Nigeria witnessed one of its most alarming security crises in recent memory between November 18 and 21, 2025.
On November 18, gunmen struck Christ Apostolic Church, Oke-Isegun in Eruku, Kwara State, leaving three worshippers dead and abducting 38 others during a church service.
Just days later, on November 21, St. Mary’s Catholic Primary and Secondary School in Papiri, Niger State, was overrun by heavily armed kidnappers. Reports suggest roughly 303 students and 12 teachers were seized, marking one of the largest school abductions in Nigeria’s history.
By November 23–24, authorities and families reported the return of 50 students who had escaped, while state and federal officials declared all 38 churchgoers “rescued.”
Rescued, released, or ransomed? What really happened?
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu framed the developments as a security success. In a November 23 statement, he announced he had canceled a planned G20 trip to South Africa to coordinate security efforts and celebrated the “rescue” of the Kwara church worshippers and the recovery of 51 Niger school students.
But how were these rescues achieved? Were ransom payments involved, or were the captives freed through military action or their own daring escape?
Local accounts complicate the official narrative: for the Niger school, many pupils reportedly “escaped” during the chaos rather than being extracted by security forces.
In Eruku, relatives allege kidnappers demanded up to N100 million per victim, though discussions reportedly reduced the figure. So, were these lives saved by negotiation, paid ransom, or tactical intervention — and if money changed hands, why is the government silent about it?
What Tinubu Said and What It Means
“My fellow Nigerians, thanks to the efforts of our security forces over the last few days, all the 38 worshippers abducted in Eruku, Kwara State, have been rescued. I am equally happy that 51 out of the missing students of the Catholic School in Niger State have been recovered,” Tinubu declared.
He emphasized that his canceled G20 trip allowed him to coordinate efforts at home, while pledging continued vigilance: “Every Nigerian, in every state, has the right to safety — and under my watch, we will secure this nation and protect our people.”
Yet, the statement leaves critical questions unanswered: how were the captives recovered? Were the kidnappers confronted, neutralized, or quietly negotiated with? Did ransom payments fuel this release, and if not, what operational successes enabled it?
Social media erupted as Nigerians challenged the official narrative. Users questioned the absence of operational details, highlighting the lack of arrests, weapons seizures, or evidence of direct military engagement.
Many demanded proof, asking for video evidence of the rescued students and other victims, questioning how the rescue occurred without arrests or shootouts, and seeking clarity on whether ransom payments were involved.
With an X user, @sho1shaw, saying “Show us the video evidence of these rescued students and the other victims. Until we see some proof, we don’t believe you.”
Another user @Ugochukwu_Zilla: “Rescued? No arrest, no shootout. Tell us how much you have paid.”
This reaction illustrates a national sentiment: without transparency, the term “rescue” risks being interpreted as political theater rather than a tangible security success.
The Bigger Picture of what is happening
Ransom payments are illegal in Nigeria, yet they remain the practical currency of the kidnapping industry. In Eruku, reports suggest initial demands were reduced after negotiation, while Niger’s abduction shows kidnappers prioritizing rapid transfers over confrontation. Paying ransom saves lives short-term but fuels criminal networks; refusing to pay without arrests or neutralization risks perpetuating insecurity. Transparency is strategic — without it, the state signals incapacity or unwillingness to disrupt the kidnapping economy.
Investigative efforts by local reporters and youth journalists have pieced together partial details. In Eruku, victims were held in forest corridors known for criminal activity. Many Niger school pupils were found weak, dehydrated, and disoriented, consistent with escape rather than a coordinated extraction. Several recovered students returned after interventions that remain unclear to the public. However, verification of ransom payments, the tracking of kidnappers, or any concrete law enforcement follow-up remains elusive. Until authorities provide clarity, each “rescue” risks being seen as a temporary relief with long-term consequences left unaddressed.
What Nigerians should watch for next
To move beyond public relations, the government must provide tangible proof of success, such as presenting arrested suspects, displaying recovered weapons, sharing forensic findings, and pursuing prosecutions.
Families of victims, civil society groups, and the international community are closely observing these efforts. Without such concrete actions, the story will likely be remembered as a temporary relief overshadowed by the failure to dismantle the criminal networks behind the kidnappings.
Nigerians face a harsh reality: while some captives are now safe, the threat of future abductions remains.
Tinubu’s canceled G20 trip and triumphant statements may offer temporary reassurance, but without transparency, accountability, and decisive law enforcement, this week’s “rescues” could simply pave the way for next week’s kidnappings.
It is important to celebrate the return of survivors, but the public also deserves proof, clear accountability, and a concrete plan to dismantle the kidnapping networks. Relief alone is politically convenient, but without action, it leaves the country vulnerable and strategically exposed.
Discover more from LN247
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
