Normative Guarantees versus Practical Realities: Evaluating Nigeria’s International Legal Obligations on Rights against Torture

The ban against torture constitutes one of the most fundamental norms of international human rights law, recognised as jus cogens and non-derogable under any circumstances. Nigeria, as a State Party to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture thereto, has undertaken substantial normative commitments to prevent, prohibit, and punish torture within its jurisdiction. This paper critically evaluates the chasm between Nigeria's international legal obligations and the practical realities of torture prevention within its territory. Through an extensive doctrinal analysis of constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks including the Anti-Torture Act 2017, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, and the Nigeria Correctional Service Act 2019, alongside recent institutional developments such as the designation of the National Human Rights Commission as Nigeria's National Preventive Mechanism in May 2024, this study interrogates the efficacy of Nigeria's torture prevention architecture. Drawing comparative insights from South Africa, Kenya, and the United Kingdom, the paper argues that while Nigeria has established a comprehensive normative framework prohibiting torture, systemic challenges including institutional impunity, inadequate resourcing of preventive mechanisms, judicial reluctance to enforce anti-torture legislation, and the persistent culture of violence within law enforcement agencies continue to undermine the practical realisation of these guarantees. The paper concludes with recommendations for legislative amendment, institutional strengthening, and enhanced international cooperation to bridge the gap between normative aspirations and practical implementation.