CRIMINAL TORTURE AND THE NIGERIA POLICE CELL SYSTEM IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION PROCESS IN NIGERIA
ATTENTION:
BEFORE
YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE
INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000
ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE
BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
CRIMINAL
TORTURE AND THE NIGERIA POLICE CELL SYSTEM IN THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION
PROCESS IN NIGERIA
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
In most
countries, it has been accepted that democracy is the only system of government
that seeks to protect individual liberty and guarantee the fundamental rights
of all. The pursuit of these rights is however not absolute as there exist
state institutions like the police whose mandate is to maintain law and order
and curtail the citizenry‟s excesses within constitutional means
hence:[1]
Police power
is the exercise of the sovereign right of government to promote order, safety,
health, morals, general welfare within constitutional limits and it is an
essential attribute of government.‟ Indeed, the police are the outward civil
authority of the power and might of a civilized country. The generality of the
public is potentially affected one way or another by their action or inaction
What this
presupposes is that while democracy allows or guarantees freedom, the police as
an institution policed that freedom and in carrying out this function, they are
expected to operate within existing democratic norms, else the essence of
democracy becomes defeated. This is because the role of police and the
existence of these norms remain the standard benchmark in ascertaining an
acceptable democratic system. As a result, most of the policing applications
that are classified as democratic policing practices in an ideal society are
designed to ordinarily promote democratic principles and human rights. In Nigeria
however, many dilemma arose concerning the way and manner the police carry out
its statutory responsibilities. Top on the striking balance of this is the need
to respect the inalienable rights of citizens while carrying out their
legitimate duties. These duties ought to be performed within the context of
existing rules duly fashioned and recognized. It is however regrettable that
despite more than a decade of democratic governance, Nigerians are still faced
with lots of human rights abuses in the hand of the police. Contrary to what
democracy represents, the police is still largely authoritarian in nature[2]
. McCulley[3] opines that the state of
human rights violations by police officials is becoming a culture of impunity
and this includes arbitrary arrest, extra-judicial killings, illegal detention
and destruction of property by security forces etc. The question therefore is
how democratic is the Nigeria Police Force and how well have they imbibe
democratic policing principles? What is their response level with regards to
the observance of human rights since 1999? It has been correctly pointed out
that the police have not performed well in this regard.
The Guardian
editorial opined:
The truth is
that the police system in Nigeria is decadent at several levels, not least of
which is the tunnel vision of our police men in their operational approach to investigations and the treatment
of suspects and detainees. Driven by overwhelming corrupt tendencies, they are
rooted to a mixed bag of torture tactics that have nothing to do with the
enforcement of the law or the promotion of justice… Nigerians know too well
that whether accepting commissions from individuals or groups to settle scores
against antagonists, opponents or offenders, whether hounding persons or groups
in the name of the state or making suspects plead guilty to a crime not
committed in order to be saved from police brutality, or whether committing
sexual violence against female detainees, our police are adept to making life
hell on earth for their victims.[4]
Reuben Abati
observed further:
…the Nigeria
Police Force is one of the most unpopular institutions in Nigeria today; it is
distrusted by the same people whose lives and property it is meant to protect,
and this has resulted into a resort to self-help in many ways. Every year, the
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch as well as local civil society
organizations report on many cases of police brutality, police inefficiency and
corruption. The crime rate is on the increase and the police have proven to be
helpless and overwhelmed. This has been so in nearly every instance, be the
matter of armed robbery, kidnapping, ethno religious violence or financial
fraud. It is also generally regarded as a corrupt police force with policemen
collecting bribes openly and showing tendencies of thuggery and mendicancy. It
is so bad that rich persons hire the police for all kinds of unlawful purpose,
or simply as bodyguards to oppress the less privileged. [5]
In spite of
the foregoing, it has been shown that there are inherent factors responsible
for this negative impasse. One of such is the impact of Nigeria‟s colonial/
military history. The annexation of Lagos by the British in 1861 and the
subsequent establishment of a Consular Guard were solely to protect British
economic interest and so no foundation was properly laid for a civil and
genuine police force for Nigeria.
Dambazau agrees when he stated that “the Nigeria Police was not
constituted to provide services to the community in a manner consistent with
human rights and democracy, but the main concern of the colonial administration
was to brutally suppress popular resistance against colonialism by poorly
educated and poorly trained personnel, and the effects are still felt today”[6]
. Alemika also agreed:
…Historical
evidence demonstrates that the colonial police forces were organized and
oriented to behave as occupation forces- ruthless, brutal, corrupt, dishonest and prone to
brutalizing the colonized peoples and vandalizing their properties… The
preoccupation of colonial and post-colonial Nigeria police were not the
promotion and enforcement of just laws, rule of law, natural justice and equity
and security of the vast majority of Nigerians, as colonial surrogates often
claimed…the greatest part of the police energies and resources were committed
to, and dissipated on the suppression of struggles and protests against
oppression and exploitation, the large scale theft and mismanagement of the
public wealth by those who controlled the economy and state apparatus.[7]
Regrettably
at independence in 1960, it became obvious that those who took over from the
colonial authority began to manipulate the system for their own selfish
interest.[8] Worst still, subsequent military regimes that took over from 1966
failed to improve the police and instead used it to enforce authoritarian rule
which further entrenched a culture of public disdain and hatred for the
police.[9] These negative tendencies continued unabated and finally culminated
into acts of indiscipline, corruption and violation of the rights of citizens
to mention but these few. Another germane problem is the loopholes in the
Nigeria Police Act which has enhanced the obvious disconnect between the
police, the law and the citizens. Innocent Chukwuma laments that “since 1943
when the police Act was enacted by the colonial government, it has not been
reviewed to reflect present day realities”[10] . According to him:
The first is
to capture and incorporate into law, recent positive policy developments in the
Nigeria Police Force. Such developments include community policing, police
performance monitoring and minimum educational requirement for entry and
performance in the force. The second issue is to amend or expunge provisions in
the Act that have either become outdated or obnoxious in the light of the
present democratic dispensation. The third is the necessity to amend sections
of the Act that makes it impossible to insulate the police from partisan
political control[11]
Suffice it
to say that Democracy is a term that has been jointly and severally subjected
to all kinds of meaning and interpretation. According to Buhlman et al, „there
are abundant literature relating to democratic theory with countless
definitions of what democracy should be and what democracy is‟[12] . Laza
corroborated this view by saying that „there is no consensus on how to measure
democracy, and that definitions of democracy are contested and there is an
ongoing lively debate on the subject.[13] To start with, „democracy‟ was define
as „a system of rule by the poor and disadvantaged; a form of government in
which the people rule themselves directly and continuously without the need for
professional politicians or public officials; a society based on equal
opportunity and individual merit rather than hierarchy and privilege; a system
of welfare and redistribution aimed at narrowing social inequalities; a system
of decisionmaking based on the principle of majority rule; a system of rule
that secures the rights and interest of minorities by placing checks upon the
power of the majority; a means of filling public office through a competitive
struggle for the popular vote.[14] To some writers, „democracy is a system of
government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and
exercise directly by the citizens. In Sadaro‟s own view „the essential idea of
democracy is that people have the right to determine who governs them. In most
cases, they elect the principal government officials and hold them accountable
for their actions. A democracy also imposes legal limits on the government‟s
authority by guarantying certain rights and freedoms to their citizens‟[15] .
The
minimalist sees democracy as a „political system of political rights that
specifies how leadership should be designated at the highest national level in
a policy. It is in this same line that Schumpeter[16] defines democracy as
„that institutional arrangement for arriving at political decision in which
individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a competitive struggle for
the people‟s vote. Other authors like Diamond Larry uses the maximalist
definition of democracy as all encompassing „not only a civilian,
constitutional, multiparty regime, with regular, free and fair elections and
universal suffrage, but organizational and informational pluralism; extensive
civil liberties; effective power for elected office and functional autonomy for
legislative, executive and judicial organs of government.[17]
From the
foregoing definitions, the essential principles or elements for any system to
qualify as democracy are many. In other words certain elements must co-exist
for a political system to be called a democracy. Several views abound and shall
be considered. Buhlman et al identified equality, freedom and control as the
key principles or elements of democracy. They opined thus, “we define freedom,
equality and control as the three core principles of democracy.
To qualify
as a democracy, a given political system has to guarantee freedom and equality.
Moreover, it has to optimize the interdependence between these two principles
by means of control. Control is understood as control by the government as well
as control of the government.[18]
Linz and
Stepan[19] argues that for a democracy to be consolidated, five interrelated
conditions must exist, that is to say: free and lively civil society, a
relatively autonomous and valued political society, the rule of law to
guarantee citizen‟s freedom and independent associational life, functioning
state bureaucracy which can be use by the democratic government and an
institutions analyzed economic society. In his own contribution, Professor
Eteng posits that genuine democracy is obviously inconceivable today without
the following structures and elementary forms: free and fair election
completely bereft of money driven, zero-sum, macabre prone electoral process,
truly representative government drawn not from ethno-religious constituencies
but rather more or less from various occupational groups, an independent
judiciary, a vibrant civil society comprising organized labour, professional
bodies, pro democracy and human rights organization a free and unfettered press
and finally a people oriented economy.[20]
The
Inter-Parliamentary Council, the plenary governing body of the
Inter-Parliamentary
Union in its
161st conference held in Cairo Egypt on 16th September 1997 adopted the
Universal
Declaration
on Democracy and asserted as follows:
A state of
democracy ensures that the processes by which power is acceded to, wielded and
alternates allow for free political completion and are the product of open,
free and non-
discriminatory
participation by the people, exercised in accordance with the rule of law, in
both letter and spirit…. As an ideal, democracy aims essentially to preserve
and promote the dignity and fundamental rights of the individual, to achieve
social justice, faster the economic and social development of the community,
strengthen the cohesion of society and enhance national tranquility.
The Council
maintained that democracy must be based on existence of a well structured and
functioning institutions as well as a body of standards operated on the will of
the society with rights and responsibilities. It is founded on the right of
everyone to take part in the management of public affairs through the holding
of free and fair elections at regular intervals. To achieve this, civil and
political rights are essential, and more particular among them, the right to
vote and be voted for, the right to freedom of expression and assembly, access
to information and the right to organize political activities. Public
accountability applies to all who hold public office and independent judicial
institutions with effective oversight. Mechanisms are equally required to give
efficacy to the doctrines of the rule of law.[21]
1.1 Statement of the Problem
Policing a
democratic state entails the ideals of the rule of law and human rights as its
core principles. The rule of law emphasizes the need for all persons and
institutions including law enforcement agencies (police) to be responsive to
the tenets of all democratic laws that are consistent with human rights
standards. These standards have assumed universal acceptance to the extent that
there is a duty imposed on law enforcement officials to, at all times respect
and obey the law, protect all persons against illegal acts and protect human
dignity and maintain and uphold the human rights of all.
The
constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) in line with
international norms and obligations contains human rights provisions to protect
the rights of citizens. The constitution also established the Nigeria Police
Force with the statutory duty of maintaining law and order. This duty must
however conform to standard best practices that reflect the tenets of the rule
of law and human rights observance. Unfortunately, the overall performance of
the police in Nigeria leaves much to be desired. The force appears more adept
to paramilitary operations, anti democratic tendencies and abuse of police
powers. Incessant abuses such as arbitrary arrest, illegal detention, torture,
inhuman and other degrading treatment as well as extra judicial killings are
common place. Besides, democratic policing attributes like the rule of law,
accountability, responsive/representative policing and respect for human rights
are essentially lacking. The shortfall
stems from the lapses in the Police Act and the inefficiency and ineffectiveness
in the overall operation and execution of policing generally which if
critically viewed together do not help to create a police force that respect
the rights of citizens as guaranteed under the constitution and other
international human rights conventions which
Nigeria has
signed and ratified.
1.2 Scope of the Research
This
research work is limited to policing a democratic Nigeria and the observance of
human rights by its police force in comparative terms with international best
practices.
The reason
for this limitation is most clearly informed by the fact that human rights
standards are compromised and abuses abound in a developing country like
Nigeria. Besides, policing raises issues which either enhances or retrogresses
democratic advancement hence it became expedient to use the Nigeria Police
Force as a case study to review their overall performance and participation in
the democratic process to see whether Nigeria‟s nascent democracy is being
advanced
1.3 Objectives of the Research
This
research had explored three correlated questions. First, to what extent or
degree are democratic policing principles applicable in Nigeria? Second, how
well has the Nigeria Force faired in terms of human rights observance since the
return to civil rule in 1999? Was the Nigeria Police Act fashioned to encourage
democratic policing and observance of human rights? To this end, the research
x-rays the powers and operational capabilities of the Nigeria Police Force vis
a vis the observance of human rights in the new Nigeria democratic setting. It
explores in very simplistic terms, the basic principles of democratic policing
and the need for human right observance within the context of global best
practices. It provides a comparative and indebt analysis of policing as a major
component of democracy, policing and human rights issues, judicial attitude to
policing and other operational efficacy of the police with particular emphasis
on the lacunas of the enabling law establishing the police. It also brings to the
fore myriads of abuses inherent in the system, the need to officially recognize
their violations and the challenges of surmounting them. The overall objective
is to observe and proffer amicable recommendations that will help save guard
democratic policing in Nigeria.
,
findings/observations, and recommendations.
[1] Per
Uwaifo JSCin Fawehinmi Vs Inspector General of Police (2002) 7 N.W.L.R (Pt.
767) 606 at 672-673
[2] Akhaine,
S.O. and Chizea, B.U., State of Human Rights in Nigeria- Center for Constitutionalism and Demilitarization
Annual Report, Abuja (2011) p. 16
[3]
McCulley, T.P., “Nigeria‟s Commitment to Human Rights”, The Punch, 25th April,
2013.
www.punching.com(assessed
on 4th November, 2013)
[4] The
Guardian, 18th August, 2005,p. 16
[5] This Day
Newspaper, Tuesday, 15th April, 2008, p. 23
[6] Dabazau,
A. B., Criminology and Criminal Justice, Spectrum Books Limited, Ibadan (2007)
p.274
[7] Alemika,
E. E. O., “Policing and Perceptions of Police in Nigeria” Police Studies 11 (4) (1998) p. 161-176
[8]
Etannibi, A., and Chukwuma, I., “Analysis of Police and Policing in Nigeria: A
Desk Study on the Role of Policing as a Barrier to Change or Driver of Change
in Nigeria,” (Unpublished) Prepared for the Department for International
Development, 2004.
[9] “The
Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission Report” by Hon. Justice Oputa,
C. A. http://www.oputapanelreport.org(last visited on 19/04/14
[10]
CLEEN Foundation One Day Interactive
Forum of the House of Representatives‟ Committee on Police Affairs on 8th
November, 2004 at the National Assembly Complex, Abuja
[11] Ibid
[12] Bulman
M, Wolfgang M., et al. The Quality of Democracy: Democratic Barometer for
Established Democracies,
National
Centre for Competence in Research: Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century
(2008)
[13] Laza,
K. The Economic Intelligence, Unit Index of Democracy,
http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/DEMOCRACYINDEX2007v.3.pdf(last
visited on 31/01/13)
[14] Helwood,
A., Politics (2nd ed.) Palgrave, New York (2002) p.68
[15] Sodaro,
M. J. Comparative Politics: A Global Introduction, MC Braw-Hill, Moscow (2004)
p. 31
[16]
Schumpeter, J. Capitalism Socialism and Democracy (3rd ed.) Harper & Row,
New York (1950) p.12
Also,
Lipset, S. M.: “Prospects for Democracy” Unpublished Manuscript (2000) p.11
[17]
Diamond, L., Developing Democracy; Towards Consolidation, John Hopkins
University, Baltimore (1999) p.13 – 14
[18] Buhlman
et al. op cit p.15
[19] Linz,
J., and Stepan, A., Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, John
Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1996) p.7
[20] Eteng,
I. A., “Transparency in Democracy Government in Contemporary Africa” In: Akani,
C. Globalization and the People of Africa, Fourth Dimension Publishers, Enugu
(2004) p.137 - 139
[21]
Democracy: Its Principles and Achievements, Inter-Parliamentary Union, Geneva,
Switzerland (1998) p. v
Criminal
Torture And The Nigeria Police Cell System In The Criminal Investigation
Process In Nigeria
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount
(#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project
topics
(2) Email
Address
(3) Payment
Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) after
we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
AFFILIATE
Comments
Post a Comment