Makinde Calls for Rescue of Borno Schoolchildren After 137 Days in Captivity

Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde has called for intensified efforts to secure the release of more than 40 schoolchildren abducted in Borno State on May 15, 2026, as the victims reach 137 days in captivity.

Makinde made the appeal on September 29 while receiving the report of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry established to examine the May 15 abduction of pupils and teachers in Oyo State. His intervention has drawn renewed attention to the unresolved Borno case, which occurred on the same day as the Oyo attack.

The two incidents initially appeared as parallel school-abduction cases. But their subsequent trajectories have been markedly different: the Oyo victims were rescued after 56 days, while the children taken from Mussa in Borno have remained the subject of continuing rescue demands.

The Borno abduction occurred on May 15 at Mussa Primary and Junior Day Secondary School in Askira-Uba Local Government Area.

Early reports identified approximately 42 abducted students. Senator Ali Ndume, who represents Borno South, publicly appealed for intensified military and security efforts to rescue the children.

The figure has not been completely consistent across subsequent reporting. Several reports continued to identify 42 pupils and students, while a September investigation reported that later official figures had put the number at 44. Because of that discrepancy, Superior News should avoid presenting either figure as an uncontested final total without identifying the source behind it.

The children were taken during an early-morning attack. Reporting at the time said armed attackers entered Mussa and abducted students from the school.

By June, the Nigerian Union of Teachers had publicly protested over the abduction and called on the Borno and Federal Governments to accelerate efforts to secure the children's release.

Families were still demanding action after 100 days. In August, relatives and concerned citizens held a press conference in Abuja calling on President Bola Tinubu and Borno Governor Babagana Zulum to intensify efforts to secure the children's release.

The September 29 statement attributed to Makinde therefore comes after months of public appeals from the children's families, teachers' representatives and Borno stakeholders.

Why the 137-day figure matters

The number is significant because it measures the duration of captivity rather than simply the date of the original attack.

From May 15 to September 29 is 137 days. That means the children have spent more than four months away from their families and education, assuming they remain in captivity as reported.

The case has also continued while another major school-abduction case from the same day moved toward resolution.

In Oyo State, armed men attacked schools in the Oriire area on May 15. The Oyo victims included 39 pupils and seven teachers, according to subsequent reporting.

The Nigerian security agencies rescued the remaining Oyo victims on July 10, after 56 days in captivity. The military said the operation involved several security agencies and was intelligence-led.

The Presidency also said no concession was made to the abductors for the release.

That difference is central to understanding why Makinde's September appeal has attracted attention: the two abductions occurred on the same day, but the Borno victims had not experienced the same outcome by September 29.

Makinde's comments came as Oyo State was concluding an important stage of its own response to the May abduction.

After the Oyo victims were rescued, Makinde established an eight-member Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate how the attack occurred, identify possible institutional or operational failures and recommend measures for protecting schools and vulnerable communities.

The commission, chaired by retired Court of Appeal Justice Professor Mojeed Owoade, was given an initial four-week mandate, with the possibility of an extension. It subsequently invited members of the public, including victims and witnesses, to submit memoranda and evidence.

This means Makinde's September remarks were not simply about the Borno abduction. They came while Oyo authorities were examining their own security failures following an attack that exposed vulnerabilities around schools.

The Oyo investigation also remains distinct from the criminal proceedings connected with the attack. In September, the Department of State Services re-arraigned five men accused of involvement in the Oriire abduction and the deaths of two victims. The defendants pleaded not guilty, and the case is continuing before the Federal High Court.

Those allegations remain matters for the court and should not be treated as established facts.

The central unresolved issue is not whether the Mussa abduction occurred. Multiple reports and public statements have established that schoolchildren were abducted there on May 15.

The more difficult question is what has happened to the children since their abduction and what concrete steps are currently being taken to secure their release?

Public reporting has provided considerably less information about the children's whereabouts than families would need to determine their current condition.

A June report from Trust Radio quoted parents saying they had not received information about the children's whereabouts and that no group had claimed responsibility or contacted families to demand ransom at that point.

That lack of publicly available information is important. It means reports about the children's continuing captivity should be distinguished from independently verified information about their present location, condition or the identity of anyone currently holding them.

Families and Borno stakeholders have repeatedly called for greater government action.

The June protest led by Borno's teachers' union specifically demanded faster rescue efforts and safer conditions for schools.

By August, families were publicly asking the President and Borno governor to mobilise available security and intelligence resources to secure the children's release.

Government and security agencies

The Nigerian government and security agencies have not publicly disclosed all operational details surrounding efforts to locate and rescue the children.

That is understandable in a security operation, where releasing intelligence about troop movements, surveillance or negotiations could potentially compromise an operation. But it also leaves families and the wider public with limited independently verifiable information about progress.

Makinde's September 29 intervention was a call for intensified rescue efforts rather than a detailed disclosure of a new rescue operation.

His broader argument, made during the Oyo inquiry, has been that school safety should ultimately be measured by whether children can attend school without being exposed to attacks. His September appeal places the Borno victims within that wider national security concern.

The two May 15 attacks demonstrate that school abductions cannot be understood only as isolated incidents affecting individual communities.

In Oyo, the abduction resulted in a large-scale security operation, the eventual rescue of the victims and a subsequent government inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the attack.

In Borno, the prolonged captivity has instead remained an unresolved security and humanitarian issue months after the original attack.

For families, the most immediate consequence is uncertainty. For schools and communities, prolonged abductions can affect confidence in the safety of sending children to school. The Nigerian Union of Teachers explicitly connected the Borno case to the need for a safer learning environment.

The contrast also raises a broader policy question: how effectively can security agencies prevent school attacks in areas where armed groups remain capable of reaching educational institutions, and how quickly can they locate and recover victims when prevention fails?

That question cannot be answered solely by the outcome of one rescue operation. It requires evidence about intelligence gathering, local security arrangements, response times, coordination between agencies and the protection of vulnerable communities.

Several important questions remain unanswered publicly:

What is the current confirmed number of Borno children still in captivity — 42 or 44?

Where exactly are the children being held?

What is known about their current condition?

Has any group formally claimed responsibility for holding them?

Have their families received any verified communication concerning them?

What specific rescue operations have been undertaken since the May 15 attack?

What obstacles have security agencies encountered?

Are there current negotiations or intelligence-led operations that cannot yet be disclosed?

When will government provide another substantive public update on the case?

These questions should not be answered through assumptions or unverified social-media claims.

The immediate development is Makinde's call for intensified efforts to rescue the Borno children.

Separately, the criminal case arising from the Oyo abduction is continuing, while the Oyo Judicial Commission of Inquiry has been examining the circumstances surrounding that attack. The commission's work and the court proceedings may provide further information about the Oyo incident, but they do not by themselves establish what has happened to the Borno children.

For the Borno families, the key next development is a substantive, verifiable update on the whereabouts and rescue efforts concerning the children.

The most important unresolved fact remains simple: after 137 days, when will the children abducted from Mussa be safely returned to their families?