Toba Owojaiye reporting
Abuja, Nigeria
The Nigerian House of Representatives has taken a bold stand on human rights violations by demanding the immediate release of Bello Badejo, the President of Miyetti Allah, from what it describes as “unlawful detention” by the Nigerian Army. Badejo, who was arrested in a commando-style operation by the 177 Battalion on December 9, 2024, in Maliya, Nasarawa State, has yet to be arraigned before a court.
Truth Live News gathered that this resolution, moved by Hon. Mansur Soro during plenary, also directed the military to issue a formal apology to Badejo for violating his fundamental rights. The lawmakers emphasized that the continued detention breaches Sections 34, 35, and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantee dignity, personal liberty, and fair hearing.
The House condemned the Army’s actions, accusing the officers involved of overstepping their authority by intervening in what appears to be a local dispute. This case brings to the forefront growing concerns about the military’s encroachment into civilian affairs and the implications for democratic governance.
To address the matter, the House has summoned the Chief of Defence Staff, General Christopher Musa; the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Olufemi Oloyede; and the Commanding Officer of the 177 Battalion. They are expected to appear before the Committees on Army, Human Rights, and Justice on December 20, 2024, to provide explanations for the Army’s actions.
Miyetti Allah and its leadership have often been at the center of Nigeria’s complex security and ethnic conflicts. The group has been linked to farmer-herder clashes that have claimed thousands of lives and displaced countless others, fueling tensions across Nigeria’s Middle Belt and beyond. While the group has consistently denied involvement in violence, its association with Fulani herders places it at the heart of debates over resource control, land ownership, and ethnic identity.
This is not Badejo’s first encounter with security agencies. Earlier in January 2024, the DSS detained him over allegations of running an unsanctioned vigilante group, citing national security concerns. In March, he filed a lawsuit against the Federal Government, challenging what he described as wrongful detention.
These recurring clashes with authorities highlight larger issues concerning the group’s activities, its perceived influence, and the government’s often-controversial approach to handling these matters within Nigeria’s security architecture.
This episode transcends Badejo’s personal ordeal, touching on critical issues like human rights enforcement, the limits of military authority, and the need for institutional accountability. For many, the unresolved farmer-herder crisis further complicates public perception of Miyetti Allah and the government’s apparent leniency towards its leadership.
The House’s decision to intervene may be viewed as a double-edged sword: on one hand, it champions fundamental rights; on the other, it could inadvertently embolden a group often accused of complicity in the violence affecting rural communities.
The upcoming hearing will likely be closely watched as a test of Nigeria’s democratic resilience, its commitment to constitutional principles, and its ability to address deep-seated communal conflicts.
For many Nigerians, this case symbolizes the broader struggles between government institutions, security agencies, and the people they serve. While some applaud the House for standing up for the rule of law, others remain skeptical, questioning whether this move truly prioritizes justice or merely plays into political expediency.
As Nigeria grapples with escalating insecurity and rising ethnic tensions, upholding democratic values and human rights must remain a priority. The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for civil-military relations, institutional accountability, and respect for the rule of law. However, addressing the underlying causes of the farmer-herder crisis is equally crucial to securing lasting peace.
This moment calls for vigilance from all Nigerians and a renewed commitment from leaders to bridge the divide between security concerns and human rights protections. Without decisive action to tackle the root causes of communal violence, such interventions risk being perceived as reactive rather than transformative.