THE VALUE OF THE LIFE OF A NIGERIAN!

“Human rights protection in Nigeria”

“Every person has a right to life, and no one shall be deprived intentionally of his life, save in execution
of the sentence of a court in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been found guilty in Nigeria”
...Section 33 of the Nigerian Constitution
I strongly believe that the value of the life of any citizen is embedded in his country protection of his
or her human rights.
It is basic knowledge that human rights have become a global matter with global appeal. The fact that
human rights have gained outstanding recognition, prominence and relative importance in our world of
diversity, varieties and reliance, emanates from their very nature. I believe human rights in my country
are the rights in which all Nigerians have by virtue of their citizenship and humanity. Such as: the right to
life, personal freedom, fair hearing and freedom of speech, dignity of personality, moral behavior and
religion which I believe provide a common measure of behavior within the nation. To illustrate the
significant character of human rights, a scholar explained that: “the issue of human rights in recent past in
the country has penetrated the national and international dialogue, and has become an active substance in
interstate associations and has also burst the solemn bounds of national sovereignty.”
I believe it is for this preceding and fore-going reason that the country has subscribed to the significant
international human rights devices, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICPR); The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights devices.
However, it must be recalled- as practically explained by a scholar- that “human rights in a country are
more than just a collection of formal norms, they are energetic politically, social, economic as well as
cultural, rational and thoughtful conditions which illustrates the intrinsic value of a citizen and his natural
dignity”. I believe that a hypothetical implication of this is that human rights promotion, protection and
compulsion in the country surpasses mere formal subscription to their ideals or-more incisively put-mere
domestication.
I believe that in the relationship between human rights devices in my country and domestic standards-
which includes the constitution-two principal school of thoughts have emerged, viz “monism and
dualism”. In addition to these prevalent theories, a lesser hypothesis that has also been propounded is the
harmonization theory. Monism declares that international standards and municipal standards form part
of a universal legal order serving the needs of the human community one way or another. By this
hypothesis, any international agreement including those involved with human rights in the country,
ratified by any state in my country is directly enforceable within any municipal system in the country. On
the other hand, dualism explains that international standards and municipal standards are two separate
legal orders in a country. Thus, each standard may isolate the other, and as such, assented treaties are not
enforceable until the constitution enacts a law to incorporate them into the municipal standard. The theory
of harmonization explains that man’s life is a focus of both areas as he lives in any jurisdictions.
However, in my country today the dualist system applies by virtue of the section 12 of the Nigerian
constitution (1999).
I am a firm believer that national instruments, which includes the human rights of any citizen should take
precedence over the legislation. If my country subscribes to these norms by assertions of the treaties it
means that the government and its agencies are not legally permitted to detract from these norms. I
believe that human rights norms of any citizen should be interpreted and enforced accordingly in such a
way as to grant primacy on human rights devices over the legislation.
However, the intervention of the military in many African countries including Nigeria has without doubts,
had quite an unstable effect on human rights in the life of a citizen. Military governments –with their
questionable legitimacy – are not only defective in elements of the constitution, but are significantly
totalitarian, apparently inebriated by the power that moves from the barrel of their weapons. Indecency,
lack of civility and disrespect to the rule of the law are usually dominated by the military government.
Undoubtedly, the influence of the political system and of underdevelopment in the country–social,
economic and cultural –has a deep influence on the protection and promotion of human rights in the life
of any citizen. Nigeria suffers convoluted political disorder and remarkable underdevelopment. The
manifestations of these challenges can be observed in the high level of illiteracy and poverty, virtual
collapse of social infrastructure and political crisis. Nigeria is battered in grave proportion by the above
measure of underdevelopment. Many of us live in want, penury, obscurity and even abject poverty while
many swim in ignorance today.
I strongly believe that in recognizing the challenge which the state of our underdevelopment poses to the
actualization of human rights, one of the excellent tests of the effectiveness of the basic rights provisions
of our constitution should be whether the rights preserved therein are accorded to the less privileged, the
weak or the defenseless. Even though our constitution speaks honorably of “promoting the good
governance for all citizens in the nation on the underlying principles of liberty, fairness and equality”
…But in the actual sense one discovers that it is the rich and the superior class that tend to claim all the
rights, while the only rights left for the weak and the less privileged tends to be their rights to endure in
silence and probably to wait for their gain in heaven (if they are Christians).
In essence it means we must therefore ensure that in no circumstances, however serious it may appear,
should we allow our fundamental human rights in our lives to be detracted from, because once there is a
detraction for a justifiable reason, there would always be a possibility in the wielders of power, in order to
continue detracting human rights in the name of security of the nation. Effective regard for the lives of a
citizen must therefore place two types of restrictions on the forces of detractions. Firstly, it must restrict
the circumstances and illustrate the procedures that may be legally invoked and Secondly, it must also
identify specific aspects of human rights in the life of a citizen such as the right to freedom, right to fair
hearing and even the right to life.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that the concern for human rights in the life of any citizen is universal
which is why the notion of human rights has respectfully gained significance even in our country today in
terms of independence and diversity. Since the life of any citizen are most effectively safe guarded at the
national level. It is therefore essential for each government to take all executive, judicial and legislative
measures in order to prevent and avoid all human rights violations in the country. It may not entirely be
fashionable to accept and adopt human rights devices but instead practical engagement ought to be
illustrated and demonstrated at all times towards the actualization of their noble objectives in the country.
Also the boundary of permissible detractions must be well-defined and severely restricted. Furthermore,
the dualism model on the application of human rights in a citizen’s life should be abolished as it enacts a
significant drawback to the promotion and protection of human rights in the country.
Finally, the court of law should at all times accept and adopt a noble interpretation of the provisions of
human rights in a citizen -and shun what has been called the harshness of tabulated legitimacy –suitable
to provide individual citizen, the complete measure of the basic rights in our lives.
“Even as stated by the constitution that every individual is entitled to respect for the dignity of his person
and accordingly –no person shall be subject to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment; no person
shall be held in slavery or servitude and no person shall be required to perform forced or compulsory
labor……Section 34 of the Nigeria constitution.

Name ABOSEDE Oyinlola Samson

Gmail [email protected]