Toggle display of website navigation Argument: April 30,5:
The one exception is the issue of insurgency, which is growing in strength and sophistication and becoming quite ominous for Nigeria. The article examines the growth of various insurgency movements in Nigeria, noting the strengths and impact of each and their potential to destabilise the country to the point of state failure and possible disintegration.
The article then addresses the causative factors of insurgency in Nigeria, including the religious and ideological discontent which appears to be propelling the current conflict in Northern Nigeria. The article then considers some of the policy options for addressing these causes and conflict and recommends, among other measures, the establishment of a constitutional body - a supreme council for interreligious conflict - to function as a final arbiter in all interreligious conflicts that are potentially explosive conflicts that threaten a serious breach of the peace.
Nigeria on the brink Nigeria is at a dreadful precipice.
Observers of the country and everyone with any interest in it must be very concerned about what the fallout would be should it be unable to surmount its current problems. The problems are a complex blend of social, political, ethnic, legal and constitutional problems which now bedevil the country in proportions never before experienced in the turbulent and checkered history of this potentially great nation.
There is now a dangerous escalation of terrorist campaigns with all the hallmarks of insurgency. Ironically, it could well portend a catastrophe, if not properly managed alongside other instruments of state policy.
This article examines the problem areas articulated by the former Chief Justice Dahiru Musdapher concerning causative factors of insurgency and instability in Nigeria, and proposes a solution utilising an institutional framework that incorporates both religious and political actors.
Nigeria is at the moment at a crossroads. At the end of the day, given the dynamics of the turbulence in the polity, policy choices will certainly dictate whether Nigeria can survive as a state or fail and splinter into fledgling micro-mini states. The indicators are glaring, profuse and ominous.
The immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria, retired Justice Dahiru Musdapher, recently summarised the situation with the observation that 1 Boko Haram insurgency, political violence, corruption, nepotism, tribalism, indiscipline, abduction and kidnappings, armed robbery, murder and extortion, bombings of places of worship and innocent Nigerians are all the indicators of a failing state.
More generally, and more ominously, Chief Justice Musdapher maintained: The path we are treading is a threat to the continued peace, unity and prosperity of this land we call our home This is not the Nigeria we inherited from our predecessors, this is not the Nigeria we envisioned as young men.
Favouritism, nepotism and tribal sentiments have made it impossible to run a merit driven system. Hard work, brilliance, honesty and integrity in our dealings are no longer rewarded.
Rather we celebrate mediocrity soaked in the corruption we claim is our common enemy. I am scared and deeply worried. The situation is grave. The problem is that, if the slide is not checked in good time, the fallout and trauma in the Nigerian case is likely to be worse than Yugoslavia and Somalia put together.
To understand what exactly Chief Justice Musdapher meant, it is instructive to understand and appreciate each of the phenomena the respected judge mentioned. In the process, it will be necessary to answer the question whether, given a failure to abate or mitigate the dynamic interplay of the lethal factors prevailing in the state, Nigeria can survive or will break up as similarly situated countries have historically done.
A further question is whether, if the probability of fragmentation is high, there are measures to prevent it from occurring. In Africa, and particularly in Nigeria, political violence has often occurred in anticipation of, during or sometime after an election campaign. It has been a feature of Nigerian electoral history recorded as early as the pre-independence elections in the s.
It is usually intended to eliminate, intimidate, or otherwise subdue political opponents so as to obtain an advantage in the political process. It may have attained its zenith in the early s in the old Western regional elections.
The violence in response to the federal elections, particularly in the northern states, may well be an indication of a resurgence of violence related to the political process in Nigeria.Argument Israel’s Calm Before the Storm Without deft diplomacy, confrontations in Syria, protests in Gaza, and tensions over the Iran nuclear deal could plunge the .
Summary. Taking a cue from recent pronouncements by Chief Justice Dahiru Musdapher on the current precarious situation in Nigeria, this article examines the issues raised by the learned Chief Justice and concludes that none of those issues, working alone, is capable of making Nigeria a failed state.
I would call it a racist abuse of power IFF the faculty, after seizing the clock, treated it in accordance with any reasonable guidelines for a suspicious package, like taking it as far away from everyone as possible and calling the bomb squad, or evacuating the building and calling the bomb squad, or calling the bomb squad and following their instructions.
Additionally, since the terrorist presumably knows that the timer is ticking, he has an excellent reason to lie and give false information under torture in order to misdirect his interrogators; merely giving a convincing answer which the investigators will waste time checking out makes it more likely that the bomb will go off, and of course once the bomb has gone off, not only has the terrorist won, but there is .
The ticking-bomb argument is the situation where a terrorist is tortured in order to gather information of an arranged bomb in a residential area.
Torture, a painful act, could either be physical or mental. "To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies — all this is indispensably .