-
Terrorism And Nigeria's External Image Under Goodluck Jonathan’s Administration
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 1 of 4
-
-
-
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
According to Adebajo, (2014) the administration of ex-President Goodluck Jonathan can at present be described as underperforming, and evaluation of its performance shows in quite a lot of sectors. This also could be described as unfortunate for a government which came to power on the back of popular aid, then had less public goodwill in its early years (Adebajo, 2014). In the same vein, Chinwokwu, (2013) asserted that Nigeria has certainly been confronted with internal security disorders corresponding to acts of terrorism which has widely affected its foreign relations coverage in the past government. Based on Adebajo statement in 2014, Alabi, had already brought to light in 2012 by saying that the influence of domestic events on the foreign policy of a country cannot be over emphasized; this is on the ground that inner traits can steadily metamorphose into disorders of worldwide concerns. Again, Chinwokwu opined that terrorism certainly has impaired Nigeria’s image there by undermining its impact in the international scene (Chinwokwu, 2013).
To support Chinwokwu statement, Tsokwa in 2012 maintained that the emergence of terrorism in Nigeria owing to the upward thrust of Islamic fundamentalism in Northern Nigeria has broadly undermined the nation’s foreign coverage power. Boko Haram hobbies in Nigeria have led to terrible reactions from corporations and international positions have been littered with its events, thereby leads to deterioration of international relations (Tsokwa, 2012). In addition, terrorist acts in Nigeria using Boko Haram and others according to Madu, (2014) generated a lot of interest of the world community raising questions about effective approach on how presidency could attack the issue, which envisages that the audacity persevered no tirelessly effort among the trouble group as this allow daily victim, and expanded an alarming rate after each assault to most people in which they lose confidence. Madu, further stated that the attacks on the United Nation’s building at Abuja in 2011 resulted in undue stress on the world group and Nigeria wanting to end the insurgency that began as a problem (domestic violence) which appearance showed more during Goodluck Jonathan government. The foregoing has grown to be necessary because of internationalization of the conflict, Boko Haram was indoctrinated in a takfiri in 2009 (Madu (2014) and it’s linked following the international terrorist Al -Qaeda businesses in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).
To shed more light, Alabi, (2012) opined that terrorism is not only a Nigerian drawback; it is a world obstacle. Neither is it a solely Islamic crisis. Extremists are to be found in all religions. The crucial study is that, the increasing salience of Islamist terror could also be defined by the special experiences of Arab-Muslim societies and how faith has customarily been deployed as a weapon of political struggle. Globalisation and the applied sciences related to the growing internationalization, facilitated the potential of terror groups to mobilise community and put into affecting their projects throughout countries and communities (Alabi, 2012). Curiously enough, Tomis, (2011) maintained that no one has ever been known to describe himself or herself as a terrorist. Terrorism might probably even be a term of abuse (Tomis, 2011). Correspondingly, Bamgbose, (2013) brought to light that a principal challenge in seeking fully grasp terrorism is the fact that views range, depending on where the country stands on a certain trouble. For example, both Ronald Reagan in America and top Minister Margaret Thatcher in Britain brushed aside the imprisoned Nelson Mandela and his colleagues as “terroristsâ€. To their possess persons and to most Africans, however, they were ‘freedom combatants’; heroes of an ancient wrestle for liberation against Apartheid and racial humiliation (Bamgbose, 2013).
More so, the African Union (AU) conference on Prevention and Combating Terrorism (A.U.C.P.C, 2012) defines terrorism as “any act which is a violation of the criminal law that can endanger the existence, bodily integrity or freedom of, or rationale critical injury or loss of life, factors may motive harm to public or exclusive property, natural resources, environmental or cultural heritage and is calculated or intended to: intimidate, put in fear, coerce or induce government image and create public emergency; or create general insurrection in a State (A.U.C.P.C. (2012).
However, Madu (2014) argued that in an era of terror in the face of terrorism, the Nigerian state is structured as an area of security for the population. The Presidency, lawmakers and security agencies openly condemns terrorist attacks as illegitimate action used by non-state actors. Consequently, the Nigerian government, the National Assembly (NASS) undertook a statute to criminalize terrorism through the Act (Establishment) Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in 2002 (Madu, 2014). On the other hand, the inchoate nature of the provisions to fight against terrorism led to the exploration of a more comprehensive legal framework, and in turn to the presentation of terrorism prevention Bill to the Senate in 2006 (Oghogho, (2011). Five years later, the 2011 Terrorism Prevention Act was passed by the Senate and the House on June 1, 2011 and June 2, 2011, he was sent by the Clerk of the National Assembly to the President Goodluck Jonathan to sign the law.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 4]
Page 1 of 4
-
