They additionally demanded explanations over his alleged repeated conferences within the forests with an NDC chieftain, Mr Ben Alukwu, whom they claimed was neither from Ugwuaji nor owned property within the space.
Reacting to a press release issued by the Public Relations Officer of the National Forest Guard, Enugu State Command, on October 17, 2026, the youths accused Olasoji of avoiding allegations of harassment, assault and land grabbing.
“While we recognise the need to protect residents against kidnapping and other criminal activities, security operations must not become an excuse for evading legitimate questions about the conduct of personnel.”
The youths demanded that Olasoji establish the people allegedly carrying AK-47 rifles alongside Forest Guard personnel within the Ugwuaji–Obeagu forest space and clarify their official standing, recruitment, coaching, authorisation and chain of command.
They questioned the authority below which the people carried the weapons and demanded related deployment information and arms authorisations.
The group additionally challenged the Commander to clarify his alleged repeated presence within the forests with Mr. Alukwu, asking whether or not the NDC chieftain was a recognised safety chief, an appointed Forest Guard officer or a member of one other safety company authorised to take part within the operations.
They insisted that the aim of the alleged conferences, the identities of the individuals and the official information supporting their presence ought to be disclosed.
“Dr. Olasoji must explain why unknown individuals alleged to be operating alongside his personnel in our forests are carrying AK-47 rifles.
“Who are these individuals? Are they duly recruited, trained and authorised members of the National Forest Guard? Under whose authority are they carrying such weapons, and where are their deployment records and relevant arms authorisations?
“We also challenge Dr. Olasoji to explain his alleged repeated presence in the forests with one Ben Alukwu. What official capacity does Alukwu occupy in these operations?
“Is Ben Alukwu, who is known to us as a member of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, NDC, a recognised security chief, a duly appointed Forest Guard officer or a member of any security agency authorised to participate in such deployments?
“If he holds an official position, the Commander should state it clearly and provide the basis for his involvement.
“If these encounters are legitimate security operations, there should be no difficulty in explaining who participated, the purpose of the visits, the authority under which they took place and the official records supporting them.”
The youths faulted the Commander for citing earlier kidnapping incidents and an alleged assault on Forest Guard personnel with out instantly answering the allegations in regards to the armed people and Alukwu’s alleged presence within the forests.
They maintained that the alleged earlier safety threats couldn’t mechanically justify each subsequent motion by personnel and insisted that every assertion made in opposition to the Command ought to be investigated by itself deserves.
The group argued that residents and buyers had been entitled to query the actions of armed people of their surroundings and challenged Olasoji to refute any false allegations with verifiable proof, establish authorised personnel via official channels and clarify why unauthorised people had been allegedly working alongside his males.
They additional acknowledged that demanding accountability was not an assault on safety establishments, nor was it an try and undermine the combat in opposition to kidnapping.
The group gave Olasoji 72 hours to publicly tackle 5 points: “the identity, official status and authorisation of the alleged AK-47-wielding individuals; the legality of their deployment and arms authorisations; Alukwu’s identity, official capacity and role during the alleged forest meetings; whether he held any recognised appointment or authorisation within the National Forest Guard or another security agency; and the purpose of the alleged joint visits, including the official records establishing their legitimacy.”
They warned that failure to reply inside the stipulated interval would result in a proper petition, accompanied by obtainable supporting proof, to the Office of the National Security Adviser, NSA, the Minister of Defence and different acceptable safety and investigative authorities.
