The Federal Government has reiterated its long-standing position against the payment of ransom to kidnappers, as the Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Policy Communication, Mr. Daniel Bwala, has declared that no ransom was paid for the release of recently freed kidnapped victims across parts of the country.
Bwala’s assertion, coming amid widespread public concern over the persistent epidemic of abductions, seeks to reassure Nigerians that the government is maintaining a firm stance against negotiating with criminal elements and is instead relying on intelligence-driven security operations and sustained military pressure to secure the freedom of victims.
The statement has sparked renewed national debate over Nigeria’s counter-kidnapping strategy, the ethics and practicality of ransom negotiations, and the broader fight against insecurity that continues to plague many communities.
Growing Public Anxiety Over Kidnappings
Kidnapping for ransom remains one of Nigeria’s most distressing security challenges. From highways to farmlands, schools, villages, and even urban neighborhoods, criminal gangs continue to abduct citizens for monetary gain. The impact has been devastating: families impoverished by ransom payments, communities rendered unsafe, and trust in public safety institutions deeply shaken.
In recent weeks, several groups of abducted victims were released in different parts of the country, prompting speculation in the public space that huge sums of money may have been paid to secure their freedom. Social media was awash with unverified claims of millions of naira allegedly transferred to kidnappers through middlemen.
It was against this backdrop that Daniel Bwala issued a firm denial of any ransom payment by the Federal Government, emphasizing that the releases were achieved through coordinated security operations rather than financial inducement.
Bwala’s Position: No Negotiation With Criminals
According to the presidential aide, the administration of President Bola Tinubu has adopted a zero-tolerance policy for ransom payments, in line with global best practices in counter-terrorism and organized crime suppression. He stressed that paying ransom only strengthens criminal networks, fuels further abductions, and creates a vicious cycle that is difficult to break.
He explained that the government’s approach is anchored on three pillars: intelligence gathering, sustained military pressure on criminal enclaves, and strategic coordination among security agencies. Under this framework, security operatives are empowered to track kidnappers, disrupt their supply chains, and neutralize their hideouts rather than engage them financially.
Bwala further noted that while the safety of victims remains paramount, the long-term security of the nation depends on denying kidnappers the financial incentives that drive their operations.
The Delicate Balance Between Rescue and Deterrence
The issue of ransom payment in kidnapping cases has long divided public opinion in Nigeria. On one hand, families of victims often feel compelled to raise whatever sums are demanded in order to save their loved ones. On the other hand, security experts consistently warn that ransom payments embolden criminal gangs and increase the profitability of kidnapping as a business.
Successive Nigerian governments have officially maintained a policy of non-payment of ransom. However, in practice, the line between government action and private intervention has often been blurred, with families, communities, religious groups, and philanthropists reportedly stepping in to negotiate releases.
By publicly asserting that no ransom was paid in the latest cases, the Tinubu administration appears determined to reinforce its official policy and send a clear message to criminal groups that abduction will not yield financial rewards from the state.
Security Operations and Intelligence Breakthroughs
According to information from security sources, the recent releases of kidnapped victims were the result of sustained military and police operations across identified flashpoints. These operations reportedly involved the use of advanced surveillance, community intelligence, and joint task force coordination.
In several instances, security operatives were said to have stormed forest enclaves believed to serve as hideouts for kidnappers, forcing them to abandon captives while fleeing under heavy pressure. In other cases, negotiation channels were reportedly used strictly for tactical engagement to buy time for rescue operations, without any monetary exchange.
The Federal Government has increasingly emphasized the role of local intelligence in these successes, highlighting cooperation from vigilante groups, hunters, and community leaders who provided critical information that led to the dismantling of kidnapping cells.
Government’s Broader Anti-Kidnapping Strategy
President Bola Tinubu’s administration has consistently pledged to confront Nigeria’s security challenges head-on. Since assuming office, the government has announced a series of measures aimed at strengthening internal security, including:
- Increased funding for the military and police
- Expansion of intelligence-gathering capabilities
- Acquisition of surveillance equipment and modern hardware
- Recruitment and training of additional security personnel
- Enhanced inter-agency coordination and field operations
The government has also prioritized the destabilization of criminal financing networks, recognizing that kidnapping, banditry, and terrorism thrive on illicit financial flows.
By publicly rejecting ransom payments, the administration signals its intention to deprive criminal groups of one of their most powerful economic incentives.
Reaction From the Public and Civil Society
Bwala’s declaration has drawn mixed reactions from Nigerians. Many citizens welcomed the assurance, describing it as a courageous stand against criminality and a necessary step toward breaking the cycle of abductions.
Security analysts have also commended the government’s position, arguing that a consistent refusal to pay ransom over time could make kidnapping less attractive as a business model.
However, some civil society groups and human rights advocates have urged caution, emphasizing that the safety and well-being of victims must always come first. They argue that while ransom payments may be undesirable, rigid policies should not put the lives of victims at greater risk.
Families of abducted persons, especially those still in captivity, have expressed anxiety over the implication of the no-ransom policy, fearing that security agencies may not always be able to reach victims in time through military operations alone.
The Economic Cost of Kidnapping
Beyond the human toll, kidnapping has exacted a heavy economic price on Nigeria. Billions of naira are believed to have moved through illegal ransom transactions over the past decade. Rural economies have been crippled as farmers abandon their fields for fear of abduction, while transporters and traders face constant threats along major highways.
Communities once known for agriculture and commerce have become depopulated as residents flee kidnapping hotspots. In many states, schools have also been forced to shut down for extended periods due to the threat of mass abductions.
The Federal Government’s insistence on refusing ransom payments is partly aimed at cutting off this underground economy that fuels organized crime and undermines legitimate economic activity.
Ethical and Security Dilemmas
The debate over ransom payment is not unique to Nigeria. Globally, governments struggle with the same moral and strategic dilemma: whether to negotiate with kidnappers to save individual lives or to refuse, even at great human cost, in order to safeguard long-term security.
While some countries adopt strict non-negotiation policies, others allow discreet engagement under controlled circumstances. Nigeria’s official position places it firmly in the non-payment camp, though practical realities often complicate enforcement.
Bwala’s statement seeks to project a firm and consistent image of government policy, one designed to reassure both citizens and international partners that Nigeria is committed to confronting organized crime without compromise.
International Implications and Perception
Nigeria’s handling of kidnapping cases is closely monitored by international partners, foreign investors, and diplomatic missions. The perception of insecurity directly affects foreign direct investment, tourism, and international cooperation.
A strong stance against ransom payment is often viewed favorably in global security circles, as it aligns with counter-terrorism principles aimed at depriving criminals of funding. By affirming that no ransom was paid, the Tinubu administration underscores its commitment to international security norms and the rule of law.
Challenges Still Ahead
Despite recent successes in securing the release of some victims, Nigeria’s kidnapping crisis is far from over. Criminal gangs remain active in several forests and border regions, exploiting difficult terrain, porous borders, and economic deprivation.
Security agencies continue to struggle with logistical constraints, limited manpower in rural areas, and the complexity of tracking mobile, well-armed kidnapping groups. Corruption and poor intelligence sharing in some quarters have also been cited as persistent challenges.
Moreover, poverty, unemployment, and the proliferation of small arms continue to feed into the reservoir of youths who are recruited into banditry and kidnapping.
Calls for a Multi-Dimensional Approach
Experts argue that while military operations and refusal to pay ransom are important, they must be complemented by broader socio-economic and governance reforms. These include:
- Job creation and youth empowerment in high-risk regions
- Strengthening of local policing and community surveillance
- Improved access to education and social services
- Judicial reforms to ensure speedy prosecution of arrested kidnappers
- Enhanced border security to curb the flow of weapons
Without addressing these root causes, many analysts warn that kidnapping may persist despite tactical successes.
What This Means for Nigerians
For ordinary Nigerians, Daniel Bwala’s assurance that no ransom was paid offers a measure of confidence that security agencies can achieve results without financially empowering criminals. It also sends a message to kidnappers that the era of easy profits through abduction may be coming to an end.
At the same time, citizens continue to demand more decisive action to prevent abductions before they occur. Many communities are calling for increased patrols, better road security, and faster emergency response mechanisms.
Families of those still in captivity remain caught between hope and fear, praying that ongoing security operations will yield more rescues without bloodshed.
Conclusion
The declaration by the Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Policy Communication that no ransom was paid for the release of kidnapped victims marks a significant moment in Nigeria’s ongoing battle against kidnapping. It reinforces the Federal Government’s resolve to confront criminality through force of law rather than negotiation and financial compromise.
While the stance has been widely applauded as bold and principled, it also underscores the enormous responsibility on security agencies to consistently deliver successful rescue operations. Ultimately, the effectiveness of the no-ransom policy will be judged not by official statements alone but by sustained reductions in abductions, safer communities, and restored public confidence in the state’s ability to protect lives.
As Nigeria presses forward in this critical fight, the message from the presidency is clear: the government will not fund its enemies, and the war against kidnapping will be pursued with renewed intensity and unwavering resolve.
