Northern leaders have clashed with the federal government and state authorities over plans to grant amnesty to terrorists operating in the region, highlighting a growing debate on the limits of gubernatorial powers.
The dispute emerged after Katsina State Governor Dikko Radda announced plans to grant amnesty to 70 individuals as part of an agreement between the state government and terrorists active in Katsina and other parts of northern Nigeria.
Northern leaders expressed anger over the plan, questioning whether such clemency could be extended to people responsible for widespread violence. The tension intensified following comments from the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation. Kamarudeen Ogundele, special adviser to the president on communications in the AGF’s office, said governors have constitutional powers to grant pardons if the terrorists were prosecuted under their respective states’ jurisdictions.
The position was echoed by Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lawal Pedro, SAN, who said governors may exercise clemency at their discretion but should consider public opinion, public policy, and societal impact. Pedro noted that while the law imposes no limits on clemency—including for terrorism or murder—state policies sometimes restrict pardons to avoid sending the wrong signal.
However, senior legal practitioners described the move as unconstitutional. They argued that terrorism is a federal offense and falls under the jurisdiction of federal law, specifically the Terrorism (Prevention & Prohibition) Act, 2022.
“State governments lack the power to grant amnesty, pardon, or any reprieve for crimes relating to terrorism, particularly if the person was prosecuted under the Terrorism Prevention & Prohibition Act,” said Senior Advocate of Nigeria Kunle Edun.
The disagreement underscores legal ambiguities over the scope of state powers in handling acts of terrorism and highlights ongoing tensions between governance, security policy, and public sentiment in northern Nigeria.
