Criminalising State Terrorism in Nigeria: Towards a Legal Framework for Military Accountability during Armed Conflicts

Terrorism is conventionally associated with non-state actors such as insurgents, separatists, and extremists, while state actors like the military are generally regarded as lawful enforcers of peace. However, this dichotomy ignores the possibility of terrorism committed by state forces, particularly during armed conflicts. Nigeria’s legal framework largely omits the possibility of attributing terrorist acts to state actors, despite recurring reports of military excesses, including extrajudicial killings, indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, and torture. These acts, while often categorised as breaches of military conduct or humanitarian law, fall within the scope of terrorism under international legal standards. This paper employed a doctrinal research methodology, drawing from statutes, case law, scholarly texts, and international legal instruments. It found that although Nigeria has ratified the Geneva Conventions, domestic military laws and the Terrorism (Prevention) Act do not explicitly criminalise acts of terrorism by military personnel. The study examined notable incidents such as the Odi, Zaki-Biam, and Baga massacres, which exhibited characteristics of state terrorism. Despite court judgments and public outcry, accountability has remained elusive because of legal and institutional gaps. The paper concluded that Nigeria’s failure to criminalise state terrorism perpetuates impunity and undermines human rights. It therefore recommended urgent legal reforms, including amending existing anti-terrorism laws to cover state actors, incorporating international humanitarian law into military training, and establishing an independent body to investigate and prosecute acts of terrorism by the armed forces.