The Nigerian Air Force’s (NAF) decision to open an investigation into the airstrike in Kurigi community, Niger State, is necessary, but it cannot be treated as accountability on its own.
Development Diaries reports that there were reported killings of two residents of the community and injuring of six others by a military aircraft during an operation against bandits in Niger State.
According to residents of the community, a surveillance military helicopter hovered over the community for several minutes before opening fire, and the gunshots struck residents in their homes.
This is not the first time civilian casualties have been recorded after military airstrikes.
In December 2025, reports emerged that Nigerian Air Force strikes targeting terrorists in Borno State (Mararaba area, Kukawa local government area) had killed an unspecified number of civilians, with sources indicating multiple casualties among fishermen and commercial drivers.
In June 2025, a military airstrike in Zamfara State reportedly killed at least 20 civilians, according to local residents and security sources. The victims were reportedly mistaken for armed groups by aircraft during an operation in Maru local government area.
Civilian deaths during security operations reveal deeper failures in how the state plans, executes, and remedies the use of force.
This incident and several others in the past exposes serious weaknesses in civilian protection, command responsibility, and the systems meant to respond when things go wrong.
At the heart of the problem is the failure of civil-military crisis response. For a military aircraft to hover over a community and fire into residential areas suggests that intelligence verification, target identification, and risk assessment did not function as they should.
These systems exist to ensure distinction between combatants and civilians, yet they failed in practice. When such safeguards collapse, the constitutional right to life is no longer protected by the state but endangered by it, regardless of intent.
Labelling the strike ‘accidental’ at an early stage does not resolve this failure, because across conflict-affected regions, similar language has often been used to close cases without independent scrutiny or meaningful remedy.
The presence of injured children makes this incident particularly serious, as beyond their immediate wounds they now face long-term risks including trauma, disability, disrupted education, and displacement.
Families are already fleeing their homes out of fear, so these realities demand urgent medical, psychological, and social support, not only official assurances.
This case also carries serious legal and political weight. Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) guarantees the right to life and places a duty on the state to protect citizens.
International humanitarian and human rights standards further require armed forces to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm, to investigate civilian casualties thoroughly, and to provide remedies where harm occurs.
When the military investigates itself without independent oversight, it erodes public trust and communities begin to see security operations not as protection but as another source of danger.
Responsibility, therefore, cannot remain abstract. The Nigerian Air Force leadership and the Ministry of Defence must account for operational decisions, targeting protocols, training standards, and command oversight.
If joint command structures were involved, those chains of authority must also be examined. At the same time, the Niger State government and local emergency agencies have a duty to ensure immediate rescue, medical care, and protection for affected residents.
What is required now is a response that matches the seriousness of the harm.
Injured civilians, especially children, need sustained medical and psychosocial care, families who lost loved ones deserve interim relief and a clear, transparent compensation process.
Beyond remedy, preventive reforms like stronger intelligence verification, stricter rules of engagement, reliable civilian-harm tracking, and real consequences where negligence or protocol breaches are found, are essential.
Nigerians must now insist on accountability that goes beyond statements and internal probes by demanding an independent investigation led by the National Human Rights Commission alongside civil society, technical experts, and representatives of the affected community, with clear timelines for public findings.
NAF leadership and the Ministry of Defence must disclose the basic operational facts of the strike, ensure immediate medical and psychosocial care for injured civilians, especially children, and provide interim relief and compensation while full reparations are determined.
Where evidence points to negligence or breaches of protocol, responsible commanders should be suspended to protect the integrity of the inquiry.
At the same time, the National Assembly must hold open oversight hearings, and the government must commit to lasting reforms, including independent civilian-harm investigations as policy, a public civilian-casualty registry, stronger targeting and rules-of-engagement safeguards, and rapid-response humanitarian protocols.
Accountability for civilian harm is the minimum condition for restoring trust, protecting the most vulnerable, and ensuring that security operations do not continue to cost innocent lives without consequence.
Photo source:
