As Nigeria faces growing security challenges, marked by a rise in killings and criminal activities, the effectiveness of recent appointments, including that of the new Defense Minister, has come under scrutiny by legal minds.
The debate centers on Section 14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which clearly states that “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary objective of the government.”
As criminal elements continue their reign of terror across the country, two senior lawyers offered contrasting but ultimately converging views on how the government, and the new Defense Minister in particular, can fulfill this fundamental constitutional mandate.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Babajide Koku, expressed deep skepticism about the impact of replacing personnel without addressing structural flaws. He dismissed the appointment as a cosmetic approach to a problem that requires far-reaching systemic reforms.
“Do you think the appointment of a new Defense Minister is the answer to this problem? I don’t think so,” Koku said, challenging the idea that a changing of the guard alone could alter Nigeria’s security trajectory.
He noted that the new sworn minister was already in the system and was part of the existing structure. Koku compared the change to a game of musical chairs, arguing that maintaining the same flawed security infrastructure and simply changing your mind won’t make a tangible difference.
“As far as I’m concerned, it’s just a musical chair. I don’t think it’s going to make any difference,” he said. He believes that sustained peace requires that the entire security architecture be fundamentally redeemed, not simply administered by a new appointee.
Another prominent lawyer, Bulus Atsen, corroborated the need for deeper reform and provided more detailed analysis, highlighting that the current crisis is a symptom of broader government decline. Atsen agreed that the safety and well-being of citizens represents the fundamental essence of governance.
However, he emphasized that security has metamorphosed into a multifaceted challenge that cannot be solved with guns, bullets and bombs alone. Atsen referred to the philosophy of former Chief of Defense Staff (General CG Musa, retired), who consistently advocated for a non-kinetic approach to addressing insecurity.
This multifaceted understanding of security, Atsen argued, involves aspects far beyond the traditional scope of the Ministry of Defense, encompassing physical, human, educational, political, economic and cultural security.
“We didn’t get to where we are overnight. It was a degeneration of governance,” Atsen said, attributing the degenerative state of national security to the government’s historic failure to address these various threats over the years.
He stressed that while the Minister of Defense is crucial, he is nothing more than a cog in a vast government machinery. “Solving the security quagmire requires a collective and harmonious effort across all sectors.
“It’s not something I can do individually. It’s just a Defense Minister. It’s just one aspect of security,” Atsen said. He insisted that the security mandate can only be ensured if all relevant ministries (those designed to address the economic, educational and political sectors) work in unison to secure their respective areas of activity.
READ ALSO TOP STORIES OF Newslodge