IGP Disu's Shoot-at-Sight Order Sparks Outrage as Nigerians Fear Abuse, Extrajudicial Killings and Mistaken Identity
The Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Olatunji Rilwan Disu, has directed police officers across Nigeria to shoot on sight anyone found carrying illegal firearms, a move that has generated widespread public debate and criticism over fears of abuse, wrongful killings and human rights violations.
The directive was announced during a stakeholders' meeting in Makurdi, Benue State, as part of renewed efforts by the Federal Government to combat escalating insecurity, particularly the wave of killings and attacks in Benue and other troubled parts of the country. According to the IGP, only authorised security personnel are legally permitted to carry firearms, warning that the era of individuals moving freely with illegal weapons is over. He stated that the directive is backed by existing police operational rules, including Force Order 237, which governs the use of firearms by police officers.
Disu stressed that police personnel must respond decisively whenever they encounter individuals unlawfully carrying firearms, describing the measure as necessary to restore law and order and protect innocent citizens from armed criminals. The directive follows President Bola Tinubu's instruction to security agencies to intensify efforts to end persistent insecurity in Benue State and across Nigeria.
However, the announcement has been met with a wave of scepticism and criticism from many Nigerians, especially on social media, where citizens questioned how police officers would immediately determine whether a firearm is legally licensed before opening fire.
One social media user argued that the directive could become another excuse for unlawful killings, writing that whenever police are given broad powers to use deadly force, "the ordinary citizen often becomes the victim while influential criminals escape accountability."
Another commenter described the order as "a dangerous policy," claiming it creates opportunities for corrupt officers to falsely accuse innocent people based on personal grudges, tribal bias, religious differences or extortion attempts. The individual prayed that Nigerians would never become victims of such abuses.
Several others expressed concern that Nigeria's history of alleged police misconduct makes the directive particularly worrying. They argued that because firearm ownership in Nigeria is already tightly regulated, only a relatively small number of civilians legally possess firearms. Critics fear that unscrupulous officers could exploit the directive by alleging that victims were carrying illegal weapons after fatal encounters.
Some Nigerians also linked the announcement to recent incidents involving police shootings, suggesting the directive could be interpreted as an endorsement of excessive force despite ongoing demands for greater police accountability.
Others questioned the practical implementation of the order, asking how officers would distinguish between licensed and unlicensed firearms during split-second encounters. They argued that determining the legality of firearm possession ordinarily requires investigation and verification, rather than immediate lethal force.
Another widely shared opinion accused the authorities of failing to confront terrorists, bandits and heavily armed criminal groups while placing greater emphasis on confronting civilians. Some commenters argued that security forces should focus more aggressively on dismantling organised criminal networks responsible for mass killings rather than introducing policies they believe could disproportionately affect innocent citizens.
Humorous but critical reactions also emerged online. One viral comment joked that while previous police directives against unlawful phone searches were allegedly ignored by some officers, the new instruction to shoot individuals carrying illegal firearms might be enforced with alarming enthusiasm. The comment urged Nigerians to avoid unnecessary confrontations with police officers during this period.
Several users went further, describing the directive as effectively granting officers "a licence to kill," warning that innocent Nigerians could lose their lives if proper safeguards, accountability mechanisms and strict operational oversight are not enforced.
The concerns are amplified by Nigeria's long-running debate over police reform following repeated allegations of excessive force and extrajudicial killings. The #EndSARS protests in 2020 brought international attention to accusations of police brutality and demands for improved accountability within the Nigeria Police Force.
Ironically, the latest controversy comes only months after IGP Disu publicly vowed to end impunity within the Nigeria Police Force. Following the fatal police shooting of a civilian in Delta State earlier this year, the police chief declared that any officer who unlawfully kills a citizen would face dismissal and criminal prosecution, insisting that "no badge is a licence to kill."
That earlier commitment is now being contrasted with the new operational directive by critics who insist that stronger safeguards, transparency and independent investigations will be necessary to prevent abuse while enforcing the order against illegal firearms.
Supporters of the directive, however, argue that decisive action is necessary given the increasing attacks on security personnel, communities and public infrastructure by armed criminal groups across several parts of Nigeria. They maintain that allowing individuals to move freely with illegal weapons poses a serious threat to public safety and national security.
As public debate continues, legal experts, civil society organisations and human rights advocates are expected to closely monitor how the directive is implemented. Many Nigerians are calling for clear operational guidelines, strict compliance with constitutional provisions governing the use of force, independent investigations into every police shooting and stronger accountability measures to ensure that efforts to tackle insecurity do not result in violations of citizens' rights.
The controversy highlights the delicate balance between strengthening national security and protecting civil liberties, a challenge that remains central to Nigeria's ongoing fight against violent crime and insecurity.
0 Comments