Recently, the DSS faced criticism from several major newspapers. Vanguard, Daily Trust, The Sun, Tribune, and Punch expressed varying views on the operational methods of the Service. Vanguard’s article on June 2, 2023, titled “Dousing the DSS/EFCC Feud,” and Daily Trust’s editorial on June 6, 2023, titled “The DSS Must Conduct Its Duties as a Secret Service” were among the pieces published.
The Sun published an article on June 7 titled “The Needless DSS/EFCC Fracas,” while Tribune’s article on June 8, 2023, focused on “The EFCC/DSS Confrontation.” Similarly, Punch featured an editorial on June 14, 2023, calling for radical reforms within the DSS and other agencies. These editorials criticizing the DSS for its public statements and actions on national security matters seemed orchestrated and biased, rather than accidental or coincidental.
In addition, respected legal personalities such as Olisa Agbakoba SAN, Mike Ozekhome SAN, and Femi Falana SAN opined that the DSS operates outside its mandate, particularly regarding the investigation of Godwin Emefiele. As this matter is now sub-judice, the Service is constrained from making further statements about it. Celebrating the news of a court order granting access to Emefiele’s lawyers and family is unnecessary, as he has never been denied access. His family and medical officials have continuously had access to him since he was taken into custody. The impression that the Service will act solely based on the court’s promptings is incorrect. However, this matter is tangential to the discussion at hand.
Regarding the criticism aimed at the DSS, it is important to recognize that security threats are constantly evolving, necessitating new approaches to address them. The security landscape in Nigeria, like in many other countries, has become increasingly complex and dynamic. Issuing periodic press statements to educate and engage citizens is an integral part of managing national security challenges.
Extensive research would reveal that intelligence services such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) employ similar tactics, including occasional statements and advisories. The CIA provides demographic information on its website to enhance public understanding of different regions and communities. Does this mean the CIA operates beyond its mandate? Or is it accepted because it is a foreign entity?
Transparency, responsiveness, and accountability to taxpayers have become global norms in national security and intelligence management. This is known as security/intelligence accountability. The principles of security and intelligence governance dictate that agencies remain transparent, accountable, and compliant with democratic values.
Intelligence services worldwide operate in ways that may not be discernible to the general public. However, the institutionalization of democracy has compelled these agencies to communicate more frequently with the public. Public statements by intelligence services are not out of place.
Without public awareness and support, countering threats would remain challenging for security agencies. Democratic subordination and legislative oversight are fundamental principles that make it an obligation for these agencies to operate openly, even if some of their activities remain secret. This is the case in advanced democracies like the USA, UK, France, and Canada. Such openness does not compromise their operations or the expected level of secrecy.
Regarding the DSS and EFCC matter, both agencies have refuted claims of rivalry. Comparing the incident at 15 Awolowo Road, Lagos, on May 30, 2023, to the National Assembly barricade in 2018 is inaccurate and unjust due to the significant differences in nature and context between the two events. While inter-agency relations and cooperation are important, it would be unfair to generalize and imply that the Service is engaged in a rivalry or power struggle with the Commission. Each agency operates within its distinct mandate and context.
The editorials did acknowledge the constitutional role of the DSS as an intelligence organization in detecting, preventing, and neutralizing threats against Nigeria. They commended the Service for its commitment to the country’s security and the accomplishments it has achieved in fulfilling its duties.
It is essential to understand that the DSS is not only an intelligence organization but also a law enforcement agency and a security and policy advisory body. Its establishment law expects it to both prevent and enforce. Should the Service seek media endorsement or permission before deploying its operatives and equipment to carry out its job? Should it prioritize public opinion? Like any intelligence organization, the DSS’s activities may never be fully explained or understood, especially by those who do not require such knowledge.
While some high-ranking officials and operations are known and their secrecy unveiled, there are numerous undercover personnel and actions that should not be made public. This is expected to remain the case.
With its broad mandate and legal authority to investigate crimes of national security significance, the DSS is well within its rights to initiate inquiries into relevant matters. The DSS is primarily responsible for detecting and preventing crimes and threats against Nigeria’s internal security.
It is also obligated to undertake any other responsibilities assigned to it by the President and Commander-in-Chief. It is crucial for certain sections of the media, lawyers, and other interested parties to appreciate this role of the DSS. The Service operates based on the rule of law and follows established rules and procedures.
When necessary, it obtains arrest and detention warrants, even if these instruments are not publicly advertised. Critics should familiarize themselves with the law and rules of engagement and refrain from misinforming, misleading, or inciting the public. Those seeking to weaken the Service through premeditated reforms may be pursuing an unproductive path. Consistent attacks on the DSS based on ignorance, unrealized interests, and emotional assessments do the country no good. The DSS has been steadfast in its commitment to Nigeria and will continue to be so.
Considering the biased mentality that has prompted these critical articles, it is unsurprising that there will likely be an increase in malicious articles, criticisms, and baseless attacks in the public sphere following the investigations of individuals such as Godwin Emefiele and Abdulrasheed Bawa, among other matters.
Certain groups and individuals may make frivolous allegations against the Service and its leadership. They may exploit unpatriotic members of the Service to spread falsehoods, propaganda, and hate in an attempt to tarnish the reputation of the Organization.
There will always be certain groups and individuals who will make baseless accusations against the Service and its leadership. These entities may even take advantage of unpatriotic members within the Service to spread lies, propaganda, and hatred, with the aim of tarnishing the reputation of the organization.
These adversaries, with their wide reach and significant resources, may try to create distractions from the ongoing investigations as directed by the Commander-in-Chief. However, the Service will not compromise its professionalism in the face of cheap criticism, nor will it fulfill its duties with bias or fear.
Those who argue that the DSS has no role in investigating the matters assigned to it are clearly not recognizing the extensive powers granted to the President, as outlined in the enabling Acts of the SSS and the NSA.
As noted by former Director of the DSS, Fubara Duke, “When a law gives the President the power to delegate ANY task that he deems suitable for a specific Agency to perform, I question how it falls outside the scope of the President’s authority and why the DSS is being criticized for carrying out the President’s directive.”
Furthermore, he added, “I have heard arguments about cases being dismissed by the courts due to the questionable prosecutorial powers of the DSS in certain categories of cases, including criminal cases. While respecting the court’s wisdom in such judgments, they should not undermine the lawful investigative authority of the DSS. If there is a need for prosecution in due course, these determinations will be appropriately evaluated, and if necessary, other appropriate prosecutorial agencies, such as the Attorney General’s Office or other related agencies, may be deployed for prosecution. This is not the first time this has happened.”
However, let it be clear that the DSS will remain resolute and professional in carrying out its duties. It reaffirms its commitment to operate diligently within the confines of the law and uphold the fundamental rights of all Nigerians. The media, as the fourth estate of the realm, must maintain balance, accuracy, impartiality, and accountability. Deliberately misleading the public with misconceptions is detrimental to the nation. Therefore, in order to enhance their contributions, it is not only ethical but also obligatory for the media to seek truth and veracity. That should not be too much to ask for.