A chemistry expert has challenged recent public statements by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai regarding the reported procurement of thallium sulphate by Nigeria’s National Security Adviser’s office, asserting that the substance is a legitimate, tightly controlled chemical for specialized use and that questions about its oversight misidentify the responsible agencies.
In a detailed response, Usman Ishaq Shehu, a PhD candidate in chemistry with advanced training in toxic metals, corrected the record on the chemical’s purpose, regulation, and safety protocols. His rebuttal follows El-Rufai’s letter, which copied the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) and the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) on concerns about the alleged purchase.
Shehu states that thallium sulphate is a well-documented toxic compound used in strictly controlled settings for analytical chemistry and trace metal detection. Its handling is governed by national security chemical safety divisions and federal bodies authorized to issue hazardous chemical import permits, not public health agencies like NAFDAC or the NCDC. “Oversight for substances such as thallium sulphate falls under national security chemical safety divisions,” he wrote.
He further clarified that a reported quantity of 10 kilograms aligns with legitimate laboratory or operational needs. Such materials are imported via licensed suppliers under legally approved permits, adhering to international standards like the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods. Storage occurs in secure, restricted facilities with proper ventilation, spill containment, and mandatory personal protective equipment for trained personnel.
Comprehensive risk assessments and hazard mitigation procedures—including fume hoods and emergency response protocols—are standard, Shehu noted, emphasizing that under controlled conditions, the chemical poses no public risk. He cited authoritative sources including the Merck Index and NIOSH guidelines to support his technical explanations.
The exchange highlights a disconnect between public security concerns and the precise regulatory frameworks governing hazardous chemicals in Nigeria. While El-Rufai’s letter raised questions about accountability and safety, Shehu’s response underscores that existing internal NSA and defence ministry compliance audits, not public health agencies, are the appropriate oversight mechanisms for such controlled substances in operational contexts.
The significance of this technical clarification lies in its focus on accurate regulatory channels and science-based risk management. It directs attention to the importance of referring highly specialized toxic materials to the correct national security and chemical regulatory authorities, rather than public health bodies, for oversight and audit. The next step appears to be a clarification from the relevant security chemical safety divisions on the protocols and legality of the specific procurement in question.
