Pix: Commander, NSCDC Mining Marshals, ACC John Attah Onoja

By Dr. Rilwan Abejide

For those of us who have closely followed Nigeria’s evolving security landscape, one lesson is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore: armed criminal networks cannot be defeated by pursuing their fighters alone; the financial structures that sustain them must also be dismantled. This is why illegal mining must no longer be viewed merely as an environmental or regulatory offence. In several parts of Nigeria, it has assumed the character of a national security threat.

Nigeria possesses vast deposits of gold, lithium, tin, columbite, tantalite, lead zinc and other commercially valuable minerals. Yet, for decades, weaknesses in licensing, monitoring, enforcement, mineral traceability and border controls allowed criminal networks to exploit these resources with limited state oversight. Illegal extraction, under reporting, smuggling, trade mispricing and other illicit practices have contributed to significant financial leakages within the sector.

The danger goes beyond lost government revenue. In some mining communities, illegal operators have established networks capable of controlling access to mineral sites, imposing illegal levies and using proceeds from mineral extraction to support wider criminal activities. Nigeria’s National Inherent Risk Assessment on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing in the Extractive Sector identified a disturbing nexus between illegal gold mining, banditry and terrorist financing, including the use of illegally mined gold in transactions linked to the procurement of weapons.

This finding should fundamentally change how policymakers and security agencies understand illegal mining. The central question should no longer be limited to who is mining illegally or who is smuggling minerals. Intelligence agencies must also ask: who finances the operation, who owns the equipment, who purchases the minerals, who transports them, who provides protection, who moves the proceeds and where does the money eventually go?

That is the point at which illegal mining intersects with organised crime, money laundering, terrorism and national security.

The scale of the economic leakage is equally troubling. Security officials have cited estimates that Nigeria loses as much as US$9 billion annually to illegal mining and gold smuggling. Whether viewed from the perspective of revenue, economic sovereignty or national security, the implication is serious. Every substantial mineral economy operating outside government oversight creates a parallel financial ecosystem in which the state loses visibility while criminal actors acquire resources.

The security implications are particularly pronounced in gold producing areas. Investigations and security assessments have raised concerns about the movement of illicit gold proceeds into criminal networks and the use of such proceeds in the acquisition of arms. While individual allegations must always be subjected to proper investigation and judicial scrutiny, the broader security concern is undeniable: illegal mining can provide a financial ecosystem within which violent criminality can flourish.

From a security intelligence perspective, therefore, a mining site can become much more than a place where minerals are extracted. It can become a node within a wider criminal supply chain involving financiers, excavator owners, local intermediaries, transporters, mineral buyers, smugglers and, in some cases, weapons suppliers. Each actor may perform a different function, but together they can sustain the same criminal economy.

It is against this background that the establishment and deployment of the NSCDC Mining Marshals should be understood.

The creation of a specialised enforcement capability within the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps represents an important development in Nigeria’s internal security architecture. The initiative recognises that protecting the solid minerals sector requires more than regulatory supervision. It requires enforcement personnel capable of securing mining locations, confronting illegal operators, protecting legitimate title holders, gathering intelligence and supporting the prosecution of offenders.

The strategic value of the Mining Marshals should therefore not be measured exclusively by the number of arrests recorded. Their greater importance lies in their capacity to deny criminal networks access to mineral resources, disrupt illegal production, secure strategic mining locations, protect legitimate investments and generate intelligence capable of supporting wider financial and criminal investigations.

The operational record already provides evidence of significant activity. As of July 2026, the Mining Marshals reported 671 suspected illegal miners arrested, with 397 cases charged before the Federal High Court, alongside convictions recorded in some cases. The unit has also reported the disruption of illegal mining operations, seizure of equipment and restoration of mining locations to legitimate licence holders.

These figures indicate that the initiative has developed beyond a mere enforcement announcement. There is now an identifiable operational chain involving detection, arrest, investigation, prosecution and, in appropriate cases, conviction.

But from a national security perspective, the more important question begins after the arrest.

An arrest is tactical. Financial disruption is strategic.

Whenever an illegal mining operation is dismantled, investigators should go beyond the immediate suspects. They should determine who financed the equipment, who owns the excavators, who purchases the extracted minerals, where the minerals are transported, which individuals or companies receive the proceeds, whether suspicious financial transactions occurred, whether minerals were moved across national borders and whether the proceeds have any connection with organised criminal or terrorist networks.

This is where the Mining Marshals must operate within a much broader intelligence architecture involving the Nigeria Police Force, Department of State Services, Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Nigeria Customs Service, Nigeria Immigration Service, Ministry of Solid Minerals Development and other relevant institutions.

The objective should be clear: to establish an intelligence chain that follows the mineral from the mining pit to the market and, ultimately, to the money.

There is also an important economic security dimension to the Mining Marshals’ operations. According to figures presented by the unit in July 2026, revenue from Nigeria’s mining sector reportedly increased from approximately ₦6 billion in 2023 to more than ₦70 billion by June 2026, representing a substantial increase. Although such revenue growth cannot be attributed exclusively to the Mining Marshals, stronger enforcement, improved compliance and the disruption of illegal operations form part of the wider effort to formalise the sector.

That distinction is important. Security enforcement does not automatically generate revenue. Rather, effective enforcement creates the conditions in which legitimate mineral production can be measured, licensed, taxed, regulated and protected.

There is another emerging security dimension that Nigeria must take seriously: strategic minerals.

The rapid growth of interest in lithium, alongside continued demand for gold, tin, columbite and other minerals, will attract both legitimate investors and criminal interests. As global competition for critical minerals intensifies, the security of mining sites, transportation corridors, processing facilities, storage locations and export routes will become increasingly important.

Nigeria must therefore begin to treat mineral security in the same strategic framework applied to other critical national assets, including oil infrastructure, electricity installations, telecommunications facilities and major transportation networks.

In my assessment, the evolution of the Mining Marshals also reflects a broader shift in the operational philosophy of the NSCDC under the leadership of Commandant General Professor Ahmed Abubakar Audi. The Corps has increasingly embraced specialised capabilities designed to respond to emerging security threats rather than relying solely on conventional civil defence functions.

The development of specialised formations, including the Mining Marshals and other intelligence and enforcement units, demonstrates an institutional recognition that modern criminality is increasingly networked, financially motivated, technologically enabled and capable of exploiting gaps between security and regulatory agencies.

Professor Audi deserves credit for sustaining this institutional direction and for recognising the strategic importance of securing Nigeria’s solid mineral resources.

The same recognition should be extended to Commander John Attah Onoja, Commander of the Mining Marshals, and his officers. Their operations often take place in remote locations, difficult terrain and environments where illegal economic interests may have been entrenched for years. Such assignments require courage, intelligence, discipline, professionalism, inter agency coordination and strong institutional support.

However, from a professional security standpoint, I would caution against measuring the success of the Mining Marshals primarily through arrest figures.

The next phase must be intelligence led, technology driven and financially focused.

Nigeria requires a dedicated mining security intelligence architecture capable of mapping illegal mining locations, identifying criminal actors, tracking mineral flows, monitoring transportation routes and border crossings, and connecting mineral related crimes with suspicious financial transactions.

Technology should play a much greater role. Satellite imagery, drones, geospatial intelligence, digital mineral traceability systems and integrated intelligence databases can help security agencies identify patterns that would be extremely difficult to detect through conventional patrols alone.

The Mining Marshals’ advocacy for stronger surveillance technology and a national mining intelligence room therefore deserves serious consideration. Nigeria cannot effectively secure thousands of remote mining locations simply by deploying more personnel. The country must combine manpower with intelligence, technology and data.

Community intelligence must also become an integral part of the strategy. Residents of mining communities are often the first to know who enters a mining area, who finances operations, which routes are used to move minerals and who provides protection to illegal operators.

Such communities should be treated as partners in national security, while appropriate safeguards must be established to protect informants from retaliation.

At the same time, enforcement must distinguish between legitimate artisanal and small scale miners and organised criminal enterprises. There is a fundamental difference between a licensed artisanal miner attempting to earn a livelihood and a sophisticated cartel deliberately invading licensed concessions, exploiting mineral resources, evading government controls and using the proceeds to sustain criminal activities.

Enforcement must therefore be firm, but it must also be intelligence driven, evidence based and professionally conducted.

The recent disciplinary action taken by the NSCDC against two Mining Marshals personnel accused of unlawfully supplying firearms to illegal miners also carries an important institutional lesson. No security agency can effectively fight criminality if its personnel become compromised by the same criminal interests they are expected to confront.

The action, following an internal investigation that cleared Commander John Onoja of the allegations made against him, reinforces an important principle: professional accountability must accompany operational effectiveness.

There should be no sacred cows in the fight against illegal mining.

If a miner breaks the law, the law must take its course. If a financier funds an illegal operation, investigators must follow the money. If a mineral buyer knowingly purchases illegally extracted resources, that buyer must be investigated. If smugglers move minerals across national borders, the appropriate agencies must intervene. And if a security officer collaborates with criminals, disciplinary and criminal proceedings should follow.

That is how security institutions build public confidence and preserve operational credibility.

Ultimately, Nigeria must stop viewing illegal mining as a collection of isolated violations occurring at individual mining sites. It is an ecosystem involving economic crime, environmental degradation, illicit financial flows, mineral smuggling and, in some areas, violent criminality.

The National Inherent Risk Assessment has already drawn attention to the relationship between illegal mining, money laundering and terrorist financing. The operational experience of the Mining Marshals provides another important lesson: criminal mineral economies can be disrupted when enforcement is combined with intelligence gathering, financial investigation and inter agency cooperation.

The strategic objective should therefore be to move from merely arresting illegal miners to dismantling the criminal economy behind illegal mining.

That requires stronger intelligence fusion, better operational equipment, faster prosecution, improved mineral traceability, tighter border controls, financial investigations, stronger community partnerships and sustained cooperation among security and regulatory agencies.

The Mining Marshals cannot win this battle alone. But they have established an important frontline capability in Nigeria’s response to the security dimensions of illegal mining.

The responsibility now rests with the Federal Government to provide the technology, manpower, intelligence support, logistics and institutional backing required to sustain their operations. At the same time, legitimate investors, licensed mining operators and host communities must receive adequate protection.

The message to criminal mining cartels must be unmistakable: Nigeria’s mineral wealth is not an unguarded national treasury.

Every illegal mining site shut down, every criminal financier identified, every smuggling route disrupted, every illicit mineral consignment intercepted and every legitimate mining concession restored represents more than an enforcement victory. Each is a strike against the economic foundations of organised crime.

In the emerging security environment, protecting Nigeria’s solid minerals is therefore not merely about protecting what lies beneath the ground.

It is about protecting the financial lifelines of the Nigerian state, safeguarding strategic national assets and denying criminal networks the resources with which they threaten Nigeria’s peace, stability and sovereignty.

Dr. Rilwan Abejide, a retired state security operative writes from Lagos