Skip to main content

The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) and the Avoidance of Responsibility: Ending Atrocity Crimes in Northern Nigeria

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Africa's Engagement with the Responsibility to Protect in the 21st Century

Abstract

The Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria’s North-East and the activities of Violent Extremist Groups (VEGs) in the Northcentral and Northwest regions have caused a humanitarian disaster and commission of significant human rights violations by insurgents and state security forces in counterinsurgency. Under international law, the intent and method of these violations confirm them as atrocity crimes. The inability of the Nigerian Government to end the insurgency thereby sustaining the perpetration of these crimes against civilians, puts the United Nations within its rights to intervene in protection of Nigerian civilians through the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP). Yet it demonstrates no zeal for the RtoP option. Applying desk research, we argue, the non-authorisation of RtoP in Nigeria, is rooted firstly, in controversies linked to the RtoP preventing it from attaining norm status. This lack of ‘normhood’ makes efforts at authorization controversial, polarising and nearly impossible. Secondly are perceptions of the RtoP when authorised, as a Trojan horse used by powerful western states to pursue national interest including regime change as inferred from the actions of France and allies in the 2011 Libyan intervention. Lastly, the divisive outcome of RtoP interventions, Libya in focus saw the country spiral into anarchy with critical implications for security not only in Sub-Saharan Africa manifest as heightened insecurity fuelled by increasing and entrenching Islamist fundamentalism but the intensification of a migratory wave of displaced civilians towards Europe contributing to its refugee problem. The study concludes that considering Nigeria’s immense population located within a volatile and deeply divided society as well as its role as a region stabilising hegemon, the authorization of RtoP considering its unpredictable outcomes, holds unpredictable implications for SSA stability because a destabilised Nigeria like Libya, may trigger the onset of a humanitarian and refugee crisis to which European and Western governments would rather avoid but be forced to respond.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uzezi Ologe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ologe, U., Aniche, E.T. (2024). The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) and the Avoidance of Responsibility: Ending Atrocity Crimes in Northern Nigeria. In: Erameh, N.I., Ojakorotu, V. (eds) Africa's Engagement with the Responsibility to Protect in the 21st Century. Africa's Global Engagement: Perspectives from Emerging Countries. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8163-2_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics