As kidnappers across the country continue to operate with impunity, families have been secretly negotiating and paying ransom to kidnappers to free abductees. The criminalisation of ransom payments has been a controversial issue in Nigeria, where kidnappings have become the order of the day. Recently, the Nigerian Senate passed an amendment to the Terrorism (Prevention) Act of 2013 that makes it illegal to pay ransom money to kidnappers. Nevertheless, the amendment has provoked challenges in choosing self-help or compliance with the law.
Undoubtedly, the reason why the government decided to ban the ransom payments is quite apparent. The ransom payment only fuels the machinery of the criminals and terrorists and gives them resources to perpetuate more abductions and to hold the government to ransom. In January 2024, the Minister of Defence, Mr Mohammed Badaru, vehemently condemned the paying of ransoms to kidnappers. Also, following the abduction of 280 students in Kaduna State, president Tinubu ruled out payment of ransoms to kidnappers. Through the prohibition and stance against ransom payments, the government aims to discourage illegal activities and stop the reign of terror that has gripped the country for a long time.
However, this amendment does not capture the terrible state that is confronting the victims’ relatives. The government cannot fulfil the constitutional obligation of protecting residents; therefore, residents have no choice but to defend themselves. The bill enacted is a potent weapon that disarms the families of the victims, preventing them from using available resources to set their loved ones free. Any government’s primary duty is to protect citizens and residents’ lives and properties. This duty encompasses pre-empting kidnappings through proactive intelligence, policing, law enforcement, and investigations. They further have the task of dealing with these incidents and rescuing victims who may be in danger. On the other hand, it could be said that the government in Nigeria, to some extent, failed to carry out its responsibility, which resulted in innumerable numbers of kidnapped people being held captive by criminals and terrorists.
Though the criminalisation of ransom payments may be perceived to be a step towards the right direction, it does not address the root causes of kidnapping. Neither does it cover the government’s laxity in the re-occurrence of criminal acts, as seen in its inability to curb insecurity. Rather than aim to avoid such events from occurring, the government’s approach inflicts harsh punishment against the victims’ families whenever they seek to free their loved ones from captors. The issue of self-help or following the law is a moral dilemma that people cannot quickly find an answer to. First, the law ensures stability and keeps people from dealing with situations independently. However, if the government disregards its part of the social contract, individuals cannot do anything but take matters into their own hands.
Prohibiting ransom payments to solve crime may seem the best solution, but it does not solve the problems. It does not make the government answerable for its inadequacies or have an alternative solution to help the victims’ families. The criminalisation of ransom payments has become a complex issue requiring much thinking. Because paying ransom only benefits the criminals and spreads terrorism, the government must play an active role in preventing these attacks. The families of the victims should not be the ones punished; the government should spend more on intelligence, policing and law enforcement to ensure the safety and security of the general public. Only then can the measure of self-help and obeying the law be established.
