- : Ms Word, Ms Word Format
- : 128 Pages
- : ₦5,000
- : 1-5 Chapters
- Click to DOWNLOAD Materials
TERRORISM IN NIGERIA: ADDRESSING THE ISSUES OF VICTIMS
ABSTRACT
Terrorism is a behavioural flu plaguing the entire world at an alarming rate. Legal prescriptions based on legal prognosis have been in the form of application of sanctions directed against terrorists. Additionally, a hostile attitude to terrorists as reflected in the legal instruments rolled out to contain the dreaded affliction is grossly insufficient to tackle it effectively. The Security Council Resolution 1373 which was unanimously adopted on September 28, 2001 under chapter 7 of the UN Charter, and which is binding on all UN member states; in addition to the existing treaties on terrorism have been battling to contain acts of terrorism with measurable success. In Nigeria incidence of terrorism is on the increase inspite of government’s effort in dealing with it. The consequent effect is the victims constant pains, losses and damages, which are not given proper attention by the Nigerian state. This work examined the issues of victims of terrorism in Nigeria. The work made use of the doctrinal methodology. It identified the challenges of victims of terrorism in Nigeria and available remedies. Thispaper recommended robust intelligence gathering and multi-agency collaboration, among others, in the fight against insurgency in Nigeria. The “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law,” approved by the General Assembly in December 2005, should be highly considered in the fight against insurgency.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENT PAGE
Title Page — — — — — — — — — i
Declaration — — — — — — — – — ii
Certification — — — — — — — — — iii
Dedication — — — — — — — — — iv
Acknowledgements — — — — — — — — v
Table of Contents — — — — — — — — vi
Table of Statutes — — — — — — — — x
Table of Cases — — — — — — — — — xiii
Table of Abbreviations — — — — — — — xiv
Abstract — — — — — — — — — xvii
1.0 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background of the Study — — — — — — 1
1.2. Statement of Problem — — — — — — — 3
1.3. Research Questions — — — — — — — 4
1.4. Objectives of the Study — — — — — — 5
1.5. Significance of the Research — — — — — — 5
1.6. Research Methodology — — — — — — 6
1.7. Scope of the Research — — — — — — 6
1.8. Literature Review — — — — — — — 7
2.0 CHAPTER TWO: UNDERSTANDING TERRORISM
2.1. The Concept of Terrorism — — — — — — 17
2.2. Forms of Terrorism — — — — — — — 24
2.3. Objectives of Terrorism — — — — — — 27
2.4. The Causes of Terrorism — — — — — — 34
3.0 CHAPTER THREE: THE LEGAL AND POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR COMBATING TERRORISM
3.1. Domestic Legislation — — — — — — — 42
3.1.1. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) — 42
3.1.2. Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment)Act,2013 — — — 44
3.1.3. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(Establishment) Act, 2004 — — — — — — 48
3.1.4. Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act,2012 — — — — 49
3.2. International Legislation — — — — — — 52
3.2.1. Pre 1980 Conventions — — — — — — — 52
3.2.2 1980-2001 Conventions — — — — — — 55
3.2.3. Post 9/11 Conventions — — — — — — 57
3.3. Government Policies on Terrorism — — — — — 60
3.4. Legal Institutions — — — — — — — 61
3.4.1. The Security Agencies — — — — — — 62
3.4.2. The Courts — — — — — — — — 63
3.4.3. Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims
of Crime and Abuse of Power1985 — — — — — 65
3.4.4 Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy
and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International
Human RightsLaw and serious violations of International
Humanitarian Law 2006 — — — — — — 66
4.0 CHAPTER FOUR: TERRORIST VIOLENCE AND VICTIMS IN NIGERIA
4.1. The Development of Terrorist Violence in Nigeria — — — 68
4.2. Who are Victims of Terrorism? — — — — — 72
4.2.1. Internally Displaced Persons(IDP’S) — — — — — 74
4.2.2 Abducted Children and Adult — — — — — — 75
4.2.3. Victims who Suffer Loss of Property — — — — — 76
4.2.4. Death Resulting from Terrorist Attacks — — — — 78
4.3. Issues of victims — — — — — — — 80
4.3.1. Poor Enforcement of the Extant Terrorism Laws of the Land — — 80
4.3.2. Lack of Victim Centered Approach During Investigation
and Prosecution — — — — — — — 82
4.3.3. Restitution, Reparation and Financial Compensation — — 84
4.3.4. Access to Justice, LegalAdvice, Representation and Participation — 85
4.3.5. Absence of Secured Designated Camps for Internally Displaced
Persons(IDP’S) — — — — — — — 87
4.3.6. Granting of Amnesty to Members of Terrorist Groups
Instead of Prosecution. — — — — — — 88
4.3.7. Remedies Available toCrime Victims. — — — — 91
5.0 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Summary — — — — — — — — 98
5.2. Conclusion — — — — — — — — 100
5.3. Recommendations — — — — — — — 102
BIBLOGRAPHY — — — — — — — 106
TABLE OF STATUTES
DOMESTIC STATUTES
Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015
Section 314 — — — — — — — — — 84,92
Section 321 — — — — — — — — — 84
Section 349 — — — — — — — — — 86
Criminal Code Act Cap C. 38 L. F. N. 2004. Repealed
Section 5 — — — — — — — — — 22
Criminal Procedure Code 1960
Section 365 — — — — — — — — — 92
Economic and Financial Crime Commission (Establishment) Act, 2004.
Section 2 — — — — — — — — — 83
Section 15 — — — — — — — — 12, 22,48
Section 46 — — — — — — — — 12, 19, 23,20
Federal High Court Act 1990
Section 56 — — — — — — — — — 82
Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2012.
Section 1 — — — — — — — — — 50
Section 2 — — — — — — — — — 50
Section 3 — — — — — — — — — 50
Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013.
Section 1 — — — — — — — — 20,21,44,45,62
Section 5 — — — — — — — — — 20
Section 13 — — — — — — — — — 46
Section 15 — — — — — — — — — 47
Section 17 — — — — — — — — — 46
Section 20 — — — — — — — — — 46
Section 27 — — — — — — — — — 47
Section 32 — — — — — — — — — 47
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
Section 2 — — — — — — — — — 82,98
Section 3 — — — — — — — — — 89
Section 5 — — — — — — — — — 97
Section 16 — — — — — — — — — 42,43
Section 18 — — — — — — — — — 43
Section 32 — — — — — — — — — 63
Section 33 — — — — — — — — — 44
Section 36 — — — — — — — — — 63,82
Section 44 — — — — — — — — — 44
Section 174 — — — — — — — — — 82
Section 175 — — — — — — — — — 89
FOREIGN STATUTES
African Commission on Human and People’s Right Fair Trial Principles and Guidelines 2003
Paragraph g — — — — — — — — — 95
Basic Principles and Guidelines for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violationof International Humanitarian Law 2006
Principle 3 — — — — — — — — — 66
Principle 8 — — — — — — — — — 67
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Nacortic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances 1988. — — — — — — — — 55
Convention on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against
Internationally protected persons 1973. — — — — — 54
Declaration of Basic principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of power 1985.
Article 1 — — — — — — — — — 73
Principle 2 — — — — — — — — — 65
Principle 3 — — — — — — — — — 66
Principle 4 — — — — — — — — 66,86,96
Principle 8 — — — — — — — — — 66
Principle 12 — — — — — — — — — 66
Principle 14 — — — — — — — — — 66
European Union Victims Directive 2012
Article 3 — — — — — — — — — 97
Article 4 — — — — — — — — — 97
Article 5 — — — — — — — — — 97
Article 7 — — — — — — — — — 97
Montreal Convention 1971
Article 10 — — — — — — — — — 54
United Nations Convention for the Suppression of Financing ofTerrorism 1999 — 56
United Nations Declaration on Measures to Eliminate Terrorism 1994
Resolution 49/60 — — — — — — — — 18
United Nations Guidelines on Internal Displacement 1998. — — — 74
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961.
Article 24 — — — — — — — — — 52
Article 29 — — — — — — — — — 52
Article 31 — — — — — — — — — 52
TABLE OF CASES
DOMESTIC CASES
Adamu Ali karumi v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2016) LPELR 40473. — 12
Alhaji Majahid Dakubo Asari v. Federal Republic — — — — 13
Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Mustapha Fawaz & others
FHC/ABJ/CR/112/2013 (unreported). — — — — — 64
Godwin Josiah v. the State (1985) 1 NWLR 125 — — — — 13
Ibori v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2016) 3 NWLR Pt. (1128) 94 — — 63
Musa Abdulmumini v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2018) LPELR 43723 SC — 22
of Nigeria 2007, 12 NWLR (1048) 320, 358-359. — — — — 13
Ogwu Achem v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2014) LPELR 23202 CA. — 12
FOREIGN CASES
Kwamashu Bakery Ltd. V. Standard Bank of South (1995) ISA 377. — 50
Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab (1979) 4 SCC 719 — — — 102
Sylvia Endere v. Karen Roses ltd 1 Kenya Law Report (E & I). 70 — — 103
United Staes v. Yousef 327 F. 3d 56 (2d. Cir. 2003). — — — 17
ABBREVIATIONS
APC – Arewa People’s Congress
ART – Article
BBC – British Broadcasting Corporation
CBN – Central Bank of Nigeria
CTC – Counter Terrorism Committee
CTR – Currency Transaction Reports
CVE – Common Vulnerabilities and Exposure
EFCC – Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency
GGSTC – Government girls Science and technical College
GSMC – Global System for Mobile Communication
IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency
ICSANT – International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism
IDPs – Internally Displaced persons
ILC – International Law Commission
IOM – International Ogranisation of Migration
IPOB – Indigenous People of Biafra
ISIS – Islamic State of Iraq & Syria
MASSOB – Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign state of Biafra
MOSOP – Movement for the Survival of the ogoni People.
NACTEST – Nations Counter Terrorism Strategy
NCNC – National Council of Nigerians and Cameroons
NDC – Northern people Congress
NDMF – National Disaster Management Framework
NDVF – Niger Delta Volunteer Force
NFIU – Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit
NIA – National Intelligence Agency
NSA – National Security Adviser
NSCDC – Nigeria Security and civil Defence Corps
OPC – O’odua People’s Congress
OPCW – Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
SEC – Securities and Exchange Commission
SEMA – State Emergency Management Agency
SSS – State Security Service
STRs – Suspicious Transaction Reports
TPA – Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act
UN – United Nations
UNSC – United Nations Security Council
UTA – Union De Transport Aeriens
- CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
- Background of the Study
Terrorism is a global phenomenon and a major threat to both national and international security and stability. Terrorist acts assume specific dimensions in different regions.It is spreading like wildfire in every part of the world and no region in the world has been spared and Africa is one of the hardest hit regions, partly due to other developmental issues that help to intensify the consequences of terrorism. Terrorism is generally considered as a recent development in West Africa. However, the 1989 Bilma bombing in Tenere desert in Niger Republic involving Union de Transports Aeriens (UTA) flight 772 over Niger, showed the existence of terrorism in the region accustomed to varied forms of threats and insecurities.[1] In 1994,journalist Robert kaplan wrote an article warning that West Africa’s ungoverned spaces, weak borders and impoverished masses had the potential to breed threat not only to the state but the continent of Africa as a whole[2] . The now identifiable presence of Al-Qaeda in other countries showed that there are marginal wars and regional matters.
One big threat to national security in Nigeria is the emergence of terrorism as it has resulted in millions of persons being forced to flee their homes and villages with their right to life and other human rights undermined. Nigeria is passing through a phase that seems the most challenging for the foreign policy observers and the average Nigerians. The country is experiencing various terrorist attacks making Nigeria ungracefully popular among the comity of nations.The emergence of terrorism in the regions is posing a serious threat to national security. Ethno-religious conflicts, Boko Haram and Herdsmen terrorism are particular causes of internal displacement. While efforts have been geared towards dealing with the root causes of terrorism, these measures have proved to be inadequate in combating the menace of terrorism. The contemporary Nigerian society is engulfed by terrible acts of terrorism, be it kidnapping by the Niger Delta militants or the bombing attacks by the members of the Boko Haram sect.
Terrorism in Nigeria is on the increase as Boko Haram activities have all affected Nigerians negatively. Its roots are traceable to problems including; poverty, corruption, religious fanaticism, ethnic and religious politics, which have, for a long time, plagued Nigeria. In the continuing terrorist violence in Nigeria, victims pay with their lives in addition to various losses, which majorly result in displacements with hopeless existence.
- Statement of Problem
Terrorism is a contemporary issue of discourse with much literature, however, there is yet a paucity of compelling scholarship on the socioeconomic determinant of the uprising, especially in terms of providing remedies to victims of terrorist acts. Firstly, there is the problem of determining whether certain acts of terrorism are criminal in nature, although the law is clear on certain acts which should be considered as acts of terrorism. The national government and the citizens seem to have different perspective as seen in the cases of Fulani herdsmen and Pro-Biafra activists; this is one of the major problems in tackling terrorism in Nigeria. The Nigerian government has responded to the menace of Boko Haram and other terrorist groups by implementing certain policies on counter terrorism ranging from executive pronouncements, Presidential orders, acts and policy documents, amongst others. These policies includes, (inter alia) declaration of a state of emergency, creation of the 7th Division Nigerian Army, the relocation of the military command center to Maiduguri, Grant of amnesty to terrorists, Formation of Joint Task Force with Cameroon, Niger and Chad, National Terrorist Strategy (NACTEST) etc.[3] Nigeria is no doubt facing grave security challenges as recorded in the spate of terrorist activities in some parts of the country.
Terrorist activities in Nigeria have continued to decimate the people and disrupt economic activities. The victims of terrorist acts are being deprived of justice as provided by law as most times government has granted amnesty to members of terrorist groups instead of prosecuting such offenders.Also there is the problem of lack of restitution, reparation and compensation for victims who have suffered physical and economical loss as a result of the activities of terrorism. Victims have been forced to leave their homes, in most cases camps are not designated for this purpose. There is also the problem of enforcement and implementation of laws meant to combat terrorism by security agencies, and lack of a victim centered approach during investigation and prosecution of terrorist. These are the problems which these work seeks to address.
1.3. Research Questions
Arising from the above problems the research questions for the work include:
1) What are the legal and policy framework on Terrorism in Nigeria?
2) To what extent are the legal and policy framework on terrorism effective in dealing with the issues of victims of terrorism in Nigeria?
3) What are the challenges of victims of terrorism in Nigeria?
4) What remedies are available for victims of terrorism in Nigeria?
1.4. Objectives of the Study
This work generally aims at examining terrorism in Nigeria with particular regards to the issues of victims of terrorism. The objectives of this work include;
1) To identify the legal and policy framework on Terrorism in Nigeria.
2) To show the extent which the legal and policy framework on terrorism are effective in dealing with the issues of victims of terrorism in Nigeria.
3) To identify the challenges of victims of terrorism in Nigeria.
4) To show the remedies available for victims of terrorism in Nigeria.
1.5. Significance of the Research
This study does not consider acts of terrorism as a momentary threat that would just fade away merely by the presence of counter- terrorism policies of the Nigerian State’s security agencies. The reason for this view is the growing frustration and political atmosphere of discontent among the populace in the mostly affected Northern and Southern region in Nigeria, particularly the youth of the area. The rise of terrorism is largely symptomatic of the ambiance of general human insecurity brought about by pervasive corruption and poverty that has tainted Nigeria’s political and economic history. By implication, the control measures employed does not proffer long term solution and therefore will lead to the emergence of terrorist groups in another dimension or nomenclature.This study concerns itself with these acts of terrorism in Nigeria and issues of victims of such act. This work shall remain a guide for policy makers with regards to issues on terrorism and victims of terrorism in Nigeria. It will also help the citizens of Nigeria to understand the ingredients of terrorism and the various available laws on terrorism. It will also serve to educate the victims on the available remedies accruable to them as victims of terrorism and on how to obtain same. It also serves as additional literature for further research in this field of study.
1.6. Research Methodology
The methodology employed in this work is doctrinal. The data was obtained from sources including statutes, case laws, journals, newspapers, articles and textbooks. Commentaries and periodicals were also used.The work contains writings of international and local authors on terrorism, national security; its challenges and the domestic and international effort in combating terrorism. The approach to be adopted is descriptive, analytical and prescriptive.
1.7. Scope of the Research
This research work shall be limited to terrorist activities in Nigeria. However, references will be made to other jurisdictions where necessary for widest analysis of the subject matter. Accordingly, the work shall limit itself to discussions on terrorism in Nigeria, domestic and international legislations relating to acts of terrorism, legal and policy framework for combating terrorism as well as the issues faced by victims of terrorist activities. Recommendations will also be made to assist the government in tackling terrorist activities.
1.8. Literature Review
One factual agreement among researchers in the field of terrorism is that it (terrorism) lacks a universally accepted definition. A whole lot of reasons have been given for this. The first is that the term terrorism is used pejoratively either by the state or, by those opposing terrorism. In other words, terrorism is a pejorative and abusive word used by political leaders against perceived opponents of the state.[4] This may be why terrorists do not see themselves as terrorists. Rather, most terrorists point out that being labeled terrorists is a political term of discredit used by political leaders against them (terrorists) who are considered enemies of the state. Hence, researchers in the field point out the pejorative connotations of the term terrorism.[5]
In alignment with the above, there is disputation as to which acts are actually terrorist acts. This becomes inevitable since the state itself may adopt terrorism as a part of foreign policy or, a tactic used in face of domestic opposition. Equally, there are strong indications among some philosophers that terrorism is permissible in some situations. These situations, these philosophers say, may arise when the intension is outweighed by the violence involved or, when the very life of a people is threatened.[6] This, equally, leads to the argument among some schools of thought that there is a thin line separating terrorism and liberation struggle. In other words, most notable freedom fighters have employed terrorist tactics as an effective way of fighting oppression. This is exemplified in the case of anti-apartheid campaigner Nelson Mandela who was branded a terrorist by both apartheid regime in South Africa and some western countries because of his support for the use of violence against apartheid regime in South Africa from 1961 1993.[7] This has been the case recently in Afghanistan, (Taliban) Israel/ Gaza/Palestine (HAMAS), Iraq/Syria (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levent, otherwise called IS), Ukraine (Russian separatists), Nigeria (Boko Haram), Somali (Al Shabab) Mali (Azawad separatists), Egypt (Muslim Brotherhood), Central African Republic ( Anti-Balaka and Seleka rebels) etc. Most of these groups, in one way or the other, have been categorized as terrorists. But in truth, some of these groups are more of liberation strugglers than terrorists. Their fight is for political independence; be their motivation, political, religious or ideological. This therefore culminated in the saying that one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. This also points to the fact that the definition of terrorism is a matter of researchers’ point of view.
Many authors and scholars have written on terrorism. These authors differ in their approach in defining terrorism but in most cases, they share similar views on terrorism. The works of these authors and scholars shall be reviewed in the course of this work. Although there is no universally accepted definition of “Terrorism” as a term without any legal significance. It is merely a convenient way of alluding to activities, whether of state or individuals, widely disapproved of and in which wither the methods used are unlawful, or the targets protected or both.[8]
According to Walter Laquer
“Terrorism constitutes the illegitimate use of force to achieve a political objective when innocent people are targeted”[9]
According to Naom Chomsky
“Terrorism is the calculated use of violence or threat of violence to attain goals that are political, religious, or ideological in nature…Through intimidation, coercion or instilling fear”.[10]
Article 1(2) of the convention for the prevention and punishment of terrorism 1937;in the present convention, the expression acts of terrorism means criminal act directed against a state intended or calculated to create a State of terror in the minds of particular persons, or a group of persons or the general public.
According to Tamar Meisel’s
“Terrorism is an intentional random murder of defenseless non-combatants, with the intent of instilling fear of mortal dangers amidst a civilian population as a strategy designed to advance political ends”. [11]
By the above definition, the researcher noticed that all the definition given by authors have a common similarity which is that terrorism is a violence committed against civilian for political reasons. The major challenge from the above is that of weak enforcement policy of government in combating terrorism. The writer through this research proposes solution in combating the challenges facing the effective implementation of the various legal frameworks in combating terrorism.[12]
Most definitions of terrorism recognize that terrorists do not just pursue violence for the sake of it but have a specific purpose for carrying out their attacks. Individuals or groups may use terrorism because they do not like the current organization of society and they want to change it.[13] They may believe that violence, or the threat of violence, will coerce society into making a change.
Various laws have been enacted both locally and internationally to combat the crime of terrorism. The Terrorism Prevention Act 2011 has facilitated help from foreign governments by way of mutual assistance, information sharing, and extradition with regard to terrorism related offences.The way leading to the enactment of the Terrorism Prevention Act (TPA) 2011 has been a long one. Some writers have attributed Nigeria’s delay in enacting an anti-terrorism legislation to the relative newness of acts of terrorism in the country. In attempting to trace the historical antecedent of the making of the law, one must necessarily take a bearing from the point of the 9/11 attacks as the event marked a turning point in the global perspectives of what terrorism portends and the necessity to wage a concerted war against it globally.[14] Between 2001 and 2004, no step was taken by the Nigerian government to give effect to resolution 1373 as there was no counter terrorism law in existence then.[15] Rather than enact a new law as demanded by the resolution, the National Assembly perfunctorily inserted two sections in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Bill which was then undergoing legislative process. The two sections now form section 15 and 46 of the EFCC (Establishment) Act 2004. Section 15 of the Act merely creates some offences relating to terrorism while section 46 attempts to define terrorism.
Nigerian courts have taken a firm position in imposing stiff punishment for terrorism offences. The rationale is based on the nature of the offence, its severity and the national security implications. In the case of Adamu Ali Karumi v Federal Republic of Nigeria[16] , the appellant was arraigned inter alia for acts of terrorism, committing acts preparatory to or in furtherance of acts of terrorism punishable under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013. He was convicted and sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 25 years, some of the terms to run consecutively. The effect of this decision and similar ones is that sentence for acts of terrorism will invariably be strict. It is suggested that non-custodial sentences with the aim of desacralizing terrorist convicts can be explored by the court.Also in the case of OgwuAchem v Federal Republic of Nigeria[17] where the appellant was charged and convicted on two counts of willfully providing money with intent that it be used for an act of terrorism contrary to and punishable under section 15(1) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004; and providing economic resources in order to facilitate the commission of a terrorist act contrary to and punishable under Section 15(3) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004. In the case ofDakubo-Asari v. FederalRepublicofNigeria[18] , the Supreme Court gave its nod of approval to the refusal to grant bail pending trial to the appellant on theground, inter alia of threat to national security.[19]
In relation to victims of terrorist attack, modern criminal justice system seems to exist for the State and the offender with little or no regard being had for the victim of the offence.[20] While not completely ignoring the victim, the contemporary practice is that the criminal law is obsessed with the process of ascertaining guilt and imposing appropriate penalties for the offence. In so doing, the state provides some measure of restoration to the victim of crime. The major remedies evident in our laws are: restitution, compensation, replacement and damages. A balanced criminal justice system should be a tripod stand, having the interest of the society, accused person and the victim at each end, rather than a two-way traffic as presently obtainable in our criminal system. In the words of the court in Godwin Josiah v. The State[21] .
Justice is not one way traffic. It is not justice for the Appellant only. Justice is not even atwo- way traffic. It is really three- ways traffic, for the appellant accused of heinous crime of murder, justice for the VICTIM[22] the murdered man… whose blood is crying to heaven for vengeance, and finally justice for the society at large. The society whose social norms and values have been desecrated and broken by the criminal act complained of.[23]
Surprisingly, under Nigerian law the victim who is supposed to be a major stakeholder has turned out to be someone who the stake is holding, his position has been reduced to a mere veritable tool in the hands of the prosecution, used only for securing the conviction of the accused, after which he goes into oblivion.The effect of terrorism is without doubt enormous in the Nigerian society. Terrorists ‘activities have displaced people from their usual bases to different unintended locations. The mass movement of people creates refugee problems with substantial costs to the individual, host communities and the government. In addition, these episodes of violence has hit strongly against and disorganized the socio-cultural tranquility, the fragile religious tolerance among the people and polluted the serene and spiritual based of the environment. The human costs in terms of lives and properties can hardly be valued and quantified since the upsurge of the violence began.The violence afflicted in northern Nigeria has affected business and economic activities have slowed down.[24] Jos, the capital of Plateau State that was once the pearl of tourism and a dream home for most people across Nigeria has become a shadow of itself.[25]
This paper also makes reference to the activities of Boko Haram and Niger Delta militants in highlighting the menace caused by terrorism in Nigeria. Domestic and International legislations bothering on terrorism are also being discussed, as well as the effectiveness of these laws in combating the threat of terrorism. The enactment of the Terrorism (Prevention)Act 2011, which was later amended to be known as the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment)Act,2013 is a veritable watershed in this country. Nigeria has not had such a comprehensive law aimed at clipping the wings of one of the gravest threat to national security which is terrorism. The anti-terrorism legislation recently enacted is a step in the right direction, despite its somewhat convoluted drafting, it stands a good chance of curbing or at least reducing the perpetration of terrorist acts. Also, this paper critically examines the legal initiative for addressing the plight of terrorist victims in Nigeria. The Institutional and legal framework for addressing this issue has to a large extent failed woefully has victims; including, internally displaced persons (IDPs), abducted children and adult and even persons killed in terrorist attacks, in most cases do not enjoy the remedy provided by law as a result of weak enforcement and implementation policy by the federal and states government as it relates to the security status of the country. Furthermore, there will be a general appraisal of the measures taken by security agencies and the government towards combating the menace of terrorism. This will be done in relation to National Security and Crime. Finally, the paper will highlight the various implications of the terrorist activities and issues or problems faced by the victims. Recommendations will be made to fill the gaps discovered.
[1] O. Ogaba, “Terrorism and Nigeria’s Foreign Policy” vol. 39 (2013)Nigerian journal of International Studies Nos 1&2 p.280.
[2] O. Ogaba, “Terrorism and Nigeria’s Foreign Policy” vol. 39 (2013)Nigerian journal of International Studies Nos 1&2 p.283.
[3] J. O. Akinbi,“Examining the Boko Haram Insurgency in Northern Nigeria and the Quest for a Permanent Resolution of the Crisis “ vol.3(2015) Global journal of Arts, Humanities and Social Science,3(8): 32-45.
[4] B. Hoffman, Inside terrorism. Colombia: Columbia State University Press, 1998.
[5] M. Crenshaw, Terrorism in context. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996.
[6] D. Rodin, “Terrorism” in E. Craig (ed),: Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (London Routledge,2006).
[7] N. Mandela, Long walk to freedom. New York: Bay Book, 1994.
[8] H. Rosalyn, The General International Law of Terrorism and M. Flory, International Law and Terrorism. p.28,1997.
[9] C. Tony, Terrorism and Justic; moral argument in a threatened world.(Melbourne University Publishing, 2002) p.8.
[10] J. Booth, Words in Collision: Terror and the further of Global Order. Houndmills, Basing stole itamp shire: Palgroue MacMillan, 2002.
[11] M. Tamar,The Trouble With Terror: The Apologetics of Terrorism- a Refutation. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[12] E. P.Halibozek, A. Jones, G. Kovacich,The Corporate Security Professional Hand Book on Terrorism. (Butterworth-Heinemann Newton, MA, USA,2007) pp5.
[13] M. Radu,“The Futility of Root Causes of Terrorism American Diplomacy”available at http:// www.uncedu/Dept’s/diplomat/archievesroll20020709 accessed on 28-2-2003.
[14] D. Cook, “The Rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria”, available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/africatoday accessed on 12/01/2015.
[15] GIABA Research Grant Reports: http://web.giaba.org/page/index_789.html. Retrieved 1/7/2014 at 9:00am.
[16] (2016) LPELR 40473.
[17] (2014) LPELR 23202 CA.
[18] 2007,12 NWLR (1048) 320, 358-359.
[19] Per Ekanem JCA.
[20] L. R. Siegel, Criminology: The Core. Thomson Wadsworth, USA, 2005.
[21] (1985) 1. N.W.L.R. 125 Per Oputa (of the blessed memory) JSC as he then was.
[22] Emphasis mine.
[23] Oputa, 1996:16.
[24] J. Akeyi, “Northern Governors and Street Begging” The Nation, 15thJanuary,2013.S.Lahkani, “North to blame for own woes, says Sultan” The Guardian , 15th January, 2013.
[25] A. Dele, “Fighting Terrorism in Nigeria” The Nation, 1stAugust,2012.
