By Prof. Sebastine T. HON, SAN, FCIArb., DSSRS
Nigeria is on the precipice. It is not the first time we are on this imaginary cliff: this has been our unfortunate trajectory since Independence. The events of today, however, portend the gravest danger to our co-existence. The Federal Government and all State Governments must act now, to prevent a total breakdown of law and order, which is the will and wish of many religious, clannish and political actors. All Nigerians of good will must also back this up.
What started some few decades ago has assumed frightening dimensions and proportions. The most topical news now is the murder, ostensibly in cold blood, of sixteen (16) hunters of Northern Nigeria extraction in Edo State. Open boasts of reprisals are thundered from both ‘conventional’ and ‘unconventional’ camps. Sahara Reporters on April 2, 2025 reported even a serving Police Officer, Hadaina Hussaini Dan-Taki ‘swearing’ such a reprisal within one week! Serving Police Officer? Yes! This is one of the ‘unconventional’ camps vomiting such deadly threats! Who knows the number of many such unreported ‘unconventional’ camps?
Unjustified, genocidal and heinously criminal as those murders of the unfortunate 16 are, most commentators have forgotten the ceaseless murder of sedentary farmers and other Nigerians by herdsmen over a period of more than two decades. Both mindless actions and activities (the latter fitting into what the herdsmen have been doing, almost unrestrained) are most reprehensible, to say the least. The unfortunate incident in Edo is just a signal or foreboding, I daresay, of the venting of anger and frustration of ‘the other Nigerians’ over the longstanding activities of Fulani herdsmen. Both, unjustifiable as they are, amount to genocide.
The word “genocide” stems from both Greek and Latin lexicons. “Geno” is a Greek prefix, which means “race” or “tribe,” while “cide” is the Latin suffix, which means “killing.” These two words were first cojoined by Polish Lawyer, Raphael Lemkin, in his book, Axis Rule. Lemkin was using his pen to attack Nazi extermination of the Jewish race. The word “genocide,” consequently, has now been commonly used to describe the systemic and systematic wiping out, by whatever means, of races or tribes by governments or non-state actors.
Resolution 96(1) of the UN General Assembly, adopted on December 11, 1946, stated amongst other things thus:
“Genocide is a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, as homicide is the denial of the right of individual human beings; such denial of the right of existence shocks the conscience of mankind, results in great losses to humanity in the form of cultural and other contributions represented by these human groups, and is contrary to moral law and to the spirits and aims of the United Nations. Many instances of such crimes of genocide have occurred when racial, religious, political and other groups have been destroyed, entirely or in part.”
Two years after, the UN General Assembly adopted the Genocide Convention by a unanimous vote of the 56 participants at its 179th plenary meeting. This was on December 9, 1948; and it was done via UNGA Resolution No. 260 A (III) of 1948. Article II of this Convention provides, inter alia, the following description of genocide:
“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part….”
The above definitions fit, whole and square, into what the Fulani herdsmen and other armed groups are doing to sedentary and agrarian tribes in Nigeria. Let it, therefore, be said loud and clear that what these groups are doing amounts to genocide under public international law.
The Nigerian Federal Government and the various State Governments have a duty to prevent genocide in the country and any part thereof. Anything short of this, as has been seen for decades now, amounts to complicity in this high crime. Article I of the Genocide Convention specifically contemplates this governmental duty; and jurisprudential interpretations of this preventive (call it preemptive) statutory mandate is known in international legal circles as the “erga omnes partes” obligation of Member States to the Convention. In summary, Member States to the Convention are held bound to prevent genocide within or outside their territorial boundaries, as the case may be. Nigeria became a signatory to this Convention on December 9, 2009; hence is strictly bound by its provisions.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has always used this principle to make “provisional measures” orders – as can be seen in the following cases:
(a) The Gambia vs. Myanmar, cited as “Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide The Gambia v. Myanmar) Provisional Measures, Order of 23 January 2020, I.C.J. Reports 2020, p.3.”
(b) Canada and Netherlands vs. Syrian Arab Republic, cited as “Application of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment (Canada and Netherlands v Syrian Arab Republic), Provisional Measures, Order 16 of 16 November 2023, I.C.J. Reports 2023 p. 587.”
(c) Ukraine vs. Russian Federation, cited as “Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), Provisional Measures, Order of 16 March 2022, I.C.J. Reports 2022, page 211.”
(d) South Africa vs. Israel, cited as “Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), Provisional Measures, Order of 26 January, 2024, I.C.J. Reports 2024, p. 3.”
The above analysis is made just to establish that national governments, (in this case, Nigeria, which is a signatory to the Genocide Convention) are under strict obligation to stop or prevent genocide. Failure in this regard amounts to a breach of the Convention.
The next to be examined is the question whether right to life is guaranteed under the Constitution of any given country – since genocide mainly affects this right. In Nigeria, section 33 of the Constitution has guaranteed right to life for “every person,” save:
(a) In the execution of a sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which the deceased has been found guilty in Nigeria;
(b) If death occurs upon use of reasonable force deployed in defence of any person from unlawful violence, or for the defence of property;
(c) If death occurs as a result of efforts to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained; or
(d) If death occurs whilst suppression of a riot, an insurrection or a mutinous activity.
In the light of an acute dearth of court decisions on the obligation of the Nigerian State to prevent genocide or the unlawful taking of human life, resort would be made to the rich European jurisprudence. Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, 1998, is similarly worded as section 33 of the 1999 Constitution. In the case of Kilic vs. Turkey (2000) ECHR 22492/93, para. 62, the European Court of Human Rights held emphatically, while interpreting the provisions of Article 2, thus:
“This involves a primary duty on the State to secure the right to life by putting in place effective criminal law provisions to deter the commission of offences against the person, backed up by law enforcement machinery for the prevention, suppression and punishment of breaches of such provisions. It also extends in appropriate circumstances to a positive obligation on the authorities to take preventive operational measures to protect an individual whose life is at risk from the criminal acts of another individual.”
See, also, the equally forceful opinion in the case of Osman vs. United Kingdom (1998) 29 EHRR 245, para. 115.
The obligation of Government to prevent genocide and the unlawful taking by a person of another person’s life as guaranteed under section 33 of the Constitution is further ably backed by section 14(1)(b) of the same Constitution. This paragraph provides that “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” Primary purpose? Yes, it is! The Court of Appeal affirmed this position, on the duties imposed by the Constitution on State Governments, in the case of Bariga-Amange vs. Adumen (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1530) 349 at 385 CA, thus:
“Typically, as argued by the respondent’s learned counsel in the light of section 14… states that the security and welfare of the peoples shall be the primary purpose of Government….”
The word “primary” was defined by the Supreme Court in Uzoukwu vs. Idika (2022) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1818) 403 at 455 SC as “first,” “main” or “most important.” Why then have our governments, both at the Federal and the State levels, been lethargic in performing this “most important” duty? Political correctness or survival tactics are the most likely reasons, in my humble opinion.
The Federal Government (past and present) and some concerned State Governments have failed Nigerians with respect to the fast-growing insecurity in the country. Both have ditched their “primary” constitutional obligation to protect and preserve life and property. This is not acceptable. Strikingly unacceptable is the double-faced posturing of some State Governors who, on the one hand, claim to be the Chief Security Officers of their States, but shrink to mere onlookers when foreign aggressors commit genocide against their subjects. This amounts to criminal complicity in the ensuing high malfeasances and reprehensible abdication of duty, to say the least.
Nigerians should not resort to murdering innocent travellers or other Nigerians in supposed reprisal or revenge attacks. Rather, they should utilise the constitutional and statutory authorisations that permit self defence when the aggressors come with murderous intentions and actions. Section 33(1)(a) of the Constitution is an exception to the right to life (of an aggressor) if the person attacked kills the aggressor for the defence of his person, and/or in defence of property. This means that such a right of defence can be lawfully exercised when there is threat to his life or property.
Superior courts of record in Nigeria have, in countless number of cases, consecrated and upheld this right of self defence when the force used by the defender is proportionate to the force used by the attacker. In other words, when the attacker launches an attack with a gun, it is lawful for the defender to also repel him with a gun; and when death of the attacker occurs, the defender will not be guilty of any offence. The decisions on this right are too many to be cited here; but see: Abimbola vs. State (2021) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1806) 399 at 447 SC; Muhammad vs. State (2017) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1583) 386 at 439 SC; Oko vs. State (2018) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1600) 216 at 238-239 SC; Ochani vs. State (2017) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1596) 1 at 35-36 SC, etc. The defence is available to a person who is defending either himself or any other person, vide: Fulani vs. State (2019) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1653) 237 at 259 SC.
In conclusion, the buck stops on the table of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to save Nigeria from armed groups who are killing innocent Nigerians without provocation and without human feelings. On the other hand, the buck stops on the table of respective State Governors who appropriate and pocket huge sums of money as security votes, if they willingly or passively allow genocidal attacks on their people. In the face of seeming governmental failure to perform its primary responsibility, Nigerians, I must say, have right to defend their lives and property. This, however, does not include cold-blooded murder and reprisals.
Nigeria cannot and should not be a centre for unrestrained genocide! That is the law, to the best of my knowledge as a Law Professor and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria!
N/B: The Opinion Expressed Here is That of Prof. Sebastine T. HON, SAN, FCIArb., DSSRS And Not Of Portfolio Media
