By Adewole Kehinde
In the past few days, a video clip has been circulating online with the sensational caption: “Why We Did Not Arrest Bandits That Came For Peace Deal, IG Kayode Egbetokun.” As expected, the clip has generated debate, outrage, and, unfortunately, widespread misinterpretation.
I feel compelled to address this matter because I was physically present at that briefing. In fact, I was one of the journalists who questioned the Inspector General of Police on that very day.
I listened to him directly, without distortion or selective editing, and I can say without hesitation: the IGP is being misinterpreted, and the narrative being pushed online is misleading.
Voluntary surrender by bandits, terrorists, or armed groups is not an unlawful act. In fact, it is a globally recognised component of peace-building frameworks such as Disarmament, Demobilisation, and Reintegration (DDR) programmes.
Many governments, including Nigeria’s, have at various times implemented amnesty windows or surrender programmes to encourage combatants to lay down their arms and reintegrate into society under state supervision.
What many do not seem to understand is that the act of surrender itself triggers a legal process. It is not a free pass. It is not an escape route. It is the beginning of accountability, not the end of it.
Surrender programmes are structured so that authorities can profile, document, interrogate, and process individuals who submit themselves. This approach has been used in the Niger Delta, in parts of the North-East, and in several conflict environments around the world.
These programmes are not invented by the police or by a single security chief. They are official government strategies, often involving state governments, federal ministries, security agencies, and even international partners.
When they are properly implemented, they are legitimate tools of conflict resolution intended to reduce violence, recover arms, weaken criminal networks, and restore stability.
This is the context in which the Inspector General spoke. He did not say bandits are above the law. He did not say they cannot be arrested. He did not say surrender grants immunity.
What he emphasised, and I recall this clearly, is that when individuals come forward voluntarily under a government-approved peace or surrender programme, the state follows due process rather than resorting to instant arrest that could jeopardise ongoing negotiations or discourage further surrenders.
To twist this explanation into an endorsement of criminality is unfair, inaccurate, and damaging to public understanding of security operations.
In conclusion, the voluntary surrender of a bandit is a legal action within the framework of government-led peace and justice initiatives. It does not mean they are forgiven. It does not mean they walk away untouched.
It simply means they have elected to submit themselves to a structured legal and administrative process designed to end banditry and restore peace to affected communities.
It is time to focus on the facts, not distortions, in our collective quest for security and stability.
Adewole Kehinde is the publisher of Swift Reporters and can be reached via kennyadewole@gmail.com
