Dare Babalola
The Nigerian Army has firmly rejected allegations that its personnel are responsible for purchasing their own uniforms and protective gear.
The army described such claims as inaccurate and misleading.
The rebuttal followed a viral interview by former soldier, Rotimi Olamilekan, who alleged that troops use personal funds to acquire essential items such as uniforms, boots, and bulletproof vests despite earning modest salaries.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Acting Director of Army Public Relations, Appolonia Anele, said the claims do not reflect the realities within the force, stressing that the welfare and operational needs of soldiers are adequately provided for through established systems.
According to the Army, personnel are paid structured salaries alongside a range of allowances designed to support their needs.
“In addition to consolidated monthly salaries, personnel are entitled to uniform allowances and other allowances, which are periodically paid directly into their accounts,” the statement said.
It further noted that soldiers deployed to operational areas receive additional financial support tailored to their assignments.
“Personnel serving in operational theatres are also paid operational allowances and other mission-specific entitlements aimed at supporting their welfare and boosting effectiveness in the field,” the Army added.
Addressing the core of the allegation, the military authorities maintained that supplying uniforms, arms, and protective equipment remains the sole responsibility of the institution.
“The claim that soldiers are required to purchase uniforms and protective equipment, including bulletproof vests and helmets, is entirely false. These items are provided through established logistics and supply systems,” the statement emphasised.
While acknowledging that some personnel may occasionally opt to acquire extra items for personal convenience, the Army clarified that such decisions are voluntary and do not point to any systemic failure.
“Some personnel may choose to supplement issued kits based on personal preference and comfort, but this is entirely optional,” it noted.
The Army also reassured the public that no soldier is sent into active operations without appropriate protective gear.
“For the avoidance of doubt, no soldier is deployed to any operational theatre without the necessary protective equipment,” the statement added.
Reacting to the controversy, the Army explained that Olamilekan’s dismissal from service was due to disciplinary infractions rather than his public comments.
“The Nigerian Army categorically states that Mr Olamilekan was not dismissed for expressing opinions. His discharge followed repeated and serious acts of indiscipline, including breaches of the Armed Forces Social Media Policy,” it said.
The statement further cited unauthorised media engagements and misuse of military identity among actions that violated military regulations.
The Army urged Nigerians to ignore the allegations, warning that spreading unverified information could erode public confidence and affect troop morale.
“The public is advised to disregard these baseless claims and avoid amplifying unverified narratives that could undermine the integrity of national institutions,” it concluded.
