Content uploaded by Olawale Olufemi Akinrinde
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Olawale Olufemi Akinrinde on Jan 29, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues
Volume 10, Issue 2, (2020) 63-70
Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest:
A theoretical discourse
Olawale Olufemi Akinrinde*, Osun State University, Osun, Nigeria
Suggested Citation:
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse.
Global Journal of Sociology: Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
Received from July 15, 2020; revised from September 13, 2020; accepted from November 10, 2020.
Selection and peer review under responsibility Prof. Dr. Mustafa Gunduz, Cukurova University, Turkey.
©2020 Birlesik Dunya Yenilik Arastirma ve Yayincilik Merkezi. All rights reserved.
Abstract
While across known histories of societies the human societies had always developed within the confines of their limits of
social justice, the security or otherwise of societies had always been directly proportional to their level of social justice.
Invariably, this implies the higher the acceptance and recognition of the need for social justice by a society, the higher the
society’s chances for national security. Social justice has thus proven to be a critical sine qua non for an egalitarian and a just
society where equity, selflessness and equitable distribution of resources reign. However, the lack and deliberate
emasculation of social justice within the society by the state and/or its machineries has over time, consequentially, informed
a pathological situation; a situation where, due to the absence or deliberate neglect of the need for social justice in the
accumulation of wealth, distribution of wealth and resources as well as social, economic and political relationships amongst
the people, the rich are becoming richer whilst the less privileged are becoming more disadvantaged. The social implication
and effect of this social pathology is the impulse by the rich or the privileged to see and use corruption to accumulate more
wealth, resources and power in unjust social, economic and political exchanges in their bid to maintain the unjust socio-
economic and political systems, whilst the poor and the less privileged tend to see and use corruption as a leveller and
means to accumulating their own share of the societal wealth, resources and power. The corrupt environment created by
social injustice is therefore antithetical to any country’s quest for national security. This is chiefly because national security
objectives and corruption are two parallel lines that cannot and have never met. This article therefore argues that social
justice backed by egalitarian and equitable distribution of wealth, resources and social services by the government would
bring about a corrupt-free society where insecurity would be minimised and reduced to the barest minimum.
Keywords: Social injustice, corruption, insecurity, Nigeria’s National Security, Nigeria.
* ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Olawale Olufemi Akinrinde, Osun State University, Nigeria.
E-mail address: olawale.akinrinde@uniosun.edu.ng
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
64
1. Introduction
Trapped in the triangular web of the Boko Haram insurgency, farmers–herdsmen crisis and the
resurgent art of banditry, the Nigerian state now sits almost hopelessly on the threshold of
discontinuity due to the pervasiveness of insecurity. The spontaneity of the manifestations of this
triangle of terrors has tested the resolution and preparedness of the Nigerian state to stem the tide of
this triangle of terrors and insecurities. With thousands of innocent Nigerians killed and internally
displaced owing to the continued manifestation of this triangle of insecurities, several attempts had
been made to understand the dynamics of this triangle, its causes and why it has remained almost
unshakable and indestructible with no end in sight despite the amount of efforts, resources and
policies and strategies that have been committed to its eradication by successive Nigerian
governments. Whilst various paradigmatic and tested hypothetical rationalisations have been
advanced to explain the wave of Boko Haram insurgency, banditry and the farmers–herdsmen crisis
that is embedded in the triangular web of national insecurity in contemporary Nigeria, little or no
attention has been given to the deep-rooted causes of the triangulated web of terrors and insecurities
in Nigeria and why this unwholesome triangle of insecurities has remained almost supreme,
unsolvable and indestructible till date. Without downplaying the capacity of other security threats
breeding insecurities in Nigeria, the security posed by the Boko Haram menace, banditry and farmers–
herdsmen persistent crises remain daunting and a major challenge to our country’s national security.
Notwithstanding the abundance of insightful explanations offered by the isolation thesis and the
relative deprivation, Nieftagodien’s endemic poverty explanation and John Dollard and Neal Miller’s
frustration–aggression theory, Burton’s (1979) human needs theory and the relatively new human
security approach to the understanding of the causes of insecurity across the globe, this article locates
the persistent manifestation of security threats and insecurities in our country within the sphere of
‘social injustice’.
While across known histories of societies the human societies had always developed within the
confines of their limits of social justice, the security or otherwise of societies had always been directly
proportional to their level of social justice. Invariably, this implies the higher the acceptance and
recognition of the need for social justice by a society, the higher the society’s chances for national
security. Social justice has thus proven to be a critical sine qua non for an egalitarian and a just society
where equity, selflessness and equitable distribution of resources reign. However, the lack and
deliberate emasculation of social justice within the society by the state and/or its machineries has
over time, consequentially, informed a pathological situation; a situation where, due to the absence or
deliberate neglect of the need for social justice in the accumulation of wealth, distribution of wealth
and resources as well as social, economic and political relationships amongst the people, the rich are
becoming richer whilst the less privileged are becoming more disadvantaged. The social implication
and effect of this social pathology is the impulse by the rich or the privileged to see and use corruption
to accumulate more wealth, resources and power in unjust social, economic and political exchanges in
their bid to maintain the unjust socio-economic and political systems, whilst the poor and the less
privileged tend to see and use corruption as a leveller and means to accumulating their own share of
the societal wealth, resources and power. The corrupt environment created by social injustice is
therefore antithetical to any country’s quest for national security. This is chiefly because national
security objectives and corruption are two parallel lines that cannot and have never met. This study
therefore argues that social justice backed by egalitarian and equitable distribution of wealth,
resources and social services by the government would bring about a corrupt-free society where
insecurity would be minimised and reduced to the barest minimum.
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
65
2. Making meaning out of the concepts of social injustice, corruption and national security
2.1. Social injustice
One of the ironies of the early twenty-first century is that ideological struggles between and within
nations have intensified a decade after the end of the Cold War. Today, proponents of diametrically
opposed visions of society, secular and religious, march under the banner of social justice. As desirable
social and political goals are depicted in starkly different forms, labels like ‘good’ and ‘evil’ become
interchangeable and the meaning of social justice becomes obscured. As it has been for millennia, the
concept of social justice is now used as a rationale for maintaining the status quo, promoting far-
reaching social reforms and justifying revolutionary action. If liberals and conservatives, religious
fundamentalists and radical secularists all regard their causes as socially just, how can we develop a
common meaning of the term? Notwithstanding the conceptual and interpretational relativity, we can
take social Injustice, in this study, to mean a situation when some unfair practices are being carried in
the society. Whatever unjustness is happening is usually against the law and it might not be something
that is considered a moral practice. Areas in which the government policy often gives rise
to social inequality and injustice therefore include: voting laws (i.e., redistricting and voter ID),
education laws (i.e., public school segregation and integration), labour laws (i.e., worker’s rights,
occupational health and safety), tax law, wealth and resource distributions etc. In the Republic, Plato
(1974, trans.) expanded the meaning of justice by equating it with human well-being. He linked the
concept of individual and social justice by asserting that justice was derived from the harmony
between reason, spirit and appetite present in all persons. Within this formulation, if a society lacked
such harmony, justice could not be achieved.
Aristotle further developed this concept of justice in the Nicomachian Ethics (1980, trans.), where
he introduced a view of justice that anticipates modern debates about issues of resource allocation.
Aristotle regarded justice, as fulfilled through law, as the principle that ensures social order through
the regulation of the allocation and distribution of benefits. In Book V, Aristotle states, ‘equality for
the people involved will be the same as for the things involved, since in a just society the relation
between the people will be the same as the relation between the things involved. For if the people
involved are not equal, they will not [justly] receive equal shares; indeed, whenever equals receive
unequal shares, or unequal’s equal shares, that is the source of quarrels and accusations’ (p. 123). Yet,
like Plato and many other philosophers and political leaders over the past 2,000 years, Aristotle did
not regard people as fundamentally equal. His view of equality and justice applied only to those
individuals who occupied the same stratum of a hierarchical social order.
2.2. Corruption
Corruption has been variously defined. Whilst the Oxford Dictionary of Current English defines
corruption as an act of dishonesty especially using bribery or an immoral or wicked act, the Oxford
Advanced Learner’s Dictionary sees it as a dishonest or illegal behaviour especially of people in
authority. This definition looks at both moral and legal aspects. But for Joseph Nye (1967), corruption
is basically a deviation from the formal duties of a public role because of private regarding (personal,
close family and private clique) pecuniary exercise of certain types of private regarding influence. This
includes behaviour such as bribery (use of reward to pervert the judgment of a person in position of
trust); nepotism (appointment by reason of inscriptive relationship or sentimental affiliation rather
than merit); and misappropriation (illegal appropriation of public resources for private regarding
uses).
The definition by Nye (Ibid) sees corruption as a deviant behaviour. This suffices to imply that the
normal behaviour or the antithesis of corruption thus equally means anti-corruption. This conception
may run into conflict with broader conceptions in terms of operationalisation, especially in instances
where corruption is widespread and regarded as the norm by majority of the people. Similarly,
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
66
Huntington (1968) conjectured and likened corruption to behaviour of public officials, which deviates
from accepted norms in order to serve private end. The International Monetary Fund and World Bank
defined corruption as ‘the abuse of public office’. According to the World Bank, corruption is the
abuse of public office through the instrumentality of private agents, who actively offer bribes to
circumvent public policies and processes for competitive advantage and profit. Beyond bribery, public
office can also be abused for personal benefit through patronage and nepotism, for example, the theft
of state assets or the diversion of state revenues. This is a very wide-ranging definition, which
delineates some of the acts of corruption. And it agrees with Otite’s (1986) interpretation of the
meaning of corruption as the perversion of integrity or state of affairs through bribery, favour or
moral depravity.
In addition to the above, the Transparency International equally defines corruption as behaviour on
the part of officials in the public sector, whether politicians or civil servants, in which they improperly
and unlawfully enrich themselves, or those close to them, by the misuse of public power entrusted to
them (Cited in Pope, 1996). Although the definition of the Transparency International is very
descriptive, it focuses only on the public sector. But there is corruption in private sector with negative
consequences for the whole of society. Similarly, El-Rufai (2003) viewed corruption as covering a wide
range of social misconducts, including fraud, extortion, embezzlement, bribery, nepotism, influence
peddling, bestowing of favour to friends, rigging of elections, abuse of public property, the leaking of a
government secret and sale of expired and defective goods, such as drugs, food and electronic and
spare parts to the public etc.
From the foregoing, however, it can be opined that in as much as we strive to understand and
conceive what corruption is all about, it will continue to elude a universally accepted
conceptualisation due to its constructivist posture. It is sufficed to say that corruption can fully be
grasped when located within our unique and local cultural understanding and context. This goes to say
that our meanings and interpretation of corruption is locally and culturally constructed. In light of this,
this study adopts Joseph Nye’s conceptually nuanced understanding of corruption as it mirrors the
local practice of corrupt behaviours in Nigeria.
2.3. Nigeria’s national security objectives
Basically what readily constitutes the national security objectives of sovereign states could differ on
so many pretexts. This is to inform that national security objectives of sovereign states may be
circumstances bound, environmentally bound and politically, culturally and economically bound.
Whilst recognising the fluidic nature of Nigeria’s national security objectives over the years, this study
construes Nigeria’s national security objectives in terms of its responsibility to quash fears and
uncertainty occasioned by the Boko Haram insurgency and ensures the safeguarding of its territorial
integrity and protection in an environment where the people are economically, politically, socially and
environmentally secured. The realities of the years which have revealed the systematic decline in the
actualisation of these security objectives have further reinforced the sad reality that Nigeria’s security
objectives only exist now in the realms of dreams and fantasies given the tsunami-like security
challenges ravaging the national landscape of the country.
3. The intersecting causality between social injustice, corruption and the fleeting Nigeria’s national
security objectives: a theoretical discourse
Trapped in the triangular web of the Boko Haram insurgency, Fulani herdsmen wave of terror and
the resurgent art of banditry, the Nigerian state now sits almost hopelessly on the threshold of
discontinuity due to the pervasiveness of insecurity. The spontaneity of the manifestations of this
triangle of terrors has tested the resolution and preparedness of the Nigerian state to stem the tide of
this triangle of terrors and insecurities. With thousands of innocent Nigerians killed and internally
displaced owing to the continued manifestation of this triangle of insecurity, several attempts have
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
67
been made to understand the dynamics of this triangle, its causes and why it has remained almost
unshakable and indestructible with no end in sight despite the amount of efforts, resources and
policies and strategies that had been committed to its eradication by the government. Whilst various
paradigmatic and tested hypothetical rationalisations have been advanced to explain the wave of
Boko Haram insurgency, banditry and the Fulani herdsmen terror embedded in the triangular web of
national insecurity in Nigeria independent of the others, little or no attention has been given to the
theorisation of the relationship between these three triangulated web of terrors and insecurity in
Nigeria’s national security and why this unwholesome triangle has remained almost supreme,
unsolvable and indestructible.
Notwithstanding the abundance of insightful explanations offered by the isolation thesis and the
relative deprivation theory (May, Woolard & Klasen, 2000; Pillay, 2008), Nieftagodien’s endemic
poverty explanation (2008) and John Dollard and Neal Miller’s frustration–aggression theory, this
study finds Burton’s (1979) human needs theory and the human security approach as the most
relevant and appropriate theoretical framings to understanding the inherent causality in the triangular
intersections of the Boko Haram insurgency, banditry and the Fulani herdsmen terror as well as why
this triangle of terrors has remained persistent and constant in the security complexion of the Nigerian
State.
The thrust of Burton’s (1979) human needs theorisation lies in its assumption that persons or
groups, or groups of persons patronise insecurity and rely on same as means to finding fulfilment of
their needs. In Nigeria and more specifically in the Northern region, most of the human needs have
become practically non-existent. Contextualised to mean food, clothing, shelter and identity as the
case may be, security, inclusiveness, liberty, religious tolerance and respect, as well as fundamental
human rights, the availability and ease of accessing these human needs in Nigeria have been
conspicuously low. The Nigerian state now boasts of being the poverty capital of the world (World
Poverty Clock, 2020). This is in addition to the World Bank report on human needs that is already
scaling up. Burton (1979) further explains that the reasons why insecurity persists is not entirely due
to weak institutions or structures but rather is a result of the inability of the institutions of state and
the government to provide for the basic human needs of its citizenries.
Since its attainment of statehood in 1960, the Nigerian state has remained one of the states that
have consistently struggled to meet the human needs of their citizenries. Not only that Nigeria is now
regarded as the poverty capital of the world having taken over from India, Nigeria now harbours then
highest numbers of children that are out of school and malnutritioned. The World Poverty Clock has
revealed Nigeria to be the poverty capital of the world with 86.9 million out of 180 million people still
living in extreme poverty (World Poverty Clock, 2020). The failure of successive Nigerian governments
to comprehensively address the roots of poverty in Nigeria has been particularly consequential for
two reasons: the rising profile of poverty level and the role the high poverty level has been playing in
the making of insecurity. The poorly catered and trained citizens who are mostly teenagers and youths
have thus become ready-made tools for the breeding of terrorism, banditry and herdsmen terror. The
current leader of the Boko Haram terrorist sect since the demise of its founding father, Mohammed
Yusuf, was formerly an Alma-Jiri who wandered the streets of Yobe state in Nigeria before he came in
contact with the late Mohammed Yusuf, the supreme founder of the Boko Haram sect. Ibrahim
Shekau, like most members of the deadly Boko Haram terrorist sect, bandit clusters and the killer
herdsmen, was a victim of failures of successive Nigerian governments to meet the basic human needs
of the citizens. Shockingly, 80% of nearly half of the population living below the poverty line are
domiciled in the Northern region. This explains why the Northern region of the Nigerian state,
especially, the North-eastern region (the least developed region) continues to account for the highest
rate of insecurity in the Nigerian state at the moment. Whilst the other parts of the country are not
exempted in the precipitation of the triangular network of Boko Haram, banditry and the killer
herdsmen in the country, the Northern part remains the major contributor for the breeding of this
triangle of insecurity.
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
68
The inability of nearly half of the entire population of the country to have their economic needs
met as evidenced by the poverty line coupled with the rising frustrations of the people, specifically,
the youths to be free from fear and wants has further exacerbated. This underscores the relevance of
the human security approach in understanding why the triangle of insecurity in Nigeria, Africa, and
indeed, the world.
The human security approach, following the end of the Cold War and the end of certainty that
came with it, became the bedrock of security discourses, strategy and even a security paradigm that
seeks to extol the primacy of human basic need as security measures itself, to forestalling insecurities
(Hough, 2004). The failure of governments to, through the usual traditional security paradigm, address
the emerging human insecurities that threatened the existence of humanity led to the emergence of
an alternative approach, i.e., the human security paradigm to approaching and understanding the
rising profile of human-related insecurity issues.
More recently, analysts, following the United Nations Development Programmes 1994 Human
Development Report and their notion of security as ‘freedom from fear and want’ (Hough, 2004), have
settled on the phrase ‘human security’ to emphasise the people-centred aspect of security efforts,
strategies and paradigms. Thus, human security takes the individual as primary referent, and also
concentrates on how best to protect them. Emphasis is therefore on the quest to actualising the well-
being of individuals, and responding to the people’s needs in dealing with sources of threats.
Furthermore, the human security paradigm aims to find a means to protect the nation from external
aggression, and also, to safeguard it from a range of menaces, such as environmental pollution,
infectious diseases and economic deprivation. Environmental destruction, poverty, famines and
diseases are huge threats to the lives of millions of people all around the world, and, indeed, in
Nigeria.
For instance, some of the threat caused by environmental degradation seems less clear-cut and
direct than most other dangers to human life. Thus, the potential threat of global warming and ozone
depletion appears far-off, when compared to more imminent threats, such as natural disasters and
military attacks (Hough, 2004). However, the negative modifications in environmental conditions have
heightened peoples’ vulnerability to other threats, such as disease, and are thus largely an indirect
threat to human security. Hence, some studies have revealed that close to one-third of deaths related
to diseases worldwide have some environmental causes, such as air or water pollution (Hough, 2004),
which are indirectly aiding the rise of terroristic activities, especially from those that have been badly
affected by the harsh effects of the emerging environmental challenges. Furthermore, human-induced
environmental degradation, and the resulting scarcity of resources also, has been one of the
motivators of insecurity and insurrections in Nigeria, and most parts of the globe (Terriff, 1999).
Similarly, one of the major threats is air pollution, caused by vehicles, factories and power plants,
which can seriously damage people’s health. Developing countries, on the other hand, mostly face the
threat of scarce water resources, as well as water pollution. Thus, for example, a recent study has
revealed that close to two million children die each year from diarrhoea, largely because of the
contamination of their drinking water and the lack of sanitation in developing countries (The
Economist, November 11, 2006). Water scarcity is also increasingly becoming a factor in ethnic
conflicts and political friction. Nigeria is not shielded from the harsh realities of human insecurities. In
fact, these human insecurities have thus placed individuals at the mercy of desperate and survivalist
actions and activities that could in most instances; precipitate the youths and teenagers into taking up
arms against the state through terrorism or banditry and the herdsman killing. Environmental issues
coupled with poverty and underdevelopments, which are both serious threats to the individual's
security as well, have become ready-made motivators of insecurities in Nigeria.
Further to the above, poverty is often regarded as most significant threat to life and human
security. Through famine and hunger, poverty has heightened the vulnerability to other threats by
creating unfavourable structural economic conditions. Therefore, poverty can kill directly in huge
numbers when people are unable to secure sufficient food, as well as precipitate and motivate the
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
69
poor into taking up terrorism, banditry and monstrous herdsmen killings as a means to surviving
economically. Poverty, therefore, as it was, does not simply mean a lack of material possessions, but,
more generally, the deprivation of the three basic economic needs: food, water and shelter
(Akinrinde, 2016a; 2016b). Historically, the immediate economic threat to food security, over time,
has always been famine. Famines chiefly occur due to the combination of both natural and economic
factors. Since, it is manmade phenomenon, they are sometimes economically motivated (Hough,
2004). An inadequate political response of governments to challenge of food insecurity has also been
a critical issue. It seems though that the overall accessibility of food is not the problem, but rather
poor distribution and the lack of the economic means or access to affordable food. The implications of
food insecurity or famine are multifold. The desperate attempt by victims of food insecurity to resort
to profitable criminal activities with a view to meeting their food needs. This explains why the Nigerian
state has the highest number of Almajirs (a group of northern children and teens whom have been
abandoned by their parents and have consequently resorted to street begging). The key to solving the
issue is to tackle the problems relating to access to resources, employment and secure revenue.
Furthermore, a malnourished population is generally more susceptible to diseases, making concerns
about healthcare closely related to the issue of poverty, especially in third world countries.
Against the backdrop of the aforementioned human security threats and variables that readily
precipitate the triangle of insecurity in Nigeria, some proponents of human security also include
various other issues, such as natural disasters, bad leadership and electoral violence.
The human security approach, like every other paradigm, has had its fair share in criticisms and
queries. Its critics have however argued that, if all the components of well-being are included, the
term will become essentially meaningless, as it permits the inclusion of practically everything that
affects any larger group of individuals adversely (Terriff, 1999). Human security has also been criticised
for being little more than a way for activists to promote certain causes, and that the term is
impractical, as it does not advance the frontiers of the understanding of the meaning of security.
Furthermore, human security could be regarded as mere polemic that seeks to provoke greater
discussions, at both political and public levels, without necessarily seeking to incubate more policy
initiatives.
Again, one of the major reasons for including non-traditional challenges into security considerations
is the hunt by analysts for new issues and threats to fill the void left by the end of the Cold War
(Terriff, 1999). Equally, contributions to global campaigns against AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis are
being criticised for having as the only aim political stabilisation of certain strategically important
African countries, while the enhancement of human security is only a welcomed side-effect. Thus,
securitisation of infectious diseases, as well as that of environmental and economic issues, can be
seen as merely considering the implications of these problems for state security rather than the
general security of individuals, which implies that some human security studies ultimately follow the
logic of traditional security studies.
4. Conclusion
Towards a new theorisation on the intersecting parallels of social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s
failed national security objectives, it has been established here that human security paradigm now
represents and offers empirically robust theoretical frame and lens in which the rationale and
immediate motivations for the rise and prevalence of insecurities remain constant in recent times.
Immediate motivations such as environmental degradation, poverty, poor healthcare system,
leadership deficit and electoral violence (‘lack of freedom from fear and want’) are not just major
threat to the lives of many people, but also catalysts and motivating factors for the manifestation of
larger insecurities. Thus, the inextricable linkage between poverty, inequalities, social deprivations,
environmental degradation, social injustice, food insecurity and famine, as well as leadership deficits,
electoral violence and the triangle of the three larger insecurities of Boko Haram insurgency, banditry
and the killer herdsmen terror are best captured in the human security paradigm.
Akinrinde, O. O (2020). Social injustice, corruption and Nigeria’s national security quest: A theoretical discourse. Global Journal of Sociology:
Current Issues. 10(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.18844/gjs.v10i2.4997
70
Acknowledgement
The author acknowledges the guidance and academic mentoring from Professors Bolaji Omitola,
Usman Tar and Associate Professor John Agbonifo.
References
Akinrinde, O.O (2016a). The use of advertorial curses in soft crime prevention. Annals of Social Sciences, 3(2).
Akinrinde (2016b). Nigeria-South Africa relations: a case study of the xenophobic attacks (Unpublished Master’s
Thesis). Submitted to the Department of Political Science, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Burton, J. (1979). Deviance, terrorism and war: the process of solving unsolved social and political problems. New
York: St. Martin’s Press.
Hough, P. (2004). Understanding global security. New York: Routledge.
Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission Reports, 2009.
May, J., Woolard, I. & Klasen, S. (2000). The nature and measurement of poverty and inequality. In J. May (Ed.).
Poverty and inequality in South Africa: meeting the challenge (pp. 19–50). Cape Town, South Africa: David
Philip.
Nieftagodien, N. (2008). Xenophobia in Alexandra. In S. Hassim, T. Kupe, E. Worby (Eds.), Go home or die here:
violence, xenophobia and the reinvention of difference in South Africa (pp. 65–78). Johannesburg, South
Africa: Wits Press.
Pillay, D. (2008). Relative deprivation, social instability and cultures of entitlement. In S. Hassim, T. Kupe, E.
Worby (Eds.), Go home or die here: violence, xenophobia and thereinvention of difference in South Africa
(pp. 93–104). Johannesburg, South Africa: Wits Press.
Terriff, T. (1999). Security studies today. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
The Economist Repots, November 11, 2006.
World Poverty Clock Report (2020). Poverty reports across the world.
