Genderizing corruption: Dieziani would not be harshly judged if she was a man

Daily Post of 22nd Sept. 2017 reported that Nigerian frontline novelist, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, took a swipe at Nigerians for criticising former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Dieziani Alison-Madueke over fraud allegations. According to her, Dieziani’s case would not be capitalised if she was a man because stealing money is a norm practised by Nigerian politicians.

It's a great surprise that this is coming from someone in the calibre of Chimamanda Adichie who is operating at the global arena and should, ipso facto, imbibe global standards and exhibit zero-tolerance against corruption. It shows that we've got a long way to go as far as corruption war is concerned. 

Corruption is an unwanted beast-of-no-gender in a progressive society. Corruption took the deep egocentric plunge into the muddy lake and got itself messed up with stolen black gold, but someone is telling us from a high gender ground that we should just wash it clean, cloak it back in a new attire, worry less about the black gold, and give it a pat on the back on account of gender sensitivity that has no precedent whatsoever.

Ngozi, Nigerian youths are looking up to you as a literary leader but you have just disappointed them by simply genderizing a big case of corruption the same way that important public issues are normally ethnicized and religionized by unscrupulous politicians. My sister, if you argue that the system is unfair to Dieziani because she's a woman, is Col. Sambo Dasuki - for example - a man or a woman? Please don't jump into that murky political water with your presumably white regalia.

You may wish to tender apologies to the millions of Nigerian youths for disappointing them, and to the millions of corruption-averse men and WOMEN in Nigeria for offending their sensibilities.

Nigeria: Who can be considered to have committed an act of terrorism?

Following our previous post on the definition of terrorism according to the Nigerian law, let us now reason as to who can be considered, legally speaking, to have committed an act of terrorism.

According to Section 1 Subsection 2 of Nigeria's Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and in tandem with the definition of "act of terrorism" given by Section 1 Subsection 2 of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011:

"A person or body corporate who knowingly in or outside Nigeria directly or indirectly willingly -

(a) does, attempts or threatens any act of terrorism,

(b) commits an act preparatory to or in furtherance of an act of terrorism,

(c) omits to do anything that is reasonably necessary to prevent an act of terrorism,

(d) assists or facilitates the activities of persons engaged in an act of terrorism or is an accessory to any offence under this Act,

(e) participates as an accomplice in or contributes to the commission of any act of terrorism or offences under this Act,

(f) assists, facilitates, organizes or directs the activities of persons or organizations engaged in any act of terrorism,

(g) is an accessory to any act of terrorism, or

(h) incites, promises or induces any other person by any means whatsoever to commit any act of terrorism or any of the offences referred to in this Act,

commits an offence under this Act and is liable on conviction to maximum of death sentence."

That's the law! What do you think in practical terms concerning the Nigeria of today?

Here is the definition of “terrorism” as provided by the Nigerian law

In the context of prevailing challenges of insecurity in all parts of Nigeria, people have been asking for the definition of “terrorism” and what exactly constitutes “terrorism”.

Different people have come up with different refractions of terrorism based on their own prisms of understanding and judgment.

Without any attempt to join issues with arguments or counter-arguments on the subject, here is the definition of “terrorism” as provided by the Nigerian law:

Section 1 Subsection 2 of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states that: 

In this section, "act of terrorism" means an act which is deliberately done with malice, aforethought and which:

(a) may seriously harm or damage a country or an international organization;

(b) is intended or can reasonably be regarded as having been intended to -

(i) unduly compel a government or international organization to perform or abstain from performing any act,

(ii) seriously intimidate a population,

(iii)seriously destabilize or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organization, or

(iv) otherwise influence such government or international organization by intimidation or coercion; and

(c) involves or causes, as the case may be -

(i) an attack upon a person's life which may cause serious bodily harm or death;

(ii) kidnapping of a person;

(iii) destruction to a Government or public facility, a transport system, an infrastructure facility, including an information system, a fixed platform located on the continental shelf, a public place or private property, likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss;

(iv) the seizure of an aircraft, ship or other means of public or goods transport and diversion or the use of such means of transportation for any of the purposes in paragraph (b) (iv) of this subsection;

(v) the manufacture, possession, acquisition, transport, supply or use of weapons, explosives or of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, as well as research into, and development of biological and chemical weapons without lawful authority;

(vi) the release of dangerous substance or causing of fire, explosions or floods, the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(vii) interference with or disruption of the supply of water, power or any other fundamental natural resource, the effect of which is to endanger human life;

(d) an act or omission in or outside Nigeria which constitutes an offence within the scope of a counter terrorism protocols and conventions duly ratified by Nigeria.

Having seen the definition of terrorism from the perspective of the law of the federation, what's your view on the application of this definition to contemporary issues and happenings in the land?