The Presidency has again made it clear that President Bola Tinubu will not shift his position on ransom payments or direct talks with terrorists.
This position was restated by Daniel Bwala, the President’s adviser on policy communication, who explained why the administration considers negotiations with terror groups to be dangerous and counterproductive.
Bwala spoke during an interview on Channels Television’s The Morning Brief, where he outlined the thinking behind the President’s stance.
He noted that previous governments sometimes explored negotiation because of difficult security pressures, but said the Tinubu administration believes such engagements end up strengthening criminal networks.
In his words, “There was a time the federal government was negotiating (with terrorists), and I think that el-Rufai (the former Kaduna governor) once talked about a national policy at that time, when they said both states and the federal government can be in a situation where they will have to negotiate.”
He explained that past administrations took those steps strictly to save lives in moments where there were no other practical options.
According to presidential aide, governments in such moments acted out of desperation to prevent mass casualties.
However, he said President Tinubu adopted a firm “zero tolerance” policy because ransom deals indirectly fund terrorist activities.
Bwala stressed that ransom payments increase the capacity of armed groups, allowing them to purchase new weapons and expand their networks.
He said this is why the Federal Government does not entertain talks that could be interpreted as financial support to criminal gangs.
Bwala added that Tinubu believes negotiations only deepen insecurity and encourage the groups to continue abducting innocent Nigerians.
When asked how the government was able to secure the freedom of recently abducted schoolchildren without paying ransom, Bwala explained that several factors can lead to releases.
He said some individuals often step in as mediators, including religious figures and community leaders, and not all interactions involve money.
Bwala also noted that some captors release victims when they realise the situation has become too tense for them to handle or when security pressure increases around their camp.
In his account, security agencies sometimes track locations of abductors but avoid engaging to prevent civilian casualties.
Such surveillance, he said, can force kidnappers to abandon their victims when they sense a confrontation is imminent.
He further explained that in some cases, families or state authorities choose to negotiate on their own, even when the Federal Government maintains its non-payment policy.
Bwala said, “I also have to admit that sometimes families of individuals that are kidnapped end up paying the ransom or the state government ends up paying the ransom.”
But he made it clear that the Federal Government did not pay in the recent cases and will not do so under Tinubu’s leadership.
He restated that the administration is committed to ending the cycle of terrorism financing by eliminating ransom payments as an option at the federal level.