By Ghazali Ibrahim
Controversial Islamic cleric, Ahmad Gumi, has come under heavy criticism from Nigerians following comments he made on AIT concerning ransom payments and banditry in the country.
Gumi sparked outrage after suggesting during a television interview that armed groups involved in kidnapping depend on ransom payments to sustain their operations amid intensified military pressure.
According to reports, the cleric stated that terrorists “need money to finance their war machines” because of ongoing government offensives against them. His remarks quickly triggered angry reactions across social media platforms, with many Nigerians accusing him of appearing to justify criminal activities and sympathise with kidnappers.
Several Nigerians took to X, Facebook and Instagram to condemn the comments, describing them as insensitive at a time many communities across the country continue to suffer deadly attacks and mass abductions.
A social media user identified as @NigIsland wrote, “This is exactly why insecurity keeps getting worse. You don’t explain kidnapping away when innocent people are dying every day.”
Another user, @KingByronX, questioned the cleric’s comments, saying, “Families are selling properties to pay ransom and someone is publicly defending the people behind the crimes. This is unacceptable.”
An Abuja-based security analyst, Kabiru Adamu, also criticised the remarks, warning that public comments capable of normalising ransom payments could undermine ongoing efforts by security agencies to discourage negotiations with kidnappers.
However, some supporters of the cleric argued that Gumi’s comments were being taken out of context, insisting that he was merely explaining how criminal groups fund their operations and not endorsing kidnapping.
The latest controversy adds to previous criticisms surrounding Gumi’s comments on insecurity and negotiations with armed groups in northern Nigeria.
The cleric has repeatedly advocated dialogue with bandits and has in the past opposed purely military approaches to tackling insecurity, positions that have generated mixed reactions from the public and security experts alike.
