The recent remarks by Nobel Laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka, regarding the heavily armed security convoy accompanying Seyi Tinubu, son of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, raise issues that transcend personal protection.
They touch the very heart of Nigeria’s fragile security architecture, the ethics of power, and the dangerous normalisation of privilege in a country battling widespread insecurity.
Professor Soyinka’s account of encountering what he described as “15 or so heavily armed to the teeth” security operatives escorting a private citizen was not merely an expression of personal astonishment, it was a deliberate civic intervention.
In a nation where police formations are overstretched, soldiers are deployed internally for constabulary duties, and communities remain vulnerable to banditry, kidnapping, and violent crime, the sight of such force devoted to a non-office holder naturally provokes concern.
Nigeria is besieged by security challenges.
From rural banditry in the North-West to insurgency in the North-East and violent crime in urban centres, the demand for protection far exceeds the capacity of the state. In this context, the deployment of what appears to be a battalion-sized armed detail to protect an individual who holds no constitutional office sends the wrong signal. It reinforces public suspicion that state power and public resources are increasingly privatised in favour of the politically connected.
Professor Soyinka’s intervention is particularly poignant because it comes at a time when the Federal Government itself has acknowledged the misuse of security personnel.
Only weeks ago, the President ordered the withdrawal of police officers assigned to VIPs, directing them back to their core duty of protecting the public. That directive was widely welcomed as a step towards restoring professionalism and prioritising public safety. Any development that appears to contradict that policy risks undermining both public confidence and institutional discipline.
The issue at stake is not the safety of the President’s family. Every citizen, including the relatives of the President, is entitled to protection where there is a credible threat. However, such protection must be proportionate, transparent, and consistent with established protocols. Democracies thrive on restraint, not excess. When protection becomes ostentation, it ceases to be security and begins to resemble a display of raw power.
Nigeria has a long and troubling history of conflating political proximity with entitlement. The danger of this culture is that it creates a parallel hierarchy of citizens those whose safety is guaranteed at all costs, and those who must fend for themselves. In a country where villages are attacked nightly and police stations are understaffed, the optics of excessive convoys are not just insensitive; they are destabilising.
Professor Soyinka’s pointed remark that children should know their place must be understood within this broader democratic framework. In mature democracies, the families of leaders consciously avoid public displays that could be construed as an extension of state authority. They understand that visibility without restraint can erode legitimacy and provoke resentment. Nigeria can ill afford further erosion of trust in its institutions.
Beyond optics, there is a practical concern: security personnel assigned to unofficial duties are removed from active theatres where they are urgently needed. Every armed officer guarding a hotel lobby or escorting a private citizen is one fewer officer patrolling highways, responding to distress calls, or protecting vulnerable communities. In an overstretched system, misallocation can be as dangerous as absence.
The silence of the Presidency on this matter so far is unfortunate. Issues of public interest demand clarity. A transparent explanation of the nature, scope, and justification of such security arrangements would help calm public anxiety and reaffirm the administration’s commitment to equity and professionalism within the security services.
Ultimately, Professor Soyinka’s comments should not be dismissed as sarcasm or the commentary of an elder statesman. They are a caution delivered in characteristically sharp language against the gradual normalisation of excess and entitlement. Nations do not decay only through dramatic collapse; they also decay through the quiet acceptance of imbalance and the misuse of power.
Nigeria must choose restraint over display, institutions over individuals, and public safety over private privilege. In a democracy struggling to secure its citizens, security should never become a symbol of status. It must remain a public good, governed by rules, accountability, and a deep respect for the people it exists to protect.
This newspaper believes that the strength of leadership is measured not by the size of convoys, but by the ability to uphold fairness, prudence, and the rule of law.