At least 36 personnel were reportedly killed Thursday night when suspected Boko Haram insurgents attacked two military formations in Gujba Local Government Area, according to military sources who later described an internal crackdown on soldiers accused of leaking details of the assault to journalists.

The attacks targeted the Theatre Training Centre in Buniyadi and the 27 Task Force Brigade in Buni Gari, both located in the home area of Mai Mala Buni. Sources cited by Sahara Reporters⁠� said insurgents launched coordinated assaults around 1:00 a.m. Thursday into Friday, overwhelming positions before reinforcements could stabilize the area.

The casualty figure has not been independently verified.

Military officials have not publicly released a formal death toll. But multiple sources quoted in the report alleged that both soldiers and Mobile Police officers were among the dead. One soldier, in a voice recording referenced by SaharaReporters, described simultaneous attacks that disrupted reinforcement efforts between the two formations.

“We wanted to reinforce them, but before we could move, they started attacking our own camp too,” the soldier reportedly said.

Coordinated assaults on multiple facilities have become a recurring tactic among factions linked to Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province. Security analysts at the Institute for Security Studies have previously documented how simultaneous attacks stretch troop mobility and delay reinforcements across northeastern corridors where road access remains limited at night.

The report’s most politically sensitive allegation concerns what happened after publication. Military sources told SaharaReporters that senior commanders reacted angrily once details of the attack appeared online. One source claimed a commander received a call from the office of Nuhu Ribadu shortly after the story was published.

No official transcript has surfaced publicly.

Related News

According to the source, commanders were instructed to suppress operational details related to insurgent attacks ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 elections. The source alleged that authorities viewed public reporting on battlefield losses as politically damaging to the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu and to the military’s public messaging about progress against insurgents.

The presidency has not publicly addressed the allegation.

That absence leaves two separate questions unresolved. The first concerns whether operational secrecy is being used for tactical security. The second concerns whether casualty reporting is being managed for political optics. Those are different issues. Nigerian security agencies have historically argued that real-time reporting can expose troop movements and weaken ongoing operations.

Human rights organizations and conflict researchers have repeatedly argued that opaque casualty accounting undermines public confidence in military briefings. Reports published by Amnesty International and the International Crisis Group have documented longstanding disputes between official military narratives and local accounts from communities affected by insurgent violence in northeastern Nigeria.

The Yobe attacks also complicate official claims that insurgent groups have been significantly degraded. Nigerian military leadership has, for years, maintained that Boko Haram factions no longer hold territory in the manner they once did between 2013 and 2015. Yet attacks on fixed military installations continue across parts of Borno State, Yobe State, and the Lake Chad corridor.

The insurgency has adapted instead.

Our analysis of public incident reporting by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project identified more than 240 reported insurgent incidents across northeastern Nigeria during several monitoring periods in 2025 alone, including raids on outposts, ambushes, improvised explosive device attacks, and civilian kidnappings. The pattern shows continued operational capacity despite years of military offensives.

The military’s internal response described by sources suggests another pressure point inside the counterinsurgency campaign: information control. Nigerian security institutions have long struggled with unauthorized leaks from personnel frustrated by equipment shortages, delayed allowances, casualty disputes, or command decisions. Public reporting from the northeast frequently originates from anonymous soldiers speaking after attacks, often before official statements are issued.

Operational secrecy is standard in conflict zones. But the allegations described by the sources go beyond withholding tactical details during active engagements. The sources alleged that soldiers were threatened with punishment if they communicated with journalists about battlefield losses at all.

No written directive has been published publicly.

The Nigerian Army has previously disciplined personnel for unauthorized media communication under military regulations governing operational disclosure. Yet legal experts have argued that excessive secrecy around casualties can undermine democratic oversight of security spending and military accountability, especially in conflicts funded through repeated emergency appropriations.

The financial dimension is substantial. Nigeria has allocated hundreds of billions of naira to counterinsurgency operations over the last decade through defense budgets, supplementary allocations, and security votes. Despite those expenditures, attacks on military facilities continue to produce significant casualties and equipment losses.

The attrition remains visible.

The location of the attacks also carries political weight. Buniyadi and Buni Gari are linked geographically to Governor Mai Mala Buni, a senior figure within the ruling All Progressives Congress. Attacks in politically symbolic areas tend to attract heightened scrutiny from Abuja because they challenge official narratives about territorial stabilization in the northeast.

Military authorities have not publicly denied the attacks themselves. The dispute centers on scale, transparency, and the alleged response to media reporting. No independent casualty audit has yet been released. Families of personnel reportedly killed have also not spoken publicly in large numbers, a common pattern in military incidents where relatives fear institutional retaliation or delays in benefits processing.

Military sources say at least 36 security personnel were killed during coordinated attacks on two formations in Yobe State, but officials have not confirmed the figure publicly.

Sources alleged commanders reacted angrily after reports of the attack appeared online and warned soldiers against speaking to journalists.

The allegations point to growing tension between operational secrecy and public accountability inside Nigeria’s counterinsurgency campaign.

Conflict data and repeated assaults on military facilities suggest insurgent groups still retain operational capacity across parts of northeastern Nigeria.

Did the Nigerian Army officially confirm 36 deaths?

No. That figure came from military sources cited by SaharaReporters. The military has not publicly released a verified casualty count as of now.

Why would authorities restrict information about attacks?

Security agencies often argue that early reporting can compromise operations or troop safety. Critics counter that withholding casualty information prevents public accountability.

Are Boko Haram and ISWAP still active in Yobe?

Yes. Attack patterns documented by conflict monitors and local reporting show both factions remain capable of raids, ambushes, and assaults on military targets in northeastern Nigeria.

The next unresolved issue may emerge outside the battlefield itself. No public clarification has yet been issued by the office of Nuhu Ribadu regarding the alleged directive to suppress reporting before the 2027 elections, and no military court proceeding or disciplinary notice has been disclosed identifying soldiers accused of leaking operational information after the Yobe attacks.