Dismissed Soldier Presents Bank Transaction Evidence in Military Welfare Dispute
Rotimi Olamilekan, a dismissed Nigerian soldier widely recognized by his social media alias Soja Boi, has escalated his ongoing dispute with military authorities by publicly releasing bank transaction alerts that he claims document his earnings during active service. The former lance corporal directly challenged the Nigerian Army to publish official payroll records, intensifying a controversy that has drawn significant public attention to conditions within the armed forces.
Bank Alerts Revealed as Evidence of Military Compensation
In a detailed video statement, Olamilekan displayed three specific transaction notifications which he identified as representative payments received while serving. One alert showed a credit of N112,061.59, which he described as his regular monthly salary. Another reflected a payment of N20,000, characterized as a "grumbling allowance." A third transaction of N45,000 was presented as an operational allowance specifically for personnel deployed to active conflict zones such as Maiduguri.
"I am not trying to spoil the Nigerian Army's image or make people look at them as if they are not good. But I am just speaking the facts and I will be backing them with evidence," Olamilekan emphasized during his presentation. He clarified that the operational allowance was contingent upon deployment, stating "If you are not in operation, they don't pay you that one. If you go on operation, they will pay you."
Allegations of Self-Funded Protective Equipment
Beyond compensation concerns, the dismissed soldier reiterated previous claims that military personnel frequently purchase their own protective gear due to inadequate official provision. He specifically identified helmets and fragmentation jackets as essential items that soldiers allegedly must acquire independently.
"Helmet, you go buy. Fragmentation jacket, you go buy them," Olamilekan asserted, urging Nigerian citizens to verify these conditions through relatives currently serving in the military. He questioned the Army's categorical denial of his allegations and called for greater institutional transparency, demanding "If they say I am lying, they should bring out their payroll. How much are they paying soldiers?"
It is important to note that the documents presented could not be independently verified, and some transaction descriptions did not explicitly identify the Nigerian Army as the payment source.
Army Issues Formal Rejection of All Allegations
The Nigerian Army responded through an official statement issued by spokesperson Appolonia Anaele, firmly rejecting all claims made by the dismissed soldier. Military authorities maintained that all personnel receive complete uniforms, kits, and protective equipment through established official channels prior to any deployment.
The Army further stated that soldiers receive structured salaries accompanied by allowances specifically tied to operations and special assignments. Regarding equipment purchases, the military clarified that any additional acquisitions made by personnel are strictly optional and not required for standard service provision.
Background of the Controversial Figure
Olamilekan first gained significant public attention earlier this year following a viral video in which he urged Nigerian political leaders to enroll their own children in military service. His subsequent arrest and dismissal followed, with Army officials stating his removal resulted from repeated disciplinary breaches unrelated to his public statements.
This ongoing dispute emerges against a broader security backdrop, as Borno State Governor Babagana Zulum recently urged military leadership to launch coordinated offensives against terrorist hideouts in the Lake Chad region during a meeting with the new Chief of the Air Staff, Air Marshal Sunday Kelvin Aneke.
The confrontation between a dismissed soldier and military authorities continues to highlight persistent questions regarding welfare conditions, compensation transparency, and equipment provision within Nigeria's armed forces, with both sides presenting conflicting narratives supported by their respective evidence and institutional statements.
