Abuja, Nigeria — Growing outrage is sweeping across Nigeria as security analysts, community leaders, and Christian organizations intensify criticism of the Federal Government’s controversial deradicalization and reintegration programme for so-called “repentant terrorists.” Critics warn that the policy, which allows former Boko Haram and ISWAP fighters to undergo short-term rehabilitation before being released into communities, has become a “grave security risk” and a major driver of insecurity across the North-East and North-Central regions.
The policy, officially known as Operation Safe Corridor, was introduced to encourage Jihadist Terrorist militants who surrender to embrace peace and reintegrate into society. But in recent months, as killings, kidnappings, and targeted attacks intensify, many Nigerians—including security experts and Christian clerics—say the programme has backfired spectacularly. The strongest criticism has come from the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN), whose President, Bishop Francis Wale Oke, declared that the government is “rewarding killers while ignoring their victims.” According to him, released militants have repeatedly returned to terrorism, infiltrated IDP camps, and carried out attacks disguised as civilians.
Communities in Borno and Adamawa have echoed the same fear. Residents who spoke under anonymity say some of the reintegrated fighters return home with a “strange confidence,” often possessing money, motorcycles, and government-issued materials. Local vigilante groups also expressed frustration, insisting that men they once arrested and handed over to the military are later seen roaming free under the label of “repentant terrorists,” only to resume criminal activities in nearby villages.
Security analysts argue that deradicalization without accountability is dangerously flawed. Experts note that Boko Haram and ISWAP fighters have committed war crimes, mass murders, sexual slavery, and the destruction of hundreds of communities. Releasing such individuals without prosecution, they argue, sends a signal that terrorism carries no consequences and may even offer benefits. Analysts cite multiple intelligence reports indicating that some “repentant” insurgents have acted as informants for armed groups, mapping military movement and helping terrorists ambush army convoys in Borno and Yobe.
Christian leaders warn that the policy further endangers communities already suffering from religiously motivated violence. Bishop Oke, referencing repeated attacks on Christian towns in Plateau, Kaduna, and Benue, said that the reintegration scheme is “a direct threat to national survival” and accused officials of ignoring victims while empowering aggressors. The PFN insists that the programme must be immediately suspended and replaced with a far more transparent, community-driven justice process.
The controversy deepened after several cases linked reintegrated fighters to new atrocities. In 2023, security forces arrested a former Boko Haram commander—previously declared “repentant”—who had masterminded kidnappings in Borno. In 2024, another deradicalized militant was caught coordinating cattle rustling and armed robbery in Taraba. Despite these incidents, officials from the Ministry of Defence maintain that the programme is essential and claim it has helped reduce active combatants.
Human rights groups reject that claim. They argue that the government’s approach undermines justice, retraumatizes victims, and destabilizes local communities. Women in IDP camps, many of whom survived abductions and rape, have protested the policy, saying they are forced to coexist with men who once terrorized their villages.
Critics also warn that the reintegration strategy, funded partly by international partners, has become a pipeline for corruption. Some community leaders allege that certain individuals falsely present themselves as “repentant” simply to receive benefits such as vocational training, stipends, or foreign-funded welfare packages.
With calls for review growing louder, civil society organizations demand a complete overhaul of the policy. They insist that genuine repentance must involve full disclosure of past crimes, cooperation with investigations, and participation in long-term rehabilitation—not a quick release back into vulnerable communities. Many are calling for a victim-centered justice model similar to post-conflict programmes used in Rwanda and Sierra Leone.
As insecurity worsens and banditry, insurgency, and religiously motivated attacks continue to spread, the debate on “repentant terrorists” has become a national flashpoint. Critics say that unless the government abandons the current deradicalization model and adopts a more accountable approach, the programme will keep feeding Nigeria’s insecurity rather than reducing it.