Monday, June 22, 2026
Home News Why Nigeria Needs a Permanent Media–Security Partnership/ By Lanre Ogundipe

Why Nigeria Needs a Permanent Media–Security Partnership/ By Lanre Ogundipe

*NIGERIA* : _A country where corruption makes rulers deaf, dump and blind_ _Corruption is the enemy of development, and of good governance. It must be got rid off. Both the government and the people at large must come together to achieve this national objective._ *_Pratibha Patil_* . The discourse on corruption in Nigeria remains an endless talk-shop simply because both leadership and followers are deeply enmeshed in the scourge. Nigeria’s corruption has become a virus that is ravaging the entire landscape to the extent that it would take God’s intervention to recover the country from its stranglehold. The author quoted above, would suggest that corruption is an African issue. I however disagree. The “pandemic” is not restricted to Nigeria or Africa alone. Western societies are not exempted. I dare say that the Western nations, more than any other, are culpable in the performance, though at the extra territorial level. While jealously guarding their own treasures and appropriating resources for their own people, they navigated the length and breadth of the globe, exploiting other countries, for selfish interest. They corruptly enriched their countries, with the wealth, toll and blood of others. African slaves build their cities while its resources served their economies. It would take eternity to discuss corruption, but for a quick grasp of the phenomenon, Nigeria as a nation would serve the purpose of my attempt to discuss this nagging social concern. There is phenomenal corruption in our country simply because there is a profound failure of leadership generally and in the fight against corruption in particular. If the truth is to be told, with very few exceptions, our crop of leaders is essentially self-serving and visionless. Some even rank as despots, and not leaders in the true sense of the word. They lack(ed) vision, focus, selflessness and are indulgent on a large scale. Without fear of contradiction, our leaders are unimaginably corrupt; they are greedy; they are vindictive; they are reckless and, in many fundamental respects, senseless. Virtually whoever has access to power abuses it. The exceptions are very few indeed. There is perhaps no other country in the world where power corrupts and absolute power corrupts as absolutely as in Nigeria. Our indisputable consistent dismal ranking on the global corruption index testifies to the societal decadence and poverty of leadership that bestrides the country, yet we gloat over this shameful misnomer, wear its badge with pride and carry on like Nero of Rome. That the so-called African leader and hope of the black man is now donning the crown of corruption and poverty headquarters of the world, without qualms, in incomprehensible. Like a deaf and blind man, he hears nothing, he sees nothing. Our leaders hear nothing, they see nothing. Nothing moves them. What a shame! While yet adorning their corruption epaulet, those who plunged the country into the ditch are moving around with full chest, parading credentials of ‘sainthood’ and superiority. Yet our society keeps applauding them as people with morals and means. Each opportunity they had in providing leadership became personalised. Citizens are compelled to embrace their warped ideology. They are subjected to mental and material poverty and reoriented to believe that except one identifies with the loyalist camp, chances of enjoying any benefit from the state, even one’s survival, is slim. The promoters of that bastardization are walking the streets unchallenged of their evil deeds. This same attitude was what brought our country to its knees. Its assets are decimated, its infrastructure lying in runs. Our education system has been destroyed, health facilities are in comatose, shipping lines have become moribund, in short, Nigeria has been destroyed. Look at what happened in this country in the 1970s! Where are all the River Basins? Where are the industries? Where are the motor companies? Volkswagen of Nigeria, so many of them? These industries were all destroyed between 1986 and early 1990’s. At that time, if you were in their good book, they would likely issue you license to establish a bank. You can turn the bank into whatever you like. If you were favoured, you could get a license for oil block or whatever catches your fancy. At some point, the government was simply personalised. I say this on good authority. Some Nigerians who were in the security services in the country, would attest to these facts. The country’s security agencies were turned into laboratory of sorts to test all kinds of fantasies. In all honesty, the meaning of corruption goes well beyond the meaning normally adduced to it in Nigerian public discourse. For, corruption means much more than public officers taking bribes and gratification, committing fraud and stealing funds and diverting resources, entrusted to their care. Corruption, in my view, means a deliberate violation, for gainful ends, of standards of conduct legally, professionally, or even ethically, established, in private and public affairs. These gains may be in cash or in kind or, it may even be psychological or political but they derive from the violation of the integrity of an entity and involve the subversion of its quality and capacity, going by the definition of the late erudite scholar Bala Yusuf Usman in one of his submissions on corruption. Corruption is one of the major problems which Nigeria has to tackle and overcome if it is to make any significant and sustainable progress in 21st century. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo instituted two anti-graft agencies within a space of three years (ICPC September 2000 and EFCC in 2003). Can we say they have been able to stem corruption? Rather it's on the increase. Instead of looking inward to see the underlying factors that had inhibited efforts to curtail the scourge, the campaign now is targeted at eradicating or muzzling the mouth of the oxen that “threaded out the corn.” The kingpins of corruption are resolute to emasculate the campaign. It must not be allowed to continue. It must be silenced so business can continue as usual. The main reason for the failure of Buhari’s - military regime’s - campaign against corruption and indiscipline was the regime’s inability to deal effectively with the problem of economic and social decline inherited from the preceding regime. The regime also shot itself in the foot by trying to arrest the country’s economic and social decline by doctrinaire and anti-people policies. massive retrenchment of workers in the public service, the introduction of many new taxes, levies and fees on citizens, drastic reduction in public expenditure, especially on social welfare and agricultural subsidies, and the widespread destruction of the means of livelihood of small privately employed persons like motor mechanics, food vendors and petty traders by pulling down their makeshift sheds, kiosks and bukas in the name of urban environmental sanitation. It would be unseemly for me to particularise further but I cannot over-emphasize the importance of eradicating this epidemic that has razed our nation to the ground. Any who has not lived among us may not be able to appreciate the extent to which bribery and other corrupt practices have wrecked our nation. Those who occupy positions of power operate in exclusion of the ideals of disinterested service. Much of the attraction of a post lies in the opportunities it offers for extortion of one form or another. Unless the commission fully realizes the gravity of this problem and tackle it with courage, any recommendations for marginal reform are bound to fall flat - dead on arrival. It is most troubling to see that only a handful of Nigerians especially public officials are people of integrity and honesty. Most educated Nigerians are citizens of two publics in the same society. On one hand, they belong to a civic public from which they gain materially but to which they give only grudgingly. On the other hand, they belong to a primordial public from which they derive little or no material benefits but to which they are expected to give generously and do give materially. To make matters more complicated, their relationship to the primordial public is moral, while that to the civic public is amoral. The dialectical tensions and confrontations between these two publics constitute the uniqueness of modern African politics” It is my conviction, as an ardent believer in possibilities, that Nigeria is not beyond change. Nigeria can change today if she discovers leaders who have the will, the ability and the vision to steer her in the right direction. I wholeheartedly agree with a school of thought that says “corruption in Nigeria has passed the alarming and entered the fatal stage and Nigeria will die if we keep pretending that she is only slightly indisposed”. Although many Nigerians may tend to share this view, the incurable optimist I am about the future of this country, make me to conclude that our tomorrow will be alright if we all submit to moral discipline in all its facets. Lanre Ogundipe Former President Nigeria and African Union of Journalists (NUJ/AUJ) writes from Abuja.
Lanre Ogundipe

The recently concluded National Security Summit organised by the Nigeria Union of Journalists was more than an event. It was an encounter between two institutions that have historically regarded each other with caution, sometimes with suspicion, but which now find themselves confronting a common challenge: the security and stability of Nigeria.

Advertisement
ELLEXSLEEVES APARTMENT

The Summit deserves commendation.

At a period when insecurity has assumed multiple dimensions, terrorism, banditry, cybercrime, kidnapping, violent extremism, communal conflicts, misinformation and organised criminality – the gathering of journalists, intelligence agencies, military institutions, law enforcement bodies and policy makers was both timely and strategic.

Yet beyond the speeches, the handshakes and the communiqué lies a more important question:

What next?

Will the Summit become another successful event that fades with time? Or will it mark the beginning of a new era of cooperation between the media and security institutions?

I sincerely hope it becomes the latter.

For the truth is that the old assumptions governing the relationship between journalism and national security are no longer adequate for the complexities of the twenty-first century.

For decades, the media and security agencies have operated from positions of mutual suspicion.

Journalists accused security institutions of secrecy, intimidation and hostility to press freedom.

Security agencies complained about sensational reporting, misinformation and disclosures capable of compromising operations.

Both sides had reasons for their grievances.

Both sides also ignored a simple truth:

they need one another.

The Summit brought that reality into sharper focus.

For perhaps the first time in recent memory, there was an open acknowledgement that the media and security institutions are not adversaries.

They are partners.

This admission is profound.

It changes the conversation.

The nature of security itself has changed.

National security is no longer defined solely by guns, barracks, intelligence dossiers and military operations.

Today, security includes:

– information warfare;
– cyber threats;
– violent extremism;
– economic sabotage;
– organised crime;
– social cohesion;
– public confidence;
– and the battle against misinformation.

Information itself has become a battlefield.

Terrorists deploy propaganda.

Criminals manipulate social media.

Rumours inflame communal tensions.

Fake news erodes trust in institutions.

Disinformation destabilises societies.

In such an environment, journalism cannot remain a distant observer.

The media is part of the ecosystem.

It shapes narratives.

It influences perceptions.

It builds confidence.

It can calm societies.

It can also inflame them.

This reality places a heavy responsibility on journalists.

But responsibility inevitably raises questions.

Can journalists collaborate with security institutions without compromising their independence?

Can partnership exist without co-option?

Can the media support national security without becoming an unofficial arm of the state?

These are legitimate concerns.

As one who belongs to a generation of journalists that fought for press freedom under difficult circumstances, I do not dismiss them lightly.

The independence of the media remains sacred.

A journalism that merely reproduces official narratives ceases to be journalism.

A press that abandons its watchdog role loses public trust.

The pen must never surrender its conscience.

Yet independence should not be confused with isolation.

Professional engagement is not surrender.

Dialogue is not subservience.

Collaboration is not capitulation.

Democracy flourishes when institutions engage one another honestly while respecting their separate constitutional mandates.

The media informs.

Security agencies protect.

The judiciary adjudicates.

The legislature legislates.

The executive governs.

Each institution is autonomous.

Yet none survives in splendid isolation.

The National Security Summit therefore presents Nigeria with a historic opportunity.

The challenge now is to ensure that the momentum does not evaporate.

The Summit must not end as a one-off event.

It should become the foundation of a permanent framework of engagement.

There should be:

– regular media-security dialogues;
– specialised training in security journalism;
– crisis communication protocols;
– fact-verification mechanisms;
– peace journalism initiatives;
– cybersecurity awareness programmes;
– and structured engagements at national, zonal and state levels.

The Nigeria Union of Journalists is uniquely positioned to champion this vision.

Its membership cuts across the federation.

Its branches are embedded within communities.

Its members operate in newspapers, radio, television and digital media.

No other media institution possesses this breadth of reach.

The Union can become the bridge between:

– journalists and intelligence agencies;
– the media and security institutions;
– government and citizens;
– security imperatives and democratic freedoms.

This proposition is not without precedent.

In the United Kingdom, media organisations and security agencies maintain structured channels of engagement during periods of national emergency.

In the United States, particularly after September 11, cooperation deepened in areas such as terrorism reporting, cyber security and crisis communication.

Singapore integrates the media into its national resilience architecture.

South Africa has institutionalised media-security dialogues through conferences and professional engagements.

None of these arrangements extinguished press freedom.

If anything, they strengthened professionalism.

Nigeria should not be different.

There is another reason this conversation is important.

Journalism itself is changing.

Technology has transformed how news is produced and consumed.

Social media has weakened traditional gatekeeping.

Misinformation competes with verified facts.

Public trust in institutions is declining.

The economic foundations of journalism are under pressure.

The profession must therefore reinvent itself.

The future of journalism will depend not only on courage but also on competence.

Not only on independence but also on relevance.

Not only on criticism but also on constructive engagement.

The media must continue to speak truth to power.

But it must also recognise that it has a stake in the survival of the society it reports on.

A nation perpetually at war with itself offers little room for free expression.

Security and liberty are not enemies.

They are partners.

I believe in such partnerships.

I believe journalists can cooperate without becoming captive.

I believe security agencies can engage without seeking obedience.

I believe criticism and patriotism are not mutually exclusive.

And I believe that journalism in Nigeria must evolve if it is to remain relevant in a rapidly changing world.

The National Security Summit has shown that such evolution is possible.

The responsibility now is to ensure that the Summit becomes more than a memory.

It must become a movement. It must become an institution.

For if the shield protects the nation from physical threats, the pen protects it from ignorance, fear and falsehood.

Nigeria needs both.

And history will judge us not merely by how well we wielded them separately,

But by how wisely we deployed them together.

 

Lanre Ogundipe

Public Affairs Analyst, Former President Nigeria Union of Journalists and Africa Union of Journalists writes from Abuja.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com