Keep up with the latest news and be part of our weekly giveaways and airtime sharing; follow our WhatsApp channel for more updates. Click to Follow us

Human rights advocates, legal experts, and some community leaders have expressed opposition to the Senate’s recent decision to impose the death penalty as a punishment for kidnappers and bandits, arguing that it would not address the nation’s kidnapping and banditry issues.

Nigeria has seen numerous forms of insecurity, such as kidnapping and banditry, which have resulted in significant financial losses and fatalities.

A measure that aims to classify kidnapping and hostage-taking as acts of terrorism, execute criminals, and give security authorities the authority to track down and seize assets connected to the crime was passed by the Senate for second reading a few days ago.

The measure, known as the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Amendment measure, 2025 (SB.969), was co-sponsored by 108 senators in addition to Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele, who represents Ekiti Central.

Leading the discussion, Bamidele claimed that the change was a direct legislative reaction to one of the most serious security risks facing Nigeria.

He pointed out that abduction had evolved from isolated incidents into a “commercialized, militarized, and well-coordinated national menace,” which has killed thousands of people, destroyed businesses, bankrupted families, and overburdened security services.

“The bill seeks to designate kidnapping and hostage-taking as acts of terrorism, prescribe the death penalty without option of fine and empower security agencies to dismantle kidnapping networks through asset tracing, forfeiture, intelligence-led operations and stronger inter-agency coordination,” he explained.

The terror classification, he continued, would grant law enforcement more prosecutorial authority under the counterterrorism frameworks, allowing for quicker pre-trial processes and the dismantling of financial networks that support criminal activity.

The bill was supported by senators from both parties, who said it was urgent, long overdue, and essential to saving lives.

In his contribution, Senate Chief Whip Tahir Monguno praised the bill’s reform-oriented features, pointing out that it places a strong emphasis on lawyers’ training and retraining through continuing legal education to keep them up to date with contemporary technological realities.

He also emphasized the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee’s increased jurisdiction, which will enable it to conduct more thorough investigations into professional misconduct and carry out more extensive regulatory duties.

There are opposing opinions, despite the fact that the majority of Nigerians and MPs support the action.

Prof. Uchenna Emelonye, a distinguished human rights expert at Bournemouth University in the United Kingdom and a former UN Senior Human Rights Envoy, is a prominent opponent of the proposed legislation.

He warned that the Senate’s plan to modify the Anti-Terrorism (Prevention) Act to impose the death penalty for abduction and associated offenses goes against Nigeria’s international human rights commitments and compromises international normative standards.

He pointed out that the plan contradicts both the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which is the world’s principal document promoting the elimination of the death penalty, and the ICCPR itself, which was adopted by the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 1993.

“Although Nigeria has not ratified the Optional Protocol, it remains bound by the ICCPR’s restrictive standards on the use of the death penalty.

“Expanding the death penalty is a regressive, ineffective and legally questionable response to kidnapping.

“This amendment places Nigeria in direct conflict with international human rights jurisprudence and threatens to reverse decades of global progress toward ending capital punishment,” he told our correspondent.

“Nigeria cannot hope to deter crimes through executions. What is needed is investment in policing, intelligence and justice-sector reforms, not a return to punitive excesses. There is a plethora of evidence to show that the ‘error rates’ in Nigeria’s criminal justice system is very high.

“So, while the country continues to struggle with torture-based confessions, inadequate investigations and limited legal representation, expanding capital punishment in such a context, increases the danger of wrongful executions and the risk of irrevocable miscarriages of justice, in violation of the ICCPR’s due-process guarantees.

“The Senate proposal to reintroduce death penalty into our body of laws would set Nigeria’s trajectory backwards and place it among the retentionist jurisdictions where capital punishment remains entrenched, rather than aligning with the growing global abolitionist consensus on human rights-based justice systems.

“African countries that have abolished the death penalty, including Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Burundi, Zambia and the Central African Republic, are not experiencing higher levels of kidnapping, demonstrating that abolition does not fuel violent crimes and that capital punishment offers no meaningful deterrent effect,” he submitted.

In order to combat kidnapping, he urged members of the National Assembly to reevaluate the proposed amendment and instead pursue rights-centric, practical, and evidence-based strategies. These strategies include strengthened criminal justice institutions, targeted socioeconomic interventions, increased community policing, and swift action to stop the spread of small arms and ammunition, which continue to fuel insecurity throughout the nation.

In addition to individuals who have voiced concerns about human rights, such as Prof. Emelonye, there are others, such as the Islamic scholar Sheikh Ahmad Gumi, who would like the government to deal with the underlying reasons of kidnapping and banditry.

Sheikh Gumi had maintained that poverty, marginalization, inequality, and a lack of opportunities are the main causes of violence.

He had also argued for communication and social investment, arguing that rather than using harsh punishment, bandits are always eager to disarm provided they are treated fairly and given the chance to reintegrate into society.

There are also those who have emphasized the problem of effectiveness and inequity as the basis of their objection to the proposed law.

The main proponents of this argument are social media commentators who have questioned the fairness of the legal system, pointing out differences in penalty for various crimes and arguing that harsh punishments don’t always adequately address the root causes of crime.

Senators like Adams Oshiomhole objected to the decision on a voice vote, claiming that questions of life and death should not be handled hastily. There were also internal conflicts inside the Senate regarding the process for enacting the death sentence amendment.

Nonetheless, despite the clear opposition to the proposed legislation, most parliamentarians, state governors, and South-West leaders strongly support the death penalty as a necessary deterrent to address the serious security problem plaguing the country.

Please don’t forget to “Allow the notification” so you will be the first to get our gist when we publish it. 
Drop your comment in the section below, and don’t forget to share the post.