more pertinent question is: how can we be assured that the situation will improve? How many police officers will be recruited per year or per quarter?

One hundred thousand, four hundred thousand, or twelve hundred thousand? That adequacy of any number ultimately depends on a whole lot of issues? What, for instance, will be the distribution pattern? Equal share among states and/or cities? Assume that the government is recruiting 100,000 policemen for the whole country for the next three years. If it is spread evenly, this comes to an average of about 34,000 per year. Then since we have to distribute the numbers over the entire country of 36 states and the FCT, a state may get approximately 900 to 950 police recruits per year. Is this adequate? Perhaps. It depends, however, on a number of issues. First, some states and/or cities need more police presence than others. Lagos and Ibadan can each use more than 900 police officers, given their character and circumstances. But is someone not going to raise hell about these cities being treated as special? How about Sokoto or Port Harcourt? And where do we place Aba, Benin City, Enugu or Jos? Issues that relate to the effective protection of lives and property will be pushed to the back burner, and the politics of Federal character will take upstage. The case of NEPA and the IPP of Lagos State is just an ugly reminder of the destructive impact of years of military rule from Ironsi to Abubakar on the Nigerian polity.

Secondly, how is the recruitment to be handled and how are the personnel to be deployed? Of course, there is a constitutional provision for Federal spread in hiring and recruitment to Federal agencies. This is fair as long as competent hands are hired in all cases. The sticky issue, which has not been clearly articulated in terms of its value is the practice, established by the Military, that these trainees and personnel in security services must be deployed anywhere in the country. That is why an Okiro must be the Commissioner of Police in Lagos State and a substantial number of the personnel in Lagos State Police Command are from other states. There may be a reason for this in terms of promoting national unity. But it is only a mentally deranged person that would keep on repeating the same chore over and over even when it is evident that it is not working. In what sense have those practices promoted national unity, except in the dark recesses of the psyche of their proponents? Indeed, hasn’t it been clear that every now and then, police personnel have responded poorly to cases that had implications for national unity? Recall the Shagamu episode and the shameful role of the Ogun State Police Command. Did it not take the timely intervention of the Governor to put the matter under control? Or the Ketu incident in Lagos which everyone decided to blame on the OPC in spite of the glaring evidence of police complicity? Must national unity be promoted at the expense of the lives and property of those who make up the nation?

Everyone knows that in civilized societies, the idea of community policing works best for the safety of citizens. Members of a community and/or a neigbourhood have vested interests in that community or neighbourhood. They grew up there; they live there. They have their closest families there. They have property there, and they have real interests in protecting their families, friends, and belongings. This is the simple philosophy behind the vigilante groups, which to one’s utter dismay, some police commands and the Commander-in-Chief are now trying to outlaw.

The vigilante philosophy recommends community policing, and the only reason this philosophy has not been adopted in a more global sense in Nigeria is clear only to the government. Bola Tinubu has shouted to the roof-top, asking the Federal Government to allow him to employ his own police personnel. He has asked for the restructuring of the police to allow for state police. The Federal Government has not shown any serious concern, because it does not care for the lives and property of citizens. It only cares about protecting a particular image of Nigerian unity.

Nobody, as far as I can tell, has really given logical argument against state or local government police. The usual argument from top policy makers, including even the Minister of Police Affairs, that politicians abused such systems in the past is, at best, flawed. It suggests that there can be no effective ways for preventing such abuse than just bursting the system. That does not show any real creative thinking. Besides, the people get the type of police and politicians they deserve, and they should be a better judge of when to say no to political abuse of their security apparatus under a democratic system. But this usual argument against state police also suggests that a Federal Government police cannot be or is not being abused politically.

Well, we all are living witnesses to the politicization of the police by the Shagari administration in the Second Republic. And we now know the role of the Abacha-era Lagos State Commissioner of Police in the brutalization of our people. Sadly enough, the present administration which pitches its raison d’etre on good governance has not deemed it fit to change that system. That is not so strange if you believe, as Obasanjo does, that the way to promote national unity is to unitarize the security apparatus of state. Governors then have no security power of their own and the President must take responsibility for lives and property from Sokoto to Ngwaland, from Ijio to Maiduguri. Pray, what sense does this make?

If it doesn’t make sense, then we as the victims have a responsibility to ensure that we are not just pawns in the chessboard of power-seekers and tin-gods. One cannot but be disappointed about the attitude of our people thus far. Have we really forgotten what we went through in four years of horror? Have we then changed one system of official terror for unofficial, horrific experience? Why have we not had a mass outcry on the streets against insecurity of lives? Why have we decided to suffer in silence even when it is quite apparent that we may be the next innocent Dayo to be gunned down by those seeking other people’s property? Even those that climbed into offices on the shoulders of Abacha-era victims appeared to have abandoned their mission and promises. What kind of country is this? When the OPC was involved

in its vigilante activities and routing the Akala Street mafia, the

neighbourhood heaved a sigh of relief and thanked them. But when the OPC was maligned, outlawed, and ordered to be shot at sight, everyone suddenly joined the chorus of OPC bashers. An investigation committee was set up by Senate after the President had threatened an emergency rule in Lagos. I hope that the public’s right to know what is contained in the report of that committee will be respected.

On their part, many of our people would rather blame everything on destiny and God’s will. I listened as the pastors consoled Dayo’s father. They trivialized our terrible circumstances by attributing the death of a 14-year-old in the hands of armed robbers to God’s will. Even our traditional sages think differently. I still recall the beautiful Yoruba poem that we were taught in school. "If a small child dies, they say it is God’s will, if an adult dies, they say it is God’s will, it would appear that God has nothing better to do than to go about the world creating pain and sorrow."

Now, we must get out of this mentality of the helpless victim. I know that it has a therapeutic effect. But a therapy that is initiated and sustained by a philosophy of resignation to fate can only dehumanize us. We have to stand up for what we believe in the light of our understanding of our interest. The least we can ask for and struggle hard to achieve is the localization of our security system and personnel which will be directly responsible to state governors that will have the power to hire and fire. Adequate security can only advance national unity, it will not compromise it. We must be prepared to stand by any state governor that is ready to call the bluff of a Federal establishment by creating its own police outfit to take care of our lives and property. Otherwise, we will also bear responsibility for the terrible loss of our innocent young ones. May the wailing parents of innocent Dayo be consoled by our determination to change a system that remains dictatorial and oppressive in spite of its democratic pretensions. May the soul of Dayo and the souls of other victims of violent crime rest in peace but remain alive in our psyche to torment us until we resolve to demand respect for our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness without hindrance from official terrorists and unofficial hoodlums. We certainly had enough of both.