Anger, Loyalty Clash — Ex-Agitators React to PAP Administrator’s Leadership style as Stipend Delays, Infighting Rock Amnesty Programme”
By Paul Ebi
Tensions are rising within the ranks of ex-agitators under the Presidential Amnesty Programme (PAP) as sharp disagreements erupt over the leadership of the Administrator, High Chief Dennis Brutu Otuaro, Ph.D., following a strongly worded public intervention by Comrade Lekia Lezorge Tongor.
In a lengthy statement circulating on social media, Tongor mounted a robust defence of Otuaro, describing him as “a true product of our collective struggle” and “a symbol of hope for the hopeless.” He urged patience among beneficiaries yet to be contacted for training, insisting that the PAP administrator is working diligently to ensure that only genuine delegates benefit from the programme.
Tongor acknowledged the growing frustration among some ex-agitators but cautioned against hostile protests and internal divisions. “A hungry man is an angry man,” he said, calling on aggrieved beneficiaries to channel their complaints through constructive and diplomatic means. He also stressed that administrative processes take time and warned that infighting could weaken the collective strength of former agitators in the Niger Delta.
However, the response to Tongor’s position has been overwhelmingly critical, exposing deep cracks within the PAP beneficiary community.
Several commentators accused him of speaking only for himself while ignoring what they described as widespread dissatisfaction with the current administration. Critics pointed to delayed stipends—particularly the unusually late January payment—poor communication between the PAP office and beneficiaries, and the long-standing demand for an increase in monthly stipends as evidence of systemic failure.
“Don’t say ‘we,’ speak for yourself,” one respondent wrote, arguing that social media reactions to Tongor’s post showed that many genuine ex-agitators feel neglected. Others alleged a deviation from the original blueprint of the Amnesty Programme, claiming that the problems have become more pronounced under the current leadership.
The debate quickly degenerated into heated exchanges, with accusations of betrayal, favouritism, and questions over who truly participated in the armed struggle. While some defended Tongor, insisting that not all beneficiaries are unhappy and that many have continued to benefit from the programme, others accused supporters of the administrator of praising him only because they were personally gaining.
Amid the verbal clashes, a recurring demand stood out: a call for the PAP administrator to review and increase the stipend structure in line with the programme’s expanded budget and current economic realities. Some commenters argued that the continued hardship faced by beneficiaries fuels anger and distrust, warning that prolonged neglect could further destabilise the fragile peace the Amnesty Programme was designed to secure.
Despite the bitterness of the exchanges, the controversy highlights a broader challenge confronting the Presidential Amnesty Programme—restoring trust through transparency, improved communication, and timely welfare delivery. As frustrations mount, many ex-agitators insist that only concrete action, not appeals for patience, will calm the growing discontent within the Niger Delta’s post-amnesty community.
