The Case For Dissolving The Department Of State Services

The Case For Dissolving The Department Of State Services

In August 2024, Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi, a notable figure within Nigeria’s intelligence framework, was appointed as the new Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS).

Now, six months into his tenure, Ajayi is advocating for a paradigm shift regarding Nigeria’s security approach, suggesting a departure from the government’s traditional security architecture. He argues that communities—not the country’s security bodies—should serve as the primary defense against the escalating issues of insecurity.

In mid-February, during a meeting in Abuja with various current and former security leaders, including National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu and Chief of Defence Staff Christopher Musa, Ajayi put forth this notion without objection.

He stated, “You do not expect the Nigerian Army, police, and SSS to protect every Nigerian. It is not going to work.”

However, there is an expectation that security agencies fulfill their mandated duties as enshrined in the constitution, which underscores the security and welfare of the populace as the foremost responsibility of the government. This indicates that ensuring public safety is the top priority for the federal government, which oversees the nation’s security apparatus.

Ajayi pointed to communities across Nigeria that have successfully defended themselves as a model for nationwide security. However, this stance is fundamentally flawed. Historically, Nigerian communities have always taken on the responsibility of self-defense, often under unfavorable conditions, facing modern weaponry with rudimentary tools, while contending with threats from kidnappers and terrorists as well as, at times, from security personnel themselves.

The state is fundamentally obligated to safeguard its citizens, a commitment made explicit when officials take their oaths of office. Yet, in Nigeria, this obligation often becomes overshadowed by a pursuit of luxury and a sense of entitlement among those in power after they assume their roles.

It is critical to recall that the APC party was elected to power in 2015 primarily due to the pressing security challenges facing the nation, with Muhammadu Buhari pledging to employ his military expertise to tackle these issues. Therefore, under the leadership of both Buhari and his successor, President Bola Tinubu, the APC has held power for a decade—an era during which insecurity has only intensified.

Buhari’s significant absence due to health issues in London contributed to the growing security crisis, and Tinubu has mirrored this inaction, frequently traveling for personal reasons while the situation in Nigeria deteriorates. This has led to a lack of accountability among leaders, who often construct excuses to evade their responsibilities, thereby shifting the burden onto the citizens.

Ajayi’s assertion that “our culture is communal,” and that communities should collaborate to confront “miscreants” overlooks the organized and violent nature of the terrorist groups they face.

He also proposed that the elite engage with their communities to seek “some sort of approval and guidance” from the DSS, a request that raises numerous questions. How exactly are communities expected to approach the DSS? Is there any legal basis for the DSS to authorize villagers to take on armed adversaries with makeshift weapons?

Additionally, it is crucial to highlight that the APC’s platform includes promises made during their 2015 campaign, which touted an increase in law enforcement manpower and a focus on addressing the root causes of insecurity, such as poverty and unemployment. A decade later, these commitments remain largely unfulfilled.

As the Nigerian economy continues to decline alongside substantial mismanagement within the government, citizens are forced to flee the country in search of better opportunities, while the ruling elite enjoys lives of comfort and excess.

Beyond that, the military’s operations, which in January 2024 announced an increase in deployment against insurrection and crime, have not resulted in enhanced security.

Current leadership ineffectiveness, exemplified by President Tinubu’s recent actions during a national crisis, suggests a disconnection from the urgent realities facing the country.

Ultimately, as insecurity escalates, the situation persists because of the failures within Nigeria’s leadership. The DSS, which should be proactive in addressing threats, appears to be largely ineffectual as it continues to prioritize the interests of politicians over the well-being of the populace it is sworn to protect.

The current trajectory is unsustainable; instead of enabling citizens to assume roles for which the government is constitutionally responsible, the DSS should be actively engaged in fulfilling its duty to maintain peace and security throughout Nigeria.