By Collins Ughalaa
In a democracy, dissenting voices are inevitable and even necessary. Criticism of those in public office is part of the healthy exchange of ideas that strengthens governance. However, criticism must always be grounded in facts, context, and fairness. Recent remarks by Sandra Duru concerning the security situation in Imo State and the performance of Governor Hope Uzodinma following the City Boys event call for such a response. Public discourse should never be driven solely by the emotion of a moment or the impression created by a single event. Security management in any state, especially in a complex environment like Nigeria, is far more intricate than the narrative crafted and circulated by Sandra Duru.
There is no argument that Imo State, like many parts of the country, has in recent years faced a wave of security challenges that did not begin with the Uzodimma administration. The rise of violent criminal networks, attacks on security formations, targeted destruction of public infrastructure, and the disruption of civil life by armed groups created a difficult environment that demanded decisive leadership and sustained coordination with federal security agencies. Governor Hope Uzodimma rose to the challenge.
To understand the security record of Governor Uzodinma, it is important to appreciate the situation he inherited and the deliberate steps his administration has taken to restore stability. The Southeast zone experienced a period of heightened insecurity marked by attacks on police stations, the correctional facilities, and government institutions. In Imo State, the infamous assault on the Owerri Correctional Centre in 2021 shocked the nation and exposed the sophistication of criminal elements operating in the Southeast, not just in Imo State.
Rather than shrink from responsibility, Governor Uzodinma immediately engaged the Federal Government and security agencies to strengthen the security architecture of the state. Working closely with the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu and security institutions, Imo intensified coordinated operations aimed at dismantling criminal networks and restoring normalcy. Security, by its nature, is a continuous process. It is not defined by the absence of incidents in a single moment but by the overall trajectory of safety, stability, and public confidence. We saw this in the last yuletide where Imo people emptied to the villages in an unprecedented manner in years.
Under Governor Uzodinma, Imo State has made significant investments in strengthening security infrastructure. The government has supported joint security operations, enhanced logistics for security agencies, and facilitated intelligence sharing between federal and local authorities. Operational bases have been strengthened across the state, while strategic patrols and coordinated enforcement operations have disrupted the activities of criminal groups that once operated with impunity in many communities.
These efforts are not always visible to the public eye, but their impact can be seen in the return of social and economic life across the state. Markets now operate more freely, public events now take place across local government areas, and communities that once lived in fear are reclaiming their normal rhythms. That is success, not rhetoric.
Security is not achieved through policing alone. It also requires restoring governance, rebuilding infrastructure, and strengthening the connection between government and the people. Governor Uzodinma’s administration has aggressively pursued road construction, urban renewal, and economic development across Imo State. From the reconstruction of major road networks and development projects in Owerri and rural communities, the administration has demonstrated that governance and security must go hand in hand. Criminality thrives in environments where governance collapses. By expanding development and state presence across the state, the government has addressed some of the root conditions that allow insecurity to flourish.
Large political and civic gatherings are complex undertakings. Even in the most advanced societies, managing crowd dynamics, logistics, and security coordination presents challenges. One event, regardless of its circumstances, cannot define the entire security profile of a state, especially when there were no casualties. In the United States where Sandra Duru lives, President Donald Trump was shot during his campaigns, but that did not amount to the failure of the American security architecture. What happened in Owerri was not a security breach or an attack on the crowd, but a loss of control by the mammoth crowd that attended the event. What happened was a crowd rush, which happens when a large group of people suddenly move quickly in one direction, triggered by excitement or urgency. People ran or pushed forward to reach the empowerment items.
Crowd disasters are not peculiar to Imo State. Even in highly advanced nations such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, tragic incidents involving large crowds have occurred throughout modern history. Wherever thousands of people gather, whether for sports, music, festivals, or religious events, the risk of a crowd surge or crush can arise if movement becomes uncontrolled or there is excitement or a sense of urgency. History offers sobering examples. The tragic Hillsborough Disaster in Sheffield, England, claimed the lives of 97 football fans when overcrowding led to a fatal crush inside a stadium. In the United States, the Astroworld Festival Crowd Crush in Houston during a concert by Travis Scott resulted in multiple deaths and injuries when the crowd surged toward the stage. Earlier still, the The Who Concert Disaster in Cincinnati showed how excitement and impatience at a concert entrance could turn deadly.
These tragedies reveal a universal truth: crowd disasters are not defined by geography, level of development or government failure, but by the dynamics of human movement within large gatherings. Even with sophisticated planning and security systems, moments of panic, urgency, excitement or miscalculation can overwhelm control measures. What such events ultimately teach is the enduring importance of better and meticulous crowd management, clear entry and exit systems, and constant vigilance wherever large numbers of people assemble. In the case of the event in Owerri, the crowd surged towards the empowerment items just to grab them.
To label the City Boy event as a security failure or a failure of the Governor is to elevate clout chasing to the level of public discourse. Security management must be judged over time, across institutions, and through measurable improvements in safety and stability. It is therefore unfair and inaccurate to reduce the security record of Imo State to a single moment or anecdotal observation. Governance requires a broader lens.
One of the strongest pillars of Imo’s security progress has been the close collaboration between the state government and the federal administration led by Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The fight against insecurity in Nigeria requires coordinated action between federal and state authorities. Governor Uzodinma has consistently demonstrated loyalty to this national security framework, ensuring that Imo remains aligned with broader federal strategies for stability. This partnership, previously criticised by people like Sandra Duru, has helped strengthen intelligence operations, improve response capabilities, and sustain ongoing security interventions across the state.
Those who closely follow developments in Imo State understand that Governor Uzodinma has made security a central priority of his administration. His engagement with traditional rulers, community leaders, youth organizations, and religious institutions reflects a holistic approach to peacebuilding. Security is not only about force; it is also about dialogue, trust, and cooperation. The governor has consistently emphasized these principles in his efforts to stabilize the state.
Public commentators, no doubt, play an important role in shaping political discourse. However, influence also comes with responsibility. Four or five years ago, it might have been impossible to host public events such as the City Boys empowerment programme with thousands of people in attendance and mingling freely. Today, such events are commonplace in Imo State, even in rural communities that were once abandoned. Criticism that ignores context or disregards ongoing efforts can inadvertently weaken public confidence and embolden those who seek to destabilize society. Constructive criticism should highlight challenges while also acknowledging progress. Imo State has recorded unprecedented success through sustained effort, cooperation with federal authorities, and decisive leadership. This is fact, not propaganda. Those who chose to be critics must give the Governor his flowers, otherwise they become propagandists and not critics.
Nigeria’s security challenges are complex and evolving. They require unity of purpose rather than narratives that amplify division or diminish progress. Governor Hope Uzodinma’s administration continues to work tirelessly with security agencies, community leaders, and the Federal Government to ensure that Imo State remains on the path to lasting peace and development. Rather than dismiss these efforts, stakeholders should support initiatives that strengthen security and stability.
Democracy thrives not only on criticism but also on fairness. When the full picture is considered, it becomes clear that the security story of Imo State is not one of failure, but of determined leadership confronting difficult circumstances with resolve.
And that is a record that deserves recognition.
