On September 15 and 16, the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) arrested scores of people suspected of illegal mining during an enforcement operation around local communities known as M.I. Wushishi and Lukoto Village in Niger State. The NSCDC said the operation was conducted on September 15 and 16 and resulted in the arrest of scores of suspected illegal miners. In the early hours of September 17, some of those detained were found dead in NSCDC custody. State authorities subsequently said 37 detainees had died.
The deaths have raised serious questions about what happened between the arrests and the discovery of the bodies. The NSCDC initially claimed the deaths followed a suspected outbreak of disease, but the actual cause of death had not been conclusively established and the bodies were taken to the General Hospital in Minna for medical examination.
The Federal Government has since suspended officers involved and constituted a 10-member independent committee to investigate the arrests, detention conditions, cause and circumstances of the deaths, and possible responsibility, complicity, negligence or misconduct.
The investigation must establish the facts. But whatever ultimately caused these deaths, the incident raises a fundamental question about the limits of state power: can Nigeria effectively fight illegal mining while respecting the rights of those it arrests?
The answer should be yes. In fact, the effectiveness and legitimacy of enforcement depend on it.
The state cannot enforce the law by stepping outside it
Nigeria has a legitimate interest in stopping illegal mining. Mining without the required licences is unlawful, and the government has a responsibility to protect mineral resources, communities and the public interest.
But suspected illegal miners do not lose their rights when they are arrested. A person accused of an offence remains entitled to humane treatment and protection of life and dignity while in government custody.
Such a situation is where the rule of law becomes more than a constitutional phrase. It means that government officials exercising coercive powers are themselves constrained by law.
For a movement concerned with individual liberty and economic freedom, this distinction is fundamental. Public power must be constrained and predictable, while individuals must be protected by clear rules and secure rights. When government enforcement becomes arbitrary, it does not merely threaten individual rights. It also weakens the institutional environment in which people work, invest and conduct legitimate economic activity.
Nigeria should therefore resist the temptation to treat stronger enforcement as synonymous with more arrests. The real measure of effective enforcement is whether illegal activity is reduced through lawful, transparent and accountable institutions.
Nigeria needs lawful mining, not merely harsher enforcement
The Niger tragedy should prompt a broader rethink of how Nigeria approaches illegal mining. Arresting people at mining sites may address the immediate manifestation of the problem, but it does little to explain why illegal mining continues or who ultimately profits from it.
A serious response should trace the entire chain: who owns or controls the mining sites, who finances the operations, who buys the minerals, which operators are licensed, how licences are obtained and renewed, and which regulatory failures allow unlawful operations to persist.
At the same time, Nigeria needs to make legitimate participation in the mining sector more accessible. Where people have few economic alternatives and formal opportunities are difficult to access, simply increasing arrests may push more activity underground rather than eliminate it.
That is an important economic freedom lesson. Markets function better when rules are clear, property rights are secure and government enforcement is predictable. People should know what is legal, how to comply and what happens when they do not. Government officials should be subject to the same expectation of accountability.
The 37 deaths should therefore not end with the suspension of officers or the submission of another investigation report. If the investigation establishes criminal responsibility, those responsible should face prosecution. If it establishes negligence or institutional failure, those failures should be corrected. And if it exposes weaknesses in Nigeria’s mining regulatory system, those weaknesses should be addressed.
The fight against illegal mining is necessary. But the state must not create another illegality in the process.
Nigeria can protect its mineral resources, prosecute unlawful mining and expand legitimate economic opportunities without sacrificing human dignity and due process. That is not a limitation on effective government. It is what effective government under the rule of law should look like.
_______
Hammed J. Sulaiman is a lawyer, lecturer, media practitioner, researcher and policy advocate. He is the founder of The Peoples’ Mouthpiece Initiative, a civic education and policy organisation focused on rule of law, individual liberty, accountable governance and economic opportunity in Nigeria. He is a member of the Nigerian Bar and writes on law, public policy, governance and economic freedom. He can be reached via sulexmighty@gmail.com