*Nine-day ordeal in bandit captivity, calls for judges’ security
Justice Faruk Hassan Bunza of the Kebbi State High Court has given a detailed account of the nine days he spent in captivity after armed men abducted him from his residence, revealing that his captors operated from a camp of fewer than 20 men about 49 kilometres from his home.
The judge, who was abducted in the early hours of July 26 and regained his freedom on August 3, said his captors monitored news reports about his kidnapping and appeared to have received detailed information about his background before targeting him.
Bunza spoke at his residence in Unguwar Chaki quarters, Bunza, where he was recuperating after undergoing medical checks following his release.
According to the judge, five armed men stormed his residence around midnight, firing several shots into the air to frighten residents before taking him away. The operation lasted only a few minutes and no one was killed or injured.
The following day, the abductors contacted his family and demanded N200 million. After negotiations, the ransom was reduced to N50 million, which relatives said was paid on August 3.
The judge said he was subsequently abandoned on a hill after most of his captors left their camp.
Recounting how he was taken from his home, Bunza said he did not resist when the armed men ordered him to follow them.
“When the five armed men stormed my residence and asked me to follow them, I didn’t resist,” he said.
He explained that the group initially moved east through a road beside his house before turning north towards a small irrigation area known as Fadama. They later returned to the main road, crossed it and headed towards a hill west of Bunza town.
From there, they moved south towards the Bunza-Kamba Road before crossing the road and continuing on foot.
The judge said he trekked about 25 kilometres barefoot before reaching Tungar Bandan junction, where the abductors parked their motorcycles to avoid detection.
He said they then travelled another 24 kilometres by motorcycle before reaching Dutsen Bandan, which he described as their main camp in Dakin Gari, headquarters of Suru Local Government Area.
“In all, I was kept about 49km away from my family for nine days,” he said.
Bunza said he suspected that the kidnappers had monitored him for an extended period and had informants providing them with information.
The judge said the camp was located on a hill behind the National Youth Service Corps permanent orientation camp in Dakin Gari.
He said he encountered two other kidnapped men at the camp and was guarded by five armed men, while other members of the group stayed with their families farther down the hill.
Bunza estimated that fewer than 20 bandits were present at the camp.
He also said the group appeared to have a structure in which younger members served as informants and errand boys, while older members acted as armed foot soldiers.
According to him, some of the informants were young children of bandits who provided information from towns.
“The bandits were not more than 20 at the camp. So the government can easily crush them,” he said.
However, he acknowledged that the presence of families at the camp could complicate any security operation.
A resident of Bunza, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described Dutsen Bandan as a known hideout and said residents had previously complained about suspected bandit movements around the hill.
Bunza said his captors showed him two photographs the day after his arrival at the camp.
One was his photograph, while the other belonged to Nura Umar Abdullahi, chairman of Bugudu Local Government Area in Zamfara State.
According to the judge, the abductors said they had been instructed to kidnap both men but did not reveal who had allegedly issued the order.
“They also showed me a newspaper report about my abduction,” Bunza said.
He said the abductors told him they had heard that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had directed that N200 million be paid for his release, but that someone had stopped the payment.
For Bunza, the incident demonstrated that the group was closely monitoring news reports and social media.
The claim that the kidnappers had allegedly been ordered to abduct both men raises questions about whether the operation was purely opportunistic or whether specific targets had been selected in advance.
The judge himself offered ransom as the principal motive, but the identity of whoever allegedly ordered the abduction remains unresolved.
Bunza said the camp operated much like a settlement, with the bandits sleeping, cooking and interacting with their families.
He said the armed men did not observe the five daily Islamic prayers, although he regularly heard them reciting the Qur’an.
The judge said he was not physically maltreated during his nine days in captivity.
He was provided with food twice a day, bottled water and Maltina. He said he requested tuwon shinkafa or semo with okra soup and was encouraged to eat as much as he wanted.
However, he said the two other captives were treated differently.
“They were not given any food,” he said. “Whenever they asked for drinking water, they were given dirty water from the stream.”
Bunza said the difference in treatment appeared to reflect the abductors’ perception of his ability to attract a substantial ransom.
His face was covered whenever food was brought to him to prevent him from seeing his captors.
The judge said his captors were heavily armed but appeared nervous and constantly alert.
He recalled being warned to stop coughing on one occasion because the bandits feared he could use the sound to alert security operatives or people nearby.
“At night, they would hide a few metres away from us and remain vigilant,” he said.
He said he believed the abductors’ primary objective was financial.
Bunza identified two possible reasons for his selection: his work as a judge handling high-profile criminal cases involving banditry and kidnapping, and information that he was considered wealthy.
He said his captors told him they had been informed that he was one of the richest people in Bunza, allegedly owning several cars, houses, farmlands and other properties.
“Based on my interaction with them, I fully understood that my abduction was purely for ransom,” he said.
“My abductors were just money mongers. They had no intention to kill me. Their target was to collect money.”
Bunza said the two other captives escaped on August 1.
Two days later, after the ransom was collected, most of the abductors left the camp, leaving two men behind to guard him.
He said he overheard the two men arguing, with one allegedly suggesting that the other should shoot him.
The man did not do so, which Bunza believed may have been because of concerns that gunfire would attract security operatives or passersby.
The two eventually abandoned him.
“At around 5 to 6pm, I realised that I was alone. I then removed the covering from my face and came down from the hill,” he said.
He trekked until nightfall and reached a village but became concerned that it could also be occupied by bandits. He therefore hid until morning.
The following day, he continued walking until he reached Kwanar Bandan, where he encountered villagers and sought a commercial motorcycle to take him to Bunza.
He said one motorcyclist demanded N8,000, but he eventually secured transportation in a tinted Toyota Corolla carrying three passengers for N2,000.
At Dakingari junction, he bought firewood for N3,000, saying the purchase helped persuade the driver to take him directly to his home.
When he eventually arrived, relatives and sympathisers gathered outside did not immediately recognise him because of the vehicle’s tinted windows.
“When I came out from the car, people started jubilating,” he said.
The judge used his experience to highlight what he described as a serious security gap affecting judicial officers.
He said he previously had permanent security at his residence when he served as a magistrate and chief magistrate but no longer enjoys the same level of protection.
“Despite the risk of our job, we are not provided with security at our residences. We are prone to attack,” he said.
Bunza called for government-provided residential quarters for judges with adequate security and urged that judges should have protection at their homes, particularly at night.
He argued that judges handling banditry and terrorism cases are exposed because their decisions can directly affect criminal groups.
“Every judge should have security at his residence, at least at night,” he said.
Despite the ordeal, Bunza said the kidnapping would not affect his commitment to judicial duties.
“Nothing on this earth can change my attitude and commitment to my duties as a judge,” he said.
He described the experience as a lesson that would strengthen his resolve to continue performing his responsibilities.
The judge also attributed his survival and release to the prayers of relatives, friends and well-wishers.
He said his experience had reinforced his belief that the authorities must address the underlying conditions that enable banditry to flourish.
Bunza argued that poverty, unemployment and illiteracy are among the major factors driving young people into banditry and kidnapping.
He called for greater investment in both Islamic and Western education, more employment opportunities and measures that would allow wealth to circulate more widely across society.
“If government tackles the problems of poverty, unemployment and education, the menace of banditry and kidnapping will be drastically reduced, if not completely wiped out,” he said.
His account also presents security agencies with several issues requiring investigation: the location of the alleged camp, the network of informants he described, the identity of whoever may have ordered the abduction of the judge and another public official, and the apparent ability of the kidnappers to monitor media reports about ransom negotiations.
For the judiciary, however, Bunza’s most immediate concern is more straightforward: judges handling sensitive criminal cases should not be left without adequate protection at their residences.
The abduction has therefore become more than a personal account of nine days in captivity. It has exposed vulnerabilities in judicial security, offered an unusually detailed glimpse into the organisation of a local kidnapping camp and raised questions about how criminal networks obtain information about potential targets.
In this article