Of Homeland Security, Presidential Pardon and 2027 Elections

The Advocate

By Onikepo Braithwaite

Onikepo.braithwaite@thisdaylive.com

Recently, two developments captured my attention – the appointment of Retired Major General Adeyinka Famadewa as President Tinubu’s Homeland Security Adviser (HSA), and Hon. Farouk Lawan’s reported bid to secure the All Progressives Congress (APC) ticket, to return to the House of Representatives. 

Homeland Security 

Did the President read my piece of November 25, 2025 “Insecurity and Six Suffocating Challenges”, in which I had stated that the third suffocating challenge was the lack of a Ministry of Homeland Security? I had argued that such an agency/dedicated structure is required to defend Nigeria’s internal security against terrorism, kidnapping, herdsmen attacks and insurgency – a central agency working with the different security agencies who presently appear to work almost in silos, such as the Police, SSS and NIA etc –  “ensuring cohesion between them for a more effective response to internal security, as opposed to the amorphous system that Nigeria currently operates….”. 

The primary purpose of government is the security and welfare of the people (see Section 14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(the Constitution), and by virtue of Section 151(1) & (3) thereof, the President is empowered to appoint Special Advisers to assist him in performing his functions; they hold office at the President’s pleasure, and shall cease to hold office when the Presidency ceases, unless, of course, their services are terminated beforehand. 

Given the persistent failure of our existing security architecture, this new office of the HSA represents a necessary attempt at a more coordinated response to internal threats. Understandably, concerns have been raised about duplication of efforts, or an overlap between the National Security Adviser (NSA), Interior Ministry and the HSA. As one amusing and mischievous headline I saw over the weekend called the situation between the NSA and HSA ‘Kishiya’, which in Hausa refers to co-wives of the same husband/rivals! These roles need not clash or rival each other. A solidary, cohesive and coordinated relationship, is most likely to achieve better, effective and harmonious results. 

While the NSA has a broader national and international scope, coordinates foreign security policy, concentrates on external threats, intelligence, and is the principal Advisor to the President on national security, a HSA should concentrate more on operations and execution, the day-to-day protection of the people and country from internal security threats, terrorist attacks and the like, and coordination among the domestic security agencies, particularly the SSS (see Section 2(3) of the National Security Agencies Act 1986).   Issues such as border control, customs and immigration remain firmly in the hands of  the Ministry of Interior, so there need not be any overlap. 

I saw a video in which a Northern man said that the HSA shouldn’t have been from the South West, but from the South East or South South, and that the NSA had been sidelined. If he knew anything about the functions of the different security agencies, he would know that if anyone may have complained about Kishiya, it could be the DG SSS, not the NSA. Even the functions of the Police aren’t necessarily the same as Homeland Security – see Section 4 of the Nigeria Police Act 2020.

I generally do not like engaging in discussions about ethnicity. I’m a firm believer in the brightest and the best for any position, and I believe that we have the brightest and the best from every part of Nigeria. But, the bitter truth is that Nigerians are very tribalistic people. If they had the chance, they would do worse than those who they are criticising. Most Ghanaians I know – I don’t know what part of Ghana they are from – they just say they are from Ghana. The moment we start to ask ourselves whether we would choose to fly with an incompetent Pilot because we are from the same village, or attend the same Church or Mosque and endanger our lives, or instead, fly safely with the best Pilot, irrespective of their ethnicity or religion – I know that the answer would be the latter; the moment we also start to look at governance and positions in the same light, Nigeria will become a better place! 

The man in the video said that, Yoruba would be the spoken language in security meetings; I guess the same way Hausa has been the spoken language at most security meetings since Nigeria gained independence! 

In case the man in the video may have missed out on history, allow me to make a few observations – out of a total of 29 Nigerian Chiefs of Army Staff (COAS), 21 have been from the North. Lt General Alani Akinrinade had been the only South West COAS, a position he held for only 6 months, while Lt General Azubuike Ihejirika from the South East, held the position from 2010-2014. Late Lt General Taoheed Lagbaja, the second South West COAS,was appointed by President Tinubu in 2023. Out of 10 NSAs, apart from Rtd Colonel Kayode Are (South West) who held the position in an acting capacity for only two weeks, and late General Andrew Azazi (South South), the 8 other NSAs have been from the North. From NSO to SSS, out of 13 DGs, 7 have been from the North; before the present DG, Adeola Ajayi, only Colonel Are had been DG SSS. Even INEC, Prof Joash Amupitan, SAN from Kogi State (North Central), is the first Yoruba speaking INEC Chairman. The plan was that INEC should be headed by the minority ethnic groups, but this was broken when Profs Humphrey Nwosu and Maurice Iwu from the South East were made Chairman, and then Profs Attahiru Jega and Mahmood Yakubu (who had an unprecedented two terms) from the North West and North East respectively. 

Ultimately, merit must be the motivating factor in appointments, though inclusive representation helps to build unity in a diverse nation, such as Nigeria. 

Conviction, Pardon and Elections 

As the commencement of the electoral cycle leading up to the 2027 general elections progresses, seeing the display of Nigerian politicians across the political parties, many wonder how many of them are qualified to run for any positions, and what will be the fate of the country in their hands. While I don’t want to sound like a pessimist and say the future looks bleak, in Nigerian parlance, I can safely say things look “one kind”, that is, not too encouraging. 

1) Hon. Farouk Lawan

And, when I say qualified, I’m not referring to educational qualifications, but the qualification of a person such as Hon. Farouk Lawan, who was convicted by the FCT High Court in 2021 for receiving a $500,000 bribe out of a $3 million solicitation, to remove Zenon Petroleum from the list of firms allegedly indicted for fuel subsidy. The Supreme Court eventually upheld Lawan’s 5 year sentence. Having served his prison sentence,  Lawan was released in October 2024. In October 2025, he received a pardon from President Bola Tinubu, GCFR. By virtue of Section 175(1) of the Constitution, the President can grant such pardon – see Falae v Obasanjo & Ors (No. 2) (1999) LPELR-6585 (CA) on the main types of pardon – 1) a free/full pardon that is without conditions; 2) a pardon that is subject to conditions and 3) a commutation of sentence. 

Lawan is said to want to contest and reclaim his former House of Representatives seat representing Bagwai/Shanono Federal constituency, Kano. We must therefore, assume that he was granted a free pardon under Section 175(1)(a), not subject to any conditions, in which case Section 66(1)(d) of the Constitution which bars a person convicted of an offence involving dishonesty from running for an election within a period of less than 10 years before the date of an election to a legislative house, would be inapplicable to Lawan. 

In Falae v Obasanjo (No. 2) (Supra), the Court of Appeal held: “A pardon is an act of grace by the appropriate authority which mitigates or obliterates the punishment the law demands for the offence, and restores the rights and privileges forfeited on account of the offence….The effect of a pardon is to make the offender a new man (novus homo), to acquit  him  of  all  corporate  penalties  and forfeitures annexed to the offence pardoned”. In FRN v Achida & Anor (2018) LPELR-46065(CA), the Court of Appeal defined Pardon inter alia as: “….the act of officially nullifying punishment, or other legal consequences of a crime”. This  means that, ‘de jure’ (by law), Lawan appears to be unencumbered and free to run, as President Tinubu’s pardon has not only made him a new man, it appears to have obliterated and nullified the 10 year impediment of Section 66(1)(d) of the Constitution in relation to him. But, ‘de facto’, Lawan was convicted of bribery/corruption, and the pardon cannot wipe away this reality. 

2) Senator Jolly Nyame

Contrastingly, in a recent Federal High Court (FHC) case in the Jalingo Judicial Division – FHC/JAL/CS/6/2026, Senator Jolly Nyame who had been convicted on corruption charges relating to misappropriation of public funds in 2018, was granted a pardon by late President Muhammadu Buhari in 2022 under Section 175(1) of the Constitution, on age and health grounds and thereafter, released from prison. The FHC held that Nyame’s pardon was Presidential clemency based on health grounds and not a full pardon, thereby rendering him ineligible to run for the Taraba North Senatorial seat until 2028, thereby insisting that the 10-year post-conviction period under Section 66(1)(d) of the Constitution must be allowed to elapse; that Nyame’s pardon didn’t obliterate the legal consequences of his crime – see FRN v Achida & Anor (Supra). 

Is the FHC decision confusing the grounds for Nyame’s pardon, with a pardon that is subject to conditions? See Falae v Obasanjo (No. 2) (Supra). With respect, one can argue that they aren’t the same. There are always grounds for exercising the prerogative of mercy in favour of a pardonee, such as the convict turning their life around in prison by learning a trade or getting an education, good behaviour, terminal illness, old age etc. A pardon that is subject to conditions, on the other hand, is one in which such pardon may require restitution or repayment of misappropriated funds, or other terms attached thereto. 

Can Nyame’s case be distinguished from Lawan’s, because Lawan had completed his sentence before he was pardoned, while Nyame was pardoned before he completed his sentence? Or is it that, no matter the grounds for exercising the prerogative of mercy, or whether the sentence is completed or not, once it’s a free/full pardon, the legal consequences are obliterated, in which case the FHC decision in Nyame’s case may easily be reversed on appeal? Nevertheless, some argue that giving any person that has been adjudged to be dishonest the ticket of APC whose campaign mantra is supposedly ‘fight against corruption’, shows hypocrisy and insincerity, and it should be discouraged. 

Conclusion 

The appointment of a HSA is a welcome and timely development. If properly structured with clear terms of reference, it has the potential to bring much-needed focus, coordination, and operational efficiency to Nigeria’s internal security architecture — something that has been conspicuously absent for years. However, the success of the HSA will probably depend on on the clarity of the mandate of the office, and how well a synergy between the different agencies is achieved. 

In the long run, a Presidential pardon may restore a person’s legal rights, but it cannot restore public trust. When an elected official, convicted of accepting a bribe to manipulate State policy, seeks to return to the same National Assembly where laws and policies related thereto are made, it sends a troubling message; and, if such a person is given the ruling party ticket for that matter, it sends an even more troubling message that, in Nigeria, consequences for the powerful are temporary, or even non-existent.

As we head into the 2027 elections, the real question is not whether Hon. Farouk Lawan is legally eligible to contest, but whether a political party that rode to power on the promise of fighting corruption can/should, in good conscience, field a candidate with such a record. 

The growing perception that the system protects its own, even after conviction, as well as encourages this new pattern being formed by politicians who the law has adjudged to have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar, being given a new lease of life without facing the legal consequences of their actions, are quite damaging to Nigeria’s democracy. It tells Nigerians that, some people are indeed, somehow above the law. Already, this perception exists in the minds of many, in relation to so-called repentant terrorists who are forgiven, and not prosecuted.