Borno’s Multibillion-Naira Rehabilitation Programme Faces Fresh Security Questions Over Alleged Return of Ex-Insurgents

By Globalvoice

A government-backed programme designed to rehabilitate and reintegrate former Boko Haram members in Borno State is facing renewed scrutiny following allegations that some participants have abandoned the process and returned to insurgent camps.

The allegations, if independently confirmed, could expose serious weaknesses in the screening, supervision and monitoring mechanisms surrounding the state’s deradicalisation and reintegration programme.

In Banki, a strategic border town in Borno State, residents claim that some former insurgents who passed through rehabilitation programmes have allegedly returned to terrorist camps, with accusations that weapons, ammunition or other military supplies may have been taken from security facilities.

However, these claims have not been independently established, and security authorities would need to investigate them before responsibility can be determined.

Residents Question Whether Repentance Is Genuine

Some residents remain deeply skeptical about the government's ability to distinguish genuine renunciation of violence from temporary surrender.

Alhaji Mustapha Sani, a local Muslim cleric familiar with the rehabilitation process, told Globalvoice that some community members remain unconvinced that everyone who passes through the programme has genuinely abandoned insurgent ideology.

His comments reflect a broader concern among communities that have endured years of Boko Haram violence: whether surrender should automatically translate into rehabilitation and reintegration without extensive, long-term verification.

Reports circulating on September 28 alleged that four rehabilitated former insurgents had returned to terrorist camps. Security commentator Ezechukwu Okonkwo, popularly known as English Alhaji, also discussed the allegations in video footage, including claims that some former insurgents had been issued military-style uniforms.

The allegations remain subject to verification.

Billions in Public Resources, But What About Victims?

Beyond the security concerns, the rehabilitation policy has opened another contentious debate: how should government resources be divided between former insurgents and the civilians who survived the insurgency?

The Borno State Government, under Governor Babagana Umara Zulum, has committed substantial resources to the rehabilitation and reintegration of people who surrendered after involvement in the insurgency.

Public reports have put the number of surrendered fighters and family members processed through state-managed facilities, including the Hajj Camp in Maiduguri, at more than 160,000.

Participants have reportedly received assistance that includes food, accommodation, stipends, vocational training and starter packages.

For many displaced residents, however, the question is whether comparable attention is being given to those who lost homes, livelihoods and family members during the conflict.

Joseph Shawulu, a survivor who fled Banki after insurgent attacks and now lives as an internally displaced person in Maiduguri, told Globalvoice that victims continue to struggle with basic needs.

“Victims have no opportunity to get rehabilitated. We are suffering, while only terrorists benefit from government packages,” Shawulu said.

His comments capture a grievance repeatedly raised by victims' representatives: that reintegration of former combatants should not come at the expense of assistance for communities devastated by the insurgency.

Government Defends Reintegration Approach

The Borno State Government has promoted rehabilitation and reintegration as part of its broader effort to encourage insurgents to surrender and eventually return to civilian life.

Governor Zulum and security officials have also highlighted the use of Quranic oaths as one component of the process.

Officials, including Commissioner for Women Affairs and Social Development Zuwaira Gambo, have previously argued that former terrorists who take an oath on the Quran would be less likely to return to violence.

But the effectiveness of such measures remains a subject of debate among security and humanitarian stakeholders. An oath alone cannot establish whether an individual's ideology, intentions or operational links have genuinely changed, making continued screening and monitoring central to any reintegration strategy.

Security Experts Warn Against Equating Surrender With Deradicalisation

Security analysts and counter-insurgency observers in the Lake Chad region have repeatedly distinguished between surrender, deradicalisation and genuine reintegration.

Analyst Zagazola Makama has previously argued that some insurgents may surrender because of battlefield pressure, shortages of food and logistics, or internal disputes within terrorist factions rather than because they have completely abandoned the ideology associated with the insurgency.

That distinction carries significant security implications.

A person may surrender without being fully deradicalised. Similarly, participation in a rehabilitation programme does not automatically establish that an individual's former affiliations have disappeared.

Effective reintegration therefore requires reliable screening, psychological and ideological assessment, community engagement, continuous monitoring and mechanisms for responding to credible security concerns.

Victims Say Rehabilitation Policy Risks Creating an Imbalance

Community representatives have also challenged what they perceive as a disproportionate focus on former insurgents.

Gavvs Katiya, Chairman of the Gwoza Refugees Resettlement Initiative, described the rehabilitation policy as a misplaced priority that could leave victims feeling abandoned.

“Rehabilitation is a misplaced priority executed at the detriment of victims,” Katiya said.

He alleged that some insurgents could be using government programmes to temporarily escape battlefield pressure before returning to violence.

Those claims, however, require independent evidence and should not be treated as proof that participants generally intend to return to terrorism.

Humanitarian Crisis Continues

The debate is unfolding against the backdrop of continuing humanitarian challenges among displaced populations in Borno and the wider Lake Chad Basin.

Internally displaced people continue to face difficulties involving food, shelter, clean water, healthcare and livelihoods, according to humanitarian reporting.

This creates a difficult policy question for government: how can former combatants be encouraged to abandon armed groups while ensuring that victims of the conflict are not left behind?

Humanitarian assistance and reintegration programmes serve different purposes, but the disparity in public perception can become politically and socially significant when communities believe former perpetrators are receiving more tangible support than those who suffered their attacks.

Banki Allegations Put Monitoring Under the Spotlight

If the allegations concerning the return of rehabilitated fighters to terrorist camps are confirmed, the implications would extend beyond the individuals involved.

They could raise questions about the effectiveness of security screening, weapons accountability, supervision inside rehabilitation facilities and post-release monitoring.

Inspector Supol Ghaida G. Emthe told Globalvoice that people who had passed through rehabilitation facilities could potentially possess knowledge of military formations, security arrangements and vulnerabilities in local defence positions.

Any allegation that weapons or tactical equipment were removed from security facilities would require immediate investigation and independent verification.

The Bigger Question

Borno's rehabilitation programme is ultimately confronting a difficult balance between security, reconciliation and justice for victims.

The state must encourage genuine surrender and provide pathways back into civilian life, but communities also need confidence that individuals released through the programme have been properly screened and that effective safeguards remain in place.

At the same time, victims of Boko Haram violence continue to demand rehabilitation, resettlement, livelihoods and security of their own.

The central question is therefore no longer simply whether former insurgents can be rehabilitated. It is whether the process can demonstrate, through transparent evidence and sustained monitoring, that rehabilitation is reducing the threat of renewed violence while delivering meaningful support to the communities that bore the greatest cost of the conflict.

For now, allegations of former participants returning to terrorist camps remain allegations not established fact but they are serious enough to warrant a transparent investigation by the relevant authorities.

#Borno #BornoState #BokoHaram #ISWAP #Nigeria #Terrorism #CounterTerrorism #Insurgency #Deradicalisation #Rehabilitation #Reintegration #Banki #LakeChad #Maiduguri #InternallyDisplacedPersons #IDPs #NationalSecurity #NigeriaSecurity #HumanitarianCrisis #TerrorismInNigeria #Globalvoice