Editorial
Buhari’s New Service Chiefs
At last, Nigerians finally heaved a sigh of relief on Tuesday, 26th January 2021, with the “resignation” and eventual retirement of the old service chiefs and the appointment of new ones. The clamour for the change of the service chiefs dates back to over three years ago when insecurity began to take a turn for the worse.
Nigerians of all shades and, most recently, the National Assembly in its resolution, had called for the sack of the former service chiefs. The call for this change was not based on the fact that insecurity would automatically disappear with the appointment of new service chiefs, but that the appointment would engender new ideas, strategies and generally invigorate the fight against it.
President Muhammadu Buhari came short of telling Nigerians the truth when he told the new service chiefs, “We promised to secure the country, revive the economy, and fight corruption. None has been easy, but we have certainly made progress.” The reality is that Nigeria has regressed in security under Buhari, a retired army general. The change will only come when the President understands the problems and the task ahead
The new military heads include Major-General Lucky Irabor, (Chief of Defence Staff), Major-General Ibrahim Attahiru, (Chief of Army Staff), Rear Admiral Auwal Gambo, (Chief of Naval Staff) and Air Vice Marshal Isiaka Amao (Chief of Air Staff). These officers have to act proactively and must understand that to whom much is given, much is expected.
Names of the nominees should immediately be forwarded to the National Assembly for confirmation as required by the law. Next, the Service Chiefs must assess the situation correctly, map out a comprehensive strategy, appoint competent field commanders and implement. Decisive, intelligent political leadership is essential to ending the 11-year-old terrorism nightmare.
But the choice of Attahiru comes as shock to many. At a time, he was the Theatre Commander of the Operation Lafiya Dole until he was sacked in 2017 for alleged incompetence. Buratai fired him from the frontlines in December of 2017 after he failed to meet a July 2017 deadline to deliver Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau dead or alive within 40 days.
Under Attahiru’s watch, suicide bombings and attacks on military formations were on the rise. Barely a month after he assumed office, Boko Haram insurgents attacked Maiduguri, the Borno State capital. The question is, how will the new army chief deal with the insurgency in the North-East having reportedly failed to do so three years ago?
For some time now, the North-Eastern states of Borno, Yobe and Adamawa have been under frequent attacks by the Boko Haram insurgents and their more vicious variant, Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP). Some local governments had reportedly been taken by the brutal sect. The hitherto serene North-West has become a haven for bandits and extreme Islamists. Niger State in the North-Central is increasingly being infiltrated by extremists. The entire country is awash with guns and put under persistent threats.
In the last five years, the country’s security headache has moved from the insurgency in the North- East to banditry in the North-West, killer herdsmen in the North- Central and kidnappers in the south and other parts of the country. Our highways have become high-risk zones as travelling vehicles are daily waylaid and passengers either killed or kidnapped for ransom.
Even our military bases have not been spared as Boko Haram has repeatedly attacked them and carted away weapons. The most embarrassing security breach occurred recently when about 344 schoolboys were abducted from their school in Kankara, Katsina State, the very day President Buhari arrived in the state for a private visit.
Currently, our forest reserves and farms are as unsafe as there is constant news of killings, maimings and rapes therein. Also, there have been a series of reports of our soldiers in the frontlines being ambushed and mercilessly slaughtered by Boko Haram fighters. These have been occasioned by leakage of strategic information about the troops’ movements by renegade soldiers and their collaborators.
With these, it is obvious that the service chiefs have their work already cut out for them. The expectations of Nigerians are high and the reasons are not far-fetched. The nation has tarried on this knotty issue of insecurity for too long. Therefore, we join other Nigerians in suggesting that a timeline should be given to the service chiefs on when to end the menace.
The new appointments, in effect, means a renewal of hope, that things would change for the better. After all, they are all tested generals. Yet expertise is not enough. To succeed in their assignment, the government must address the welfare of the fighting troops. While military service is a national sacrifice, it is not a suicide mission. Not giving soldiers the tools to fight and dismissing them when they complain is not only unfair, it is unjust.
In the current phase of the war against insurgency, food and other welfare items are reportedly sometimes rationed, besides issues of outstanding payments and entitlements to families of fallen officers and men. This is not to mention guns and ammunition vital for the successful prosecution of any war. Therefore, all old weaknesses must be remedied and new strengths added to the fighting force.
When countries face serious threats, bold leadership, a firm hand on the levers of power and competence are required for survival. Buhari has to muster these qualities to give meaning to his new appointments. Many Nigerians believe that the retiring military chiefs faltered primarily because the President simply did not take charge and give effective direction. He can now make amends.
The exigencies of the moment demand that the service chiefs hit the ground running. Nigerians, buffeted on all sides by insurgency and banditry expect these evils to end. We think that the government should invest more in technology in tackling the twin problem of insurgency and banditry. This should be complemented by the strong will and determination that the new security chiefs are expected to bring to bear on their assignment.
It began as a seemingly minor in- flight disagreement. Comfort Emmason, a passenger on an Ibom Air flight from Uyo to Lagos, reportedly failed to switch off her mobile phone when instructed by the cabin crew. What should have been a routine enforcement of safety regulations spiralled into a physical confrontation, sparking a national debate on the limits of airline authority and the rights of passengers.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) wasted no time in condemning the treatment meted out to Emmason. In a strongly worded statement, the body described the incident as “a flagrant violation of her fundamental human rights” and called for a thorough investigation into the conduct of the airline staff. The NBA stressed that while passengers must adhere to safety rules, such compliance should never be extracted through intimidation, violence, or humiliation.
Following the altercation, Emmason found herself arraigned before a Magistrate’s Court and remanded at Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison, a location more commonly associated with hardened criminals than with errant passengers. In a surprising turn of events, the Federal Government later dropped all charges against her, citing “overriding public interest” and concerns about due process.
Compounding her woes, Ibom Air initially imposed a lifetime ban preventing her from boarding its aircraft. That ban has now been lifted, following mounting public pressure and calls from rights groups for a more measured approach. The reversal has been welcomed by many as a step towards restoring fairness and proportionality in handling such disputes.
While her refusal to comply with crew instructions was undeniably inappropriate, questions linger about whether the punishment fit the offence. Was the swift escalation from verbal reminder to physical ejection a proportionate response, or an abuse of authority? The incident has reignited debate over how airlines balance safety enforcement with respect for passenger rights.
The Tide unequivocally condemns the brutal and degrading treatment the young Nigerian woman received from the airline’s staff. No regulation, however vital, justifies the use of physical force or the public shaming of a passenger. Such behaviour is antithetical to the principles of customer service, human dignity, and the rule of law.
Emmason’s own defiance warrants reproach. Cabin crew instructions, especially during boarding or take-off preparations, are not mere suggestions; they are safety mandates. Reports suggest she may have been unable to comply because of a malfunctioning power button on her device, but even so, she could have communicated this clearly to the crew. Rules exist to safeguard everyone on board, and passengers must treat them with due seriousness.
Nigerians, whether flying domestically or abroad, would do well to internalise the importance of orderliness in public spaces. Adherence to instructions, patience in queues, and courteous engagement with officials are hallmarks of civilised society. Disregard for these norms not only undermines safety but also projects a damaging image of the nation to the wider world.
The Emmason affair is not an isolated case. Former Edo State Governor and current Senator, Adams Oshiomhole, once found himself grounded after arriving late for an Air Peace flight. Witnesses alleged that he assaulted airline staff and ordered the closure of the terminal’s main entrance. This is hardly the conduct expected of a statesman.
More recently, a Nollywood-worthy episode unfolded at Abuja’s Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, involving Fuji icon “King”, Wasiu Ayinde Marshal, popularly known as KWAM1. In a viral video, he was seen exchanging heated words with officials after being prevented from boarding an aircraft.
Events took a dangerous turn when the aircraft, moving at near take-off speed, nearly clipped the 68-year-old musician’s head with its wing. Such an occurrence points to a serious breach of airport safety protocols, raising uncomfortable questions about operational discipline at Nigeria’s gateways.
According to accounts circulating online, Wasiu had attempted to board an aircraft while he was carrying an alcoholic drink and refused to relinquish it when challenged. His refusal led to de-boarding, after which the Aviation Minister, Festus Keyamo, imposed a six-month “no-fly” ban, citing “unacceptable” conduct.
It is deeply concerning that individuals of such prominence, including Emmason’s pilot adversary, whose careers have exposed them to some of the most disciplined aviation environments in the world, should exhibit conduct that diminishes the nation’s reputation. True leadership, whether in politics, culture, or professional life, calls for restraint and decorum, all the more when exercised under public scrutiny.
Most egregiously, in Emmason’s case, reports that she was forcibly stripped in public and filmed for online circulation are deeply disturbing. This was an act of humiliation and a gross invasion of privacy, violating her right to dignity and falling short of the standards expected in modern aviation. No person, regardless of the circumstances, should be subjected to such degrading treatment.
Ibom Air must ensure its staff are trained to treat passengers with proper decorum at all times. If Emmason had broken the law, security personnel could have been called in to handle the matter lawfully. Instead, her ordeal turned into a public spectacle. Those responsible for assaulting her should face prosecution, and the airline should be compelled to compensate her. Emmason, for her part, should pursue legal redress to reinforce the principle that justice and civility must prevail in Nigeria’s skies.