Forgotten Dairies

Rule Of Law, Not Social Media Noise, Should Guide Our Assessment Of IGP Tunji Disu’s Leadership -By Danjuma Lamido

Democracy is not strengthened when individuals assume that their personal interpretation of events must override the legal process. True commitment to justice requires patience with the rule of law, even when the process may seem slow or uncomfortable.

Published

on

In recent days, a Facebook post by activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, titled “Signs of Weak Leadership Under New IGP Tunji Disu Are Already Manifesting!” has attempted to create the impression that the leadership of the newly appointed Inspector-General of Police, Tunji Disu, is already faltering.

Such claims are not only premature but entirely baseless.

There are no troubling signs suggesting that the new Inspector-General may be indecisive or not sufficiently firm in managing the affairs of the Nigeria Police Force. The narrative being pushed by Sowore exists largely in the realm of imagination and political theatrics rather than objective reality.

The leadership of a national security institution such as the Nigeria Police Force cannot and should not be evaluated through the lens of social media agitation. It requires patience, understanding of institutional processes, and respect for the constitutional roles of law enforcement agencies.

It is therefore unfortunate that someone who once presented himself to Nigerians as a “presidential” candidate under the African Action Congress (AAC) could stoop so low as to casually refer to our dedicated police personnel as “rogue elements.”

Advertisement

Such sweeping and reckless language does nothing to strengthen democratic accountability. Instead, it unfairly maligns thousands of hardworking officers who risk their lives daily to maintain law and order across the country.

More troubling is the attempt to weaponize a specific legal matter to attack the leadership of the police.

The case involving UK-based blogger Maureen Badejo, who is currently being held in Nigeria following complaints involving two prominent clerics, Johnson Suleman and Daniel Olukoya, is already before a competent court of law.

That fact alone should guide responsible public commentary.

Once a matter has entered the judicial process, the proper place for determining guilt, innocence, or abuse of power is the courtroom, not the court of public opinion. When individuals begin to pronounce verdicts before the courts have concluded their work, they risk undermining the very rule of law they often claim to defend.

Advertisement

It is therefore premature, and frankly irresponsible, for Sowore to describe the leadership of IGP Tunji Disu as weak simply because a case involving a controversial figure is proceeding through the appropriate legal channels.

In a constitutional democracy, the process is clear. The police investigate. Prosecutors present their case. The courts decide. Interference, whether from government officials or activists demanding a predetermined outcome, would be equally problematic.

The issues surrounding Maureen Badejo, the allegations raised by religious leaders such as Johnson Suleman and Daniel Olukoya, and the actions of various police officers are all matters that should be tested through evidence, legal argument, and judicial scrutiny.

If there has been abuse of authority, the courts will expose it. If there are legitimate charges, the courts will determine that as well. That is precisely why the justice system exists.

Having access to the Inspector-General of Police does not give anyone the right to command him or demand that he bend institutional procedures to suit a particular narrative. Access is not authority. And certainly, social media pressure should not dictate the conduct of law enforcement in matters that are already before a court of law.

Advertisement

Democracy is not strengthened when individuals assume that their personal interpretation of events must override the legal process. True commitment to justice requires patience with the rule of law, even when the process may seem slow or uncomfortable.

The goal in a democratic society should not be to win arguments on social media. The real objective must be to ensure that the law is allowed to run its full course.

Only then can justice, whichever direction it ultimately points, carry legitimacy.

Danjuma Lamido writes from Yola, Adamawa State. Email: danjumalamido2011@gmail.com 

Advertisement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exit mobile version