The recent allegation made by Mr. Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), at the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Conference in Port Harcourt, concerning alleged police complicity in kidnapping and the response by the Police authority to the issue call for concern

We agree with the Nigeria Police Force that allegations of this gravity should not be established through speculation, sweeping accusations or trial by public opinion. Individual police officers should not be presumed guilty merely because allegations have been made against them.

However, the appropriate response to serious allegations concerning possible criminal conduct by police personnel is credible, independent and transparent investigation – not dismissal or institutional defensiveness.

VDM’s allegations cannot be considered in complete isolation from longstanding concerns and previous cases in which police or other security personnel have been accused, and in some instances found, to have facilitated criminal activities, including kidnapping, either through direct participation or by providing information to criminal networks.

We are particularly concerned about the persistent contradiction between the multiplicity of security checkpoints on major Nigerian highways and the continuing occurrence of highway kidnappings and other violent crimes.

Checkpoints are established ostensibly to deter crime, identify suspects, gather intelligence and protect travellers. Yet kidnappers continue to operate on major highways. This raises legitimate questions about the effectiveness of these deployments and, importantly, the security and handling of information obtained from motorists and travellers.

There have also been reported instances in which security checkpoints were dismantled or security personnel withdrawn shortly before abductions occurred. In at least one such case, a state governor publicly questioned who authorised the withdrawal of security personnel from a checkpoint before a subsequent abduction. The matter reportedly generated debate in the National Assembly but did not produce a satisfactory public resolution.

These circumstances do not, by themselves, establish complicity. But they raise questions sufficiently serious to warrant investigation.

Indeed, the present controversy provides an opportunity to investigate a much broader systemic question:

Are there weaknesses, failures or instances of corruption within security checkpoint operations that enable kidnappers to obtain information about potential victims or exploit gaps created by the withdrawal or redeployment of security personnel?

The investigation should examine, among other things:

Previous allegations and established cases involving police or other security personnel accused of facilitating kidnapping or supplying information to criminal groups.

The operational effectiveness of highway checkpoints, including whether their deployment patterns correspond with the locations and timing of reported kidnappings.

The circumstances surrounding the withdrawal or dismantling of checkpoints shortly before particular abductions, including who authorised such decisions, the intelligence upon which they were based and whether the decisions were properly documented.

4.The handling of information obtained from travellers at checkpoints, including what information is collected, who has access to it and what safeguards exist against leakage.

The vetting, supervision and rotation of checkpoint personnel, particularly in areas affected by organised kidnapping networks.

Complaints previously made against individual officers or formations and whether such complaints were investigated and acted upon.

Whether there is any correlation between passage through particular checkpoints and subsequent targeting of victims, while recognising that correlation alone would not establish criminal complicity.

We further believe that such an investigation should not be conducted solely as an internal police disciplinary exercise where the allegations concern possible criminal collaboration between police personnel and kidnappers.

We therefore call for appropriate involvement and oversight by civilian accountability institutions, including the Police Service Commission and the National Human Rights Commission, and, where evidence of criminal conduct emerges, the relevant prosecutorial and investigative authorities.

We are also concerned about the continued use of the expression “unknown gunmen” in circumstances where violent attacks have occurred repeatedly over extended periods.

Perpetrators may legitimately be unknown at the initial stage of an investigation. But where attacks recur in identifiable locations and follow recognisable patterns, the continued inability to identify, arrest and successfully prosecute perpetrators raises legitimate questions about the effectiveness of intelligence gathering, investigation and prosecution.

Who are these perpetrators? Who finances them? Who supplies them? Who provides intelligence to them? Who negotiates their ransoms? And why do they remain beyond the reach of the law?

These are not questions intended to undermine security personnel. They are questions necessary to strengthen public confidence in the institutions responsible for protecting citizens.

As a media organization, DNC does not endorse VDM’s allegations as established facts. Neither does it believe that the allegations should be dismissed merely because they were made publicly or by a controversial public figure.

The proper test is evidence.we urge Mr. Otse to submit whatever credible evidence he possesses to the appropriate investigative authorities.

At the same time, we call on the Nigeria Police Force and other security agencies to demonstrate institutional confidence by subjecting the allegations to a credible and independently verifiable investigation.

The Police should not regard scrutiny as an attack on the institution. Accountability protects honest police officers and strengthens public confidence in the Force.

If the allegations are false, a credible investigation will establish that. If they are true, those responsible must face disciplinary and criminal consequences.

The principle is simple: No police officer should be presumed guilty because of an allegation. But no allegation of police complicity in kidnapping should be presumed unworthy of investigation merely because it is difficult or uncomfortable for the institution concerned.

We therefore call for a comprehensive, independent and evidence-based investigation into allegations of security-sector complicity in kidnapping, including the circumstances surrounding the deployment and withdrawal of highway checkpoints and the possible leakage of information obtained from travellers.

Nigerians deserve to know that those assigned to protect them are not only present on the highways, but are operating with integrity, professionalism and accountability.

We urge the IGP to as a matter of urgency investigate the allegation – not the person who made it and establish the facts. Thereafter, publish the findings and arraign those found guilty in court

End