Firearms in Private Hands: The Pros and Cons

As Nigeria continues to descend into the abyss of lawlessness and insecurity occasioned by the unrelenting assault on the citizenry, insecurity appears to be spiralling out of the control of an overwhelmed security architecture. North East, North West, North Central and South East have not been spared from the reign of bloodletting insurgents, terrorists and kidnappers. As President Bola Ahmed Tinubu recently declared a state of emergency on security, in addition to ordering the withdrawal of Police personnel from protection of Very Important Persons, many have pondered about whether Nigerians should not be legally permitted to bear firearms for self-defence. Ken Ahia, SAN; Jonathan Gunu Taidi, SAN; Kunle Edun, SAN; Chief Aikhunegbe Anthony Malik, SAN and Marx Ikongbeh express their views on the complex issue, in the face of these challenges

Firearms in Private Hands? Too Dangerous

Ken Ahia, SAN

In considering whether Nigerians should be permitted to bear firearms for self- defence, it is necessary to confront our realities honestly.

Confronting Our Realities

My view is that, the present condition of our society, together with our legal and institutional weaknesses, makes widespread civilian access to guns not only unsuitable, but dangerous. We are not yet a disciplined society. A significant number of our citizens, do not possess the emotional restraint required for responsible gun ownership. Ordinary disagreements between friends, neighbours, motorists or even relatives frequently escalate into violence involving bottles, knives, sticks or machetes. Introducing guns into this already volatile environment, would convert petty quarrels into permanent tragedies. Many people do not have the temperament, to carry a weapon without misusing it when provoked. Anger, frustration, alcohol and ego often govern reactions, more than calm judgement.

The institutional context, presents even greater concerns. Nigeria’s systems for licensing, identity verification and data management, are not reliable enough to control firearms effectively. Our national identity database is incomplete. Address verification is weak. Mental health screening is almost non existent. Criminal history records are not harmonised nationwide. Effective regulation of firearms depends on strong data systems. Without such systems, the State cannot reliably determine who is fit to possess a gun, nor can it track misuse, diversion or theft. Once a weapon enters the system, recalling it becomes extremely difficult.

Moreover, any licensing framework presupposes honesty, transparency and administrative integrity. Yet corruption remains entrenched in many parts of our public institutions. Processes that should be objective are frequently compromised by influence, shortcuts or outright bribery. If firearm licences become subject to the same weaknesses that affect other regulatory systems, weapons will certainly end up in the hands of persons who should never possess them, including political thugs, violent groups, and individuals who simply seek to display status.

Legal Impediments

There are also serious legal impediments. The Firearms Act is highly restrictive, and centralises authority in the Nigeria Police Force. Liberalising gun ownership would require a substantial amendment of that law, and would raise constitutional issues. Section 214 of the Constitution prohibits the creation of any other Police Force, outside the one established by the Constitution. A heavily armed civilian population, even if licensed, begins to resemble an unregulated parallel security structure, that may be inconsistent with the structure of the Constitution. In addition, Section 33 of the Constitution imposes on the State, a duty to protect life. A policy that foreseeably increases gun-related deaths, may be challenged as a breach of this duty.

Practical Consequences

Beyond culture and legality, the practical consequences of widespread access to guns would be severe. Domestic disputes would become more lethal. Road rage would escalate into shootings. Neighbourhood disagreements would quickly get out of hand. Stolen or misplaced firearms, would strengthen criminal gangs. Political contestation, which is already intense, would become even more violent as actors arm themselves under the guise of legality. The dangers, clearly outweigh any perceived benefits.

The Constitution places the security of lives and property firmly on the Federal Government. The proper response to insecurity is not to arm every citizen. It is to strengthen policing institutions, improve intelligence capacity, deploy technology and build effective community security structures. The inability of the State to fully discharge its duty does not justify transferring that responsibility to civilians in a manner that may produce greater insecurity than the one it seeks to address.

For all these reasons, which include cultural realities, legal restrictions, institutional weaknesses and practical dangers, I do not support the liberalisation of civilian firearm ownership in Nigeria. The country must first develop stronger institutions, better citizen discipline, reliable data systems and more effective security mechanisms. Until then, widespread access to guns will cause far more harm than good.

Ken Ahia, SAN, Constitutional Lawyer, Lagos

Challenge of Licensing of Private Guns in Nigeria

Jonathan Gunu Taidi, SAN

Introduction

Should Nigerians be permitted to own and carry firearms for self-defence? This work answers with a conditional policy recommendation. Unrestricted access to private arms would worsen insecurity, given Nigeria’s porous borders, abundant illicit weapons, weak regulatory capacity, and the prevalence of violent crimes. However, a carefully designed, tightly regulated, limited licensing regime, focused on competency, accountability, and enforcement, can be considered as part of a broader security strategy. The regime must be implemented only after significant improvements in registration systems, policing capacity, border control, and anti-corruption safeguards.

The analysis below is evidence based, cites primary legal texts and international research, and ends with concrete modalities, safeguards, and a bibliography.

Current Baseline Facts and Risks

The principal domestic law is the Firearms Act which frames possession and licensing, and states that licences are not granted as of right. Licensing, prohibited weapons, safe custody and ammunition control are regulated under the Act. Independent surveys estimate that millions of civilians already hold firearms in Nigeria, with the Small Arms Survey estimating roughly 6.4 to 6.5 million firearms in civilian hands at the time of its survey, and household firearm prevalence varying by region. High numbers of illicit small arms, are a core driver of violence.

Nigeria faces high recorded crime, and violent incident levels. The National Bureau of Statistics reported tens of millions of household crime incidents during a recent 12-month window, underscoring the demand for protection and the broader governance challenges. International systematic reviews show mixed results on the public safety benefits of increasing civilian access to guns. Evidence generally indicates that, flagrant access combined with weak controls, frequently increases firearm deaths and misuse. Evidence on whether armed civilians reduce their personal risk is contested, and often context dependent. Policy effects depend heavily on enforcement capacity, background checks, training requirements, and the relative prevalence of illicit weapons.

Core Policy Question Reframed

The binary question of whether or not to permit everyone to have licensed firearms for self-defence, is the wrong policy frame. The better policy question is this: Given Nigeria’s security environment, what limited, accountable licensing model, if any, would enhance public safety without exacerbating armed violence?

Legal and Constitutional Considerations

The Robbery and Firearms Act already contemplates licensing as not a right but a regulated privilege, and gives the State discretion. Any expansion must be enacted by legislation or subsidiary regulation consistent with the Act, and accompanied by appropriation for enforcement. Judicial review is likely, if licenses are issued arbitrarily or rights are violated.

International Lessons that Matter

Countries with permissive ownership but strong institutions, low inequality, high social cohesion, and rigorous training and storage requirements can have low gun homicide rates. The Swiss example is often cited, but its social and institutional context limits transferability. In nations with significant illegal arms flow and weak licensing enforcement, licensed firearms commonly leak into criminal markets. South Africa tightened laws but still suffers high illegal firearm use, because illicit weapons dominate violent crime. Systematic reviews show that targeted policies that combine background checks, mandatory training, safe storage, tracking of sales and ammunition, and rapid license revocation on breaches, produce the most favourable safety outcomes. Where enforcement is weak, these measures fail.

Recommended Policy Stance for Nigeria

It is recommended that, instead of allowing universal easy access, Nigeria should implement a restricted, conditional licensing regime for defined categories of civilians, accompanied by foundational system reforms. The regime should be pilot tested in a limited geography, before any national roll out.

Who Should be Eligible

Permit licences only to persons over thirty years and are:

Security professionals and private security personnel registered under Nigerian private security law, subject to agency oversight.

People in documented high risk occupations, where State protection is demonstrably inadequate, and only after approval by a security authority.

Residents in clearly defined high threat localities under a pilot programme, subject to strict vetting and oversight.

Hunters and licensed sporting clubs, with specialised licensing for hunting arms, separate from self-defence carriage.

Universal citizen carriage for self-defence is not recommended, until system reforms are proven.

Modalities for Issuance and Control

Implement the following integrated modalities simultaneously:

Licensing Regime

Competency licence and separate carry licence. Applicants must hold a competency licence first. Competency licence requires background checks, psychological screening, certified training and practical assessment. Renewal every two years.

Carry licence issued only after additional justification, limited to concealed carry in specified areas. Public carry in crowded spaces, should be presumptively prohibited.

Type Restrictions: Allow only low calibre manual firearms for civilian ownership. Prohibit automatic and military grade weapons for civilians.

Waiting Periods: Minimum cooling off waits of some months/weeks between application and issuance to allow vetting.

Background checks and vetting: Centralized digital registry that links licence, firearm serial numbers, owner identity and biometric ID.

Automated checks against criminal records, domestic violence reports, and mental health flags. Offline records must be digitised.

Mandatory disclosure of recent travel to conflict zones, and prior military service that included weapons offences.

Training and Certification: Mandatory certified training on safe handling, de-escalation, legal use of force, first aid and secure storage. Certified providers audited by the Inspectorate.

Periodic Requalification.

Safe storage and ammunition control

Legal requirement for secure safes in homes, and locked storage for vehicles. Random audits and inspections on reasonable cause, with court approved warrants.

Ammunition sold only to registered licence holders, and recorded per transaction. Limit on quantity stored at home.

Registration and ballistic tracing

Forensic ballistics tagging and central database of weapons, serial numbers and ballistic signatures where feasible. New sales must be recorded immediately, into the central registry.

Mandatory reporting of loss or theft, within 24 hours under penalty.

Insurance and Liability

Require holders to maintain a minimum liability insurance, that covers wrongful shootings and accidental harm. Insurance premiums linked to compliance history.

Revocation and Penalties

Immediate licence suspension on arrest for violent offences or domestic violence, pending revocation proceedings.

Stiff criminal penalties for illegal transfer, failure to report loss, illegal possession and evidence tampering. Confiscation powers must be operational and enforced.

Data, Audits and Transparency

Publish quarterly anonymised statistics on licence numbers, revocations, firearm related incidents involving licence holders, and seizures of illicit weapons.

Independent oversight board with civil society, Police, and legal profession representation to review policy and abuse.

Measures to Prevent Abuse and Leakage into Criminal Markets

Border control and anti-smuggling operations

Since illicit weapons are the main driver of armed crime, strengthen customs, border patrol, and regional policing cooperation. Nigeria must invest in interdiction capabilities, and intelligence sharing.

Criminal justice reforms to ensure swift prosecution of illegal firearm offences, reducing incentives to traffic arms.

Tighter controls on private security companies, including mandatory registration of company inventories and audited transfers.

Ballistic databases, mandatory reporting and trace-back procedures to detect diversion.

Robust anti-corruption safeguards within licensing agencies, including digitalised workflows, audit trails, and external oversight to reduce bribery and licence issuance fraud.

Buyback programmes and incentives for voluntary surrender of illegal firearms where feasible, to reduce the stock of illicit weapons. Previous schemes elsewhere show partial success, when paired with trust building and credible guarantees.

Pilot Area Selection: Choose two States with differing security profiles, one urban and one rural, with local buy in and policing capacity. Limit licences to registered security professionals, and a narrow category of civilians. If pilot meets safety thresholds, scale gradually. If not, suspend and recalibrate.

Build the digital registry and ballistic linkage, before issuing new licences.

Run comprehensive training programmes, and certify trainers.

Six-month conditional pilot, with real time monitoring and external evaluation at months three and six. Metrics: Changes in violent crime involving firearms, number of licence revocations, reported accidental discharges, and leakage incidents.

Risks and Mitigation

Risks: Licensed guns leaking into illicit market. Mitigation: Strict transfer controls, serialisation, audits, strong penalties, border control.

Increase in domestic firearm incidents, accidental deaths, domestic violence escalations. Mitigation: training, safe storage enforcement, immediate suspension for domestic violence reports. Evidence shows households with guns have higher domestic homicide risk unless storage and screening are strict.

Corruption in licensing. Mitigation: digital workflows, external audits, civil society oversight.

False sense of security leading to escalation of conflict. Mitigation: public communications, integrate with community policing.

Conclusion

Allowing blanket legal carriage of firearms for self-defence in Nigeria would likely increase harm, given current illicit stockpiles and enforcement gaps. A narrowly tailored, rigorously enforced licensing model, with limited eligibility, comprehensive training, digital registration and strong anti-corruption mechanisms could be piloted as part of a broader strategy that prioritises reducing the illicit weapon stock, strengthening policing, and improving border security. The success of any licensing regime depends more on institutional reform and enforcement, than on law design alone.

Bibliography

Small Arms Survey. Nigeria national reports and estimates of civilian firearm holdings. Key findings on prevalence and regional distribution.

National Bureau of Statistics Nigeria. Crime incidence survey reporting 51 million household crime incidents in a 12-month period. Media coverage and NBS report.

RAND Corporation. What Science Tells Us About the Effects of Gun Policies. Review of evidence on background checks, concealed carry and other policy levers.

Greenberg et al. systematic review on firearm legislation impacts and firearm mortality. Peer reviewed synthesis on policy effects.

UNODC Firearms Protocol and Technical Guide. International standards for preventing illicit manufacture and trafficking and guidance for national implementations.

Research on South Africa Firearms Control Act implementation and limitations, comparative lessons on illegal firearms supply.

Analysis on Swiss gun policy and the limits of direct comparisons. AOAV critique and academic analysis.

Recent Nigerian literature on proliferation of SALW and policy recommendations. Academic articles and policy briefs analysing smuggling routes and institutional weaknesses.

Technical guides on small arms control and UN best practices.

Jonathan Gunu Taidi, SAN, former General Secretary, Nigerian Bar Association

The Right to Self Defence is Sacrosanct

Kunle Edun, SAN

Right to Life and Self-Defence

The right to self-defence is a legal right, which is a natural consequence of the constitutional right to life. A Citizen has the legal right to do everything legally possible to defend himself and protect his life, against any form of attack. The primary responsibility of Government, is to provide welfare and security for its citizens. The failure of the enforcement of this constitutional  responsibility has seen the lives of thousands of Nigerians being lost, properties destroyed and communities massacred by bandits, kidnappers and terrorists in the last few years. Only recently, a Nigerian Brigadier-General was captured by bandits and killed. The nation did not mourn his death. We have all since moved on. No value attached to a human life.

I know that the President of Nigeria has since taken some steps towards tackling this menace that may spell doom for this country if we are not serious, but more proactive actions are needed. Banditry, terrorism and abduction for the past 15 years were treated with levity by Government, with speculations that the enablers and sponsors are in Government. Many Nigerians have been chased away from their communities. Refugee camps are springing up everywhere, even now, in the Southern part of Nigeria. Travelling on Nigerian roads, is no longer safe. The airlines are business tyrants. We cannot continue living like vagabonds in our own country.

Nigerians have been passing through a hellish time. If it is not the daily harassment and extortion on the road by armed Policemen, it will be threat of kidnapping and fear of being killed by bandits.

I am afraid, the way things are getting worse, Nigerians may have to take the admonition of General Theophilus Danjuma to defend themselves. It is now obvious that the Federal Government and our Security agencies, cannot adequately protect every Nigerian. State Policing that would have been a viable option is mired in politics, while hundreds are being killed or kidnapped every now and then.

Within three weeks, not less than 1000 Nigerians have been abducted by bandits. Most of the cases of abduction are never reported, so the number can be very high. It’s not a surprise, that Government announced the release of some of the abduction victims, but strangely no news of the arrest, attack or killing of a single bandit. What is really happening? Was ransom paid? Farmers can no longer go to their farms, and this has led to the sharp rise in the cost of food products. The average Nigerian is now struggling to survive in his own country, while the politicians continue their mad invasion of the treasury with no consequence.

Recently, the President directed all Policemen attached to VIPs and other private individuals and institutions, to be withdrawn. That directive has been disrespectfully disobeyed, because there is selective enforcement of the Presidential directive. We still see on the roads and at private residences, armed Policemen still being used as security escorts, gatemen and personal guards; some are still following oga madam around, while more than 230 million Nigerians are left un-policed.

The Way Forward

The way forward, should be fast. State policing is a must. It is long over due. With all its  flaws, the benefits outweigh the perceived drawbacks. In fact, we also need Local Government policing. Each of the regions should set up its own security outfit like the South West did, and legislation or Special Presidential directive be given that they should be armed. Furthermore, the NYSC scheme be converted to a Military Training Programme for one year. Nigerians must start learning how to handle weapons. We need to build up a good reserve base, to be called on when needed. If the enemy knows that I have a gun, he would think twice before attacking. Like we say in Warri, “somebody go die that day”. Nigerians of a particular category, preferably professionals like Lawyers, Doctors, Engineers and Accountants recommended by their professional bodies, should be licensed to carry guns. All ex-service personnel who retired with good records, should be allowed to carry weapons. They are part of the reserve base. The bandits and terrorists carry heavy weapons but are not licensed, so why not other Nigerians who are more reasonable.

Corruption

Finally, corruption is a major bane in the fight against terrorism. Many service personnel and politicians have been indicted for stealing security funds, and nothing happened. The Court even set some of them free. Security funds are now like a windfall to some people in Government, and in the security circles. Security votes are now a looting avenue, because they are never accounted for. Government must flush out the criminals, bandits and traitors that are within the Government circle. Placating captured bandits or paying compensation or ransom, as was said to have been done by some State Governments in the North, is not a solution. It has actually worsened an already bad situation.

Kunle Edun, SAN,  former National Publicity Secretary, Nigerian Bar Association

Security, Self-Defence and Regulation: Rethinking Firearms Ownership in Nigeria

Aikhunegbe Anthony Malik, SAN

Background

From the attack on a Cherubim and Seraphim Church at Ejiba in Yagba West Local Government Area of Kogi State, which resulted in the abduction of the church pastor, his wife and several worshippers, to the attack on the Christ Apostolic Church (CAC) in Oke Isegun, Ekiti Local Government Area of Kwara State during an evening programme, and from the abduction of 25 students in Kebbi State to the kidnapping of over 300 students in Niger State, Nigerians in recent weeks have woken to harrowing tales of insecurity and violence. These incidents have dominated headlines, and created deep apprehension across the country. “Who will be next?” is the dread that now grips many Nigerians, especially those in the lower class. More than ever, the security climate in Nigeria has deteriorated, and unfortunately, the Government appears unable to guarantee the safety of its citizens.

Shift in Policy

It is, therefore, unsurprising that many Nigerians are calling for a shift in policy and legal framework as to make it possible for them to possess firearms for purposes of self-defence. Given the apparent incapacity of the State to tackle and or deal headlong with banditry, terrorism and communal violence across several States, it is understandable that citizens seek ways to protect themselves. Against this backdrop we must ask: should responsible, law-abiding Nigerians be permitted to legally own and carry firearms strictly for self-defence?

Some will quickly reject the idea for fear of abuse, or the potential of worsening insecurity. I hold a different view. A carefully regulated right to possess and carry firearms for self-defence could yield a net public benefit, if accompanied by a robust regulatory framework.

In several developed countries such as the United States, Finland, Canada and Switzerland, private ownership of firearms is legal, and subject to regulations that balance individual rights with public safety. Importantly, the agitations which culminated in regulated private ownership in those jurisdictions, was driven by concerns about rising insecurity. The Nigerian proposal, therefore, finds precedent in responses adopted elsewhere when citizens felt inadequately protected.

Where firearms possession is lawful, licensing regimes typically include rigorous background checks, licensing tied to a demonstrable purpose, mandatory training and certification, registration and periodic renewal or inspection by authorities. These are designed to prevent misuse, and promote responsible ownership. The Nigerian Government can take a cue from such models and work to develop institutional capacity, to implement a licensing regime that suits our context.

Challenges

That said, Nigeria faces significant gaps that may complicate the introduction of a comprehensive firearms licensing scheme. These challenges stem from the existing statutory framework on firearm possession, weak enforcement institutions, fragmented data systems, poor inter-agency coordination, socio-economic vulnerabilities, public distrust of security agencies, and the pervasive circulation of illegal arms. Notably, the Firearms Act, Cap F28, LFN 2004, already contemplates private ownership of firearms in Nigeria, albeit under stringent and clearly defined conditions. Accordingly, what is required now is a legislative amendment of the Firearms Act to ease the onerous requirements imposed by the current regime, particularly as they affect ordinary Nigerians.

Conclusion

Notwithstanding these challenges, the Government must be prepared to consider this reform. If it is not prepared to strengthen and fulfil its constitutional obligation of securing the lives of Nigerians, then it must be ready to yield the ground for a tightly regulated system that permits for lawful self-defence ownership, alongside measures to curb illegal arms, enhance policing, improve data and promote community trust.

Chief Aikhunegbe Anthony Malik, SAN, Constitutional Lawyer, Abuja

Guns Don’t Kill People, People Kill People!

Marx Ikongbeh

Political Philosophy

The title of this article has been described as the first article of faith of the National Rifle Association, a powerful gun lobby group in the United States of America, where gun rights remain a top tier determinant of political ideology.

It was Max Webber, the political philosopher, who postulated the concept of monopoly of violence as an attribute of State sovereignty. He did this standing on the shoulders of renowned thinkers such as Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes, who identified the State as having a monopoly of applying coercive force to command compliance.

Sovereign Monopoly of Violence

Bringing this home to Nigeria at the present time, and in view of the clamour for liberalisation of gun control, the question that juts out, is whether the Nigerian Government is truly possessed of its sovereign monopoly of violence at the moment.

The answer is easy to observe, all around us. Non-State actors roam freely, exercising the monopoly of violence and exacting the populace. Whole swaths of Nigerian territory have fallen under the hold of gunslinging terrorists who now wield de facto this most prime aspect of State sovereignty. Of note is the humbling news or perhaps, rumours that 20 out of 34 Local Government Areas in Katsina State entered into a peace deal with these bloodthirsty overlords.

To think that this same Katsina is the beloved home State and final resting place of a man who was for 8 years the Commander-in-Chief and trustee of this monopoly, suggests quite credibly that the Nigeria State has lost its grasp on one of its most prized attributes.

So, with this state of affairs, can anyone be faulted who advocates that Nigeria should liberalise its gun licensing regime, and allow citizens to own and carry guns?

Self-Defence

To appreciate this question, it is important to understand that one cardinal exception to the concept of state monopoly of violence is the carve out for self-defence. Self-defence is an exculpatory ground for appropriating the monopoly of violence without prior consent of the State, and to still walk away unscathed and unsanctioned by the court of law.

By default position of law, a citizen who kills or applies physical force to another person is liable to be punished by the State. But, where he can show that he acted in self- defence, then his action would be excused.

However, the law not being dumb, realises that this exception can be abused easily. It could become a justification to kill or harm others, and then attempt to shelter under its warm embrace. For this reason, the law as a wise sage, set guardrails for the application of self- defence. One of the most important guardrails, amongst others, is the concept of proportionality. This stipulates that in resorting to self-defence, the medium of response must be proportional to that of the attack.

It is thus, not self-defence when a person slaps or attempts to slap you with his fist, and you retaliate with a hefty plank of wood to his head. So, the proverbial man who brought a gun to a knife fight, cannot be accommodated under the umbrella of self-defence. Neither would the man who used a sledgehammer to kill an ant who stung him escape culpability, if it was possible for the ant kingdom to establish a court to try such a case.

Posers

So, in all of this, the posers that agitate the mind are;

• how is a Nigerian citizen supposed to enjoy his right of self-defence in response to the gun totting terrorists who seek him daily? With his bare knuckles, or with his table knife?

• Without access to gun ownership, is the right of self- defence not rendered otiose?

• Is the same State that has balked to the marauders, justified to still prevent access to the necessary and commensurate implements of self-defence for the hapless citizens?

• Does the same State that cannot disarm the agents of death and doom, have any moral justification to prevent citizens who have been left to their own devices from acquiring the necessary kinetic response to this anarchy?

Of course, there are very credible arguments on the other side of the pendulum. Liberalising gun access, might precipitate many more horrors. The liberal regime might mean that criminals alike, have enhanced access to guns. More guns also equal more opportunity for violence. Guns in every hand, also diminishes the authority of the Government and can ultimately lead to a state of Hobbesian recrudescence where might is right, and the longest and most powerful gun equips its possessor with the right to have the final say.

Conclusion

Anyhow it is looked at, the present state of affairs calls for action with respect to gun rights in Nigeria. The Government cannot leave the citizens, to be canon fodder for criminal elements. The principal law regulating gun control, the Firearms Control Act, must be reviewed to provide greater access to guns, but with necessary safeguards, such as eligibility criteria that filters out persons of questionable standing and provides for adequate training and oversight.

The National Assembly seems to have made such an attempt with the introduction at one point of the Firearms Act Cap F28 LFN (Amendment) Bill 2022 (SB. 889) and the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons Bill, 2021. None of them has, however, successfully completed their sojourn through the legislative chambers. There is now a pressing need, for this to be revisited.

Marx Ikongbeh, Legal Practitioner, Abuja