A disturbing page which is contained in the National Youth Service Corps(NYSC) pamphlet flooded the internet with different reactions from Nigerians on Thursday, the page including the advice for the corps and staff on reaching out to the family and friends when traveling through such paths it portrayed as “high risk” was trending on every social media platform.
The pamphlet, which is titled; “Security Awareness and Education Handbook For Corps Members and Staff,” on its page 56, admonished both corps members and (and staff) faring on “high-risk” roads to inform their “family members, friends and colleagues to have someone on hand to pay off the ransom that could be demanded” in case they are abducted.
Meanwhile the organization in a communique denied this stating that no clause as such is included in its handbook.
Whereas, the NYSC as at the time of this report has not produced any handbook different from the one in circulation, yet the management denied this glaring truth in a press release.
It says “The attention of Management of the National Youth Service Corps has been drawn to a fake release making the rounds on the social media to the effect that Corps Members travelling on ” high risk roads” should alert their families, friends and colleagues in order to have somebody to pay off the ransom that could be demanded in the event of being kidnapped.
“Management wishes to emphatically state that the clause mischievously quoted is not embedded in the NYSC Security Tips pamphlet which was put together by a highly respected retired security expert.”
The organization stated that there are different copies in circulation, it noted that it realized that different copies of the pamphlets are in circulation with some including the clause and others not.
Meanwhile, Nexus News Media spoke with about 20 corps members from different states across the nation and confirmed that it’s all the same in the handbook.
The advice came as a result of the present insecurity challenge in the country.
Many portrayed the rebuttal by the organisation as an “open lie”, stating that they were surprised that a public organisation would be so bold to continue its defence in the face of visible evidence to the contrary.