What happened in Nigeria as a counter measure to stop protesters was Lethal repressive force against the people of Nigeria who were represented by the protesters.
Every free democracy is tested by a protest because as we all know, not every citizen will be happy with the government.
When the people begin to express their concerns, their opinion, their dissatisfaction through a protest that is when you will see a true democracy in action.
No authoritarian dictatorship regime is happy to see hundred of thousands of people taking into the street to protest against government policies.
Any direct democracy will not use lethal force to dispatch protesters, instead seek negotiation.
One of the problems of most of these states that practice democracy have been the use of government power against the people during protest and they usually fall to the will of the people in the end because the power originally belong to the people.
Now in the case of Nigeria, we have a leader who idealism is connected to dictatorship and autocratic pattern of leadership and mostly associated and advised by members of terrorist groups telling the president and commander in chief of the arm forces of Nigeria, that it’s within his constitutional provisional power to use the military against the protesters.
Only in Syria that the war between the people and the government is still on going because the government have over power the people by way of using lethal force against opposition views.
Repression and protest is inter-dependent and every democracy have witness repression, oppression or witness protesters protesting, people will always find something wrong with the policy of government and then they will protest in which ever way they want.
Repression is the act of government using it’s powerful instruments to force the will of people.
We are practicing repressive Democracy in most African states or countries because they have been led by repressive leaders who have known nothing more than authoritarian and autocratic leadership.
Before you talk about repression in Africa, let’s understand the position of the people and the government, from where I am standing, it is all about the control of political power by the elites and by those who have hijacked government ride from time and they are passing the power from one hand to the other.
I’ll give you an explanation of what mostly happen in a country like Nigeria, we have the ruling leadership and we have opposition leadership, you can’t quite understand or differentiate who is who because the opposition party is the same as the ruling leading party or the ruling party.
What usually happens is, if you are a member of any of the political party, you definitely want to secure a seat of power and if you cannot archive that in a ruling party, that means you are unable to secure a chance to run the affair of government, so you become angry and want to antagonize those in power.
There is no organic government opposition in Nigeria, there’s not much of a difference between opposition and the ruling party because what happens is people are not democratically lead, they’re lead by their own personal interests so they’re not actually in any opposition party, there are fighting for their own chances to rule, that is why most of the time the people have to take into the street on their own to protest.
Unfortunately even in many civilized countries, repression and oppression is still very well and healthy, by way of the government using it’s instruments against the people.
Even though it is against the definition of democracy and the freedom of human rights that they often trample upon.
Repressive leadership is still very visible in most African countries because of their idealism and technocracy, it is so demeaning because most of the leader evolved from the background of illiteracy any most of them came out from military training based to jump into democracy.
We can only have democracy if those who are leading democracy understands the definition of democracy and the rights of human rights, if they respect opinion, both public and private opinion and respect to the rule of law, respect the process of due governance and to respect that everybody have equal rights in the affair of states, then and only then we can have a practical democracy in some African states.
Africa repressive government is all over every African state because most of the leaders have roots and background in military regime in a non-follow the protocol only obey the orders.
Th real definition of what democracy should be is often been subdued by the force from certain constitutional decree that was paraphrase by the military ideology.
Why do we continue to talk about oppression and repression in Africa when we are not ready to individually begin to reconcile and respect our human rights?
Recently, there was an election held in Ghana and currently, there is a campaign happening in Uganda, when we talk about Africa and the problem about oppression in government, in leadership and in politics we need to understand that before the rule of law can be respected the people must learn to respect the individual human right.
In Africa we still dwell in the circle where there are no human rights implement-ions, there’s no value to opinion of individuals, or as a people.
Majority of the people are being controlled by those who have money and have power to control what should be seen as right or wrong, we do not have respect for our individual human rights and we do not have respect for ourselves as a people, so there’s a possibility that the rule of law is excuse when it does affect people that are not respected in the society of Africa.
That is why there is oppression in every part of African society.
No one expected hundreds of thousands of citizens taking to the streets against authoritarian regimes during the Arab Spring.
The Middle East and North Africa were characterized by little social mobilization. Furthermore, many states maintained a strong security apparatus oil rents and possessed international support (Bellin 2012.
It was not surprising that many authoritarian regimes were willing to use lethal repression against protesters.
In Tunisia, the police shot on protesters, Mubarak’s regime in Egypt killed close to 1,000, Gaddafi’s security forces killed protesters in Benghazi, as did the regimes in Yemen, Syria and Bahrain and recently in Nigeria more than dozens were killed by the military in a protest.
The extraordinary is the fact that bullets were not able to stop protesters in many countries, as “hope and euphoria outweighed rational calculation of risk, cost, and benefit“.
In some cases, repression and the taking up of arms of opposition groups led to full-scale civil wars, e.g. in Libya and Syria.
The relationship between repression and non-violent or violent protest can be manifold, as the unfolding events in the Arab Spring/autumn show.
Violent repression may quell the opposition and lead to less protest. It could also trigger a radicalization of opposition groups and increase the level of protest.
Certainly, the level of peaceful and or violent protest influences the degree of state repression, and vice versa.
The Social Conflict in Africa Database provides daily data on 9,354 distinct social conflict events in 48 African states from 1990 to 2012. Seven thousand events were not repressed, while 1,630 were met with non-lethal and 717 events with lethal repression.
Out of 4,494 peaceful protest events (organized demonstration, spontaneous demonstration, general strike, limited strike), 3,261 were met with no, 938 with non-lethal and 295 with lethal repression. A T-test reveals that the average number of deaths is significantly higher for social conflict events that observe lethal repression than for those that do not (24 versus nine).
This study seeks to reveal the underpinnings of a government’s decision to kill peaceful protesters. Analyzing the onset of lethal repression is highly relevant, as it often radicalizes factions and initiates a spiral of violence.
The specification of the explicandum is also a way to circumvent the complex feedback cycles between repression and dissent, especially at a later.