NC DWI Laws and Administrative Codes

Here are various laws and codes relating to North Carolina Driving While Impaired (DWI) Law:

N.C.G.S. 20-138.1 is the Impaired Driving statute that makes it a crime to “drive” (which means, operates) any vehicle upon any highway, any street, or any public vehicular area within North Carolina:

While under the influence of an impairing substance; or [appreciable impairment by alcohol or any other substance]

After having consumed sufficient alcohol that he has, at any relevant time after the driving, an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. The results of a chemical analysis shall be deemed sufficient evidence to prove a person’s alcohol concentration; or With any amount of a Schedule I controlled substance, as listed in G.S. 90-89, or its metabolites in his blood or urine. [opiates, whether prescribed or not]

N.C.G.S. 20-138.2 is the Commercial Driving Impaired Driving statute. Instead of a.08, it merely requires a showing of.04 Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) while operating a commercial vehicle.

N.C.G.S. 20-138.3 is the Provisional Impaired Driving Statute for people under the age of 21 at the time of the offense. A person may be charged with both a standard DWI and a Provisional DWI. Odor is insufficient unless the driver was provided the opportunity to blow into a machine and failed to do so. North Carolina has a zero-tolerance rule, which means that any amount of alcohol can result in a Driving After Consuming conviction.

N.C.G.S. 20-138.4 effectively makes it difficult, if not impossible, to have a DWI charge reduced in most places in North Carolina. That’s because this provision requires the prosecutor who reduces the charge to make a comprehensive report to his boss – the elected District Attorney – the court system in the court shuck and to the Administrative Office of the Courts.

N.C.G.S. 20-179 governs sentencing under 20-138.1, 20-138.2 or a second or subsequent conviction under 20-138.2A or 20-138.2B (North Carolina’s zero tolerance rules for Bus or Commercial Vehicle Operation). As described elsewhere in on this site, this section sets out the Aggravating, Grossly Aggravating, and Mitigating factors that can be used in sentencing, as well as the six levels of punishment, and the various fees, fines, and jail times that can be imposed.

N.C.G.S. 20-139.1 establishes the procedures by which a chemical analysis may be taken under North Carolina’s implied consent laws. An implied consent chemical analysis requires, among other things, that the person be informed of his or her rights (and be provided with a written list of rights, and be allowed a waiting period prior to the breath or blood analysis. North Carolina uses two types of analysis – breath and blood, although there is a provision for urine analysis that I’ve never seen used. The section also deals with the admissibility of the results (or refusal to take the test) at trial, and provides time limits for the defense to object after having been provided notice at prior to trial.

N.C.G.S. 20-16.2 is usually read along with N.C.G.S. 20-139.1 to establish North Carolina’s implied consent provisions. This section deals with the driver’s obligation to produce a sample in the event of an implied consent criminal charge, the person’s rights to a Refusal Hearing if the officer has deemed the person to have refused and the limited right to a hearing in Superior Court if the DMV Refusal Hearing Officer decides against the driver and revokes his or her license for one-year for refusing to submit a sample.

N.C.G.S. 20-19 is a general statute granting the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to suspend or revoke licenses, including for implied consent offenses and including for refusal to submit to a breathalyzer or chemical analysis at the time of an implied consent offense. In addition, this section instructs the DMV to place restrictions on the license once it is restored so that the person may not have.04 or more BAC for a period of time after having his driving privileges restored following a DWI conviction.

N.C.G.S. 20-141.4 creates a felony (Felony Death by Vehicle) in cases where the person unintentionally cases the death of another person, while engaging in impaired driving, and where the DWI was a proximate cause of the death. The section also creates additional felonies where serious injury results from a DWI offense.

N.C.G.S. 20-138.5 creates a felony where the person has been convicted of three or more impaired driving offenses (DWIs) in the preceding 10 years of the date of the current offense.

N.C.G.S. 20-17.6 governs how DMV will restore a license after a conviction for driving while impaired (DWI) or driving while less than 21 years old after consuming drugs or alcohol. Essentially, the Division of Motor Vehicles must receive a certificate of completion for alcohol treatment.

N.C.G.S. 20-17.8 governs the imposition of an Interlock Device (where the BAC was a.15 or higher) and the restoration of driving privileges after a DWI with an Interlock Device.

N.C.G.S. 20-16.3 permits an officer to request a Preliminary or Portable Breath Test (PBT) prior to arrest, but after the car has been stopped and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the driver has consumed alcohol. If the driver refuses to submit to this handheld breath test, the driver’s refusal may be used against him in court (although his license will not be suspended for refusal to submit to the PBT).

N.C.G.S. 20-28.2 and N.C.G.S. 20-28.3 allow the State to confiscate a person’s vehicle (through a civil forfeiture process) where the driver had previously been convicted of a DWI and had his license suspended or where the person was driving on a suspended/revoked or without a license and had no insurance at the time of the DWI even if it was the first DWI. This section describes the process for forfeiture, as well as defenses available to “innocent owners” who may be people who also have a property interest in the vehicle (such as a parent, or spouse) and were unaware of the fact that driver was in violation of the law.

N.C.G.S. 20-16.3A permits North Carolina police agencies to establish roadblocks pursuant to “a written policy that provides guidelines for the pattern, which need not be in writing” (whatever the heck that means!).

N.C.G.S. 20-28.9 grants the Department of Public Instruction the authority to tow, store, and sell vehicles seized as part of a DWI offense.

N.C.G.S. 20-16.5 creates a Civil Revocation in the event of an implied consent offense where the person’s BAC was high enough, or where the person refused. The Civil Revocation is usually 30 days, although may be longer. This section also establishes the guidelines by which someone can request Limited Driving Privileges during the Civil Revocation period.

N.C.G.S. 20-23.2 says that North Carolina will recognize the conviction of a DWI or impaired driving offense in a federal court the same as if the offense had resulted in a conviction in a State court.

N.C.G.S. 20-179.3 permits Limited Driving Privileges in certain DWI cases, either with an interlock device (if the BAC was a.15 or higher) or without and for certain purposes only.

N.C.G.S. 20-17.3 revokes a person’s license for purchasing or attempting to purchase alcohol beverages for underage persons.

N.C.G.S. 20-36 places a ten year limit on how long the DMV may consider prior convictions or implied-consent refusals (except in cases involving holders of commercial vehicle licenses).

N.C.G.S. 122C?142.1 establishes the requirements for Substance Abuse Assessment agencies, including the requirements for various levels of treatment. For instance, if a person has no prior DWIs, did not blow a.15 or above, and does not have a substance abuse disability, the treatment facility must impose ADETS, the lowest level of treatment.

10A NCAC 41B are regulations established by the Department of Health and Human Services in North Carolina regarding the proper maintenance of the Intox EC/IR II (and other intoximeters devices) as well as the screening devices (PBTs) used by officers on the roadside.

N.C.G.S. 17C-10 requires that all “criminal justice officers” (Law Enforcement Officers) abide by certain basic law enforcement training (BLET) in order to be certified as law enforcement officers in North Carolina. The BLET is issued by the North Carolina Criminal Justice Education And Training Standards Commission, and includes within it the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests as established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Sometimes judges in North Carolina will say that NHTSA is not the law. That’s only partially true. Since the BLET adopts the SFSTs from NHTSA in their virtual entirety, NHTSA’s SFSTs are effectively the law in North Carolina.

N.C.G.S. 15A-534.2 is a pre-trial release statute that permits a magistrate to order a defendant held if he is too impaired to be released, and there is no sober person available to release him to.

Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr – What We Must Never Forget About the Man and His Resounding Message

Author’s program note. Only one song would do for this of all articles, the iconic anthem of the American Civil Rights Movement, “We Shall Overcome.”

It was not so much a song as a declaration of purpose and profound resolve, one that did not merely state and celebrate the destination… but constituted a collective pledge, renewed with each singing, that adherents were united in mind, body and purpose; for they would need all that, and more, as they moved towards the inspiring goal of equality, where people who were divided by tradition, at last forged unity from divisiveness.

“We Shall Overcome” is a protest song. The lyrics are derived from the refrain of a gospel song by Charles Albert Tindley. It was first published in the People’s Song Bulletin, a publication of People’s Songs, an organization of which Pete Seeger was the director. The song became associated with the Civil Rights Movement from 1959, when Guy Carawan launched it as the most famous, motivating, and ultimately elegiac song of the movement; their soaring battle hymn. It was what the oppressed people, their adherents and their resolute opponents heard when fire hoses were turned on them, dogs ordered to snarl and bite, and truncheons beat down upon the pilgrims sore beset.

There were many heroes in those days, but not yet a Hero who would rise above the others and become the very heartbeat of the movement, its public face and voice to the world.

That man had not yet emerged, but his first important moment was about to take place… in Birmingham, Alabama, where from a prison cell he was about to instruct his followers, his opponents, and a world oppressed by a panoply of civil rights abuses in what a man who believes in justice must do.

Consider this man now, on the threshold of history. He is mortal, frail, fragile, with profound doubts, hesitations and an acute consciousness of his inadequacies. He, like so many Heroes hoped that he would not have to be what he was in process of becoming; he hoped others would shoulder a substantial part of the burden. But History is infallible. It saw, as the individual did not, that this man could rise above his own demons and limitations… to become what the movement must have to succeed: a moral compass, a higher purpose, a complete humanity, and the ability to be beaten down, bitten, spat on, bruised, and beaten again – and yet love his tormentors, direct the anger of his people towards benign purpose, and always get up… showing that violence, any violence, could not stop him… and so would not stop the movement either. This was sublime! This was what the man was on this planet to do… though he did not entirely know this yet.

And so he went to the most bigoted city in America, likely the most segregated, the least hospitable to its black inhabitants, the city that taught the nation how to insult, condescend, intimidate, and, all too often, to kill people of color for being born and being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It was the capital of every finely turned, exquisite form of segregation and haters of every kind looked first to Birmingham as the citadel of their embittered beliefs, the fortress for immemorial hate that every black citizen knew only too well.

And so Martin Luther King, Jr. went to Birmingham as he went to so many fateful destinations… because it was necessary, because it was the right thing to do, because the people needed succor and relief and he had that to give and to spare.

The Birmingham event was a planned non-violent protest conducted by the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights and King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference against racial segregation by Birmingham’s city government and downtown retailers. He was among the first arrested… the first taken harshly, insistently to his “suite” in Birmingham City Jail. It had to be a shock, jolting, demeaning, insulting, humiliating for this man who so loved life and life’s pleasures, more accustomed to the Word of God than the execration of man.

But he had something to say, something which he had clearly thought about for some time, because he wrote without hesitation its profound message of import to all the world and its downtrodden.

King responds to eight white Alabama clergyman who opposed his visit to Birmingham.

On that spring day eight local clergymen offered Dr. King the benefit of their erudition and desire to defuse the anxious situation and rescue the imperiled status quo. These leaders of the church did what so many such have done over the ages. Bereft of courage, with cloudy vision, and a desire to safeguard their own positions and pulpits, they wrote Dr. King to leave… to let things take their course… to stop the violence and be patient… it would be, they were quite clear, so much better so. They didn’t have to say it would be better for them…

Dr. King was bruised in body and spirit as he arrived at the city jail. He must have wondered how he came there and whether against so much hatred he could achieve his goal. He must have wondered, too, at how many people already relied upon him… and of the terrible sacrifices he might ask them to make, even unto death itself. At such a time, a man, any man, might so wonder and reflect.

But then he read the sentiments of these local clergymen about his mission to Birmingham, criticizing it as “unwise and untimely”. He read these words, and he knew at once what he must do… and so the words of high portent and unmistakable conviction came swiftly.

He started his response in the way any disagreeing minister might have addressed a colleague, professionally, directly, pointedly. But this was not destined to be such a letter between Christian clergy of differing views. He had a higher purpose, and it was soon apparent. He meant to remind (if they knew), to teach (if they didn’t) his fellow clerics a fundamental precept of their ministries. He aimed to show them, once, for all, clearly, that justice was their business, the very heart of their business and he meant his message to be stern, unequivocal, a bell summoning all to recognition of their profound duties.

First he reminded these clergymen of the South, with their regional blindness, that the issue was not Southern, but American – “Anyone who lives in the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds”. In short, what was happening in Birmingham and what made the demonstration necessary was not merely a Birmingham problem or a Southern problem… it was an American problem (not to mention by quick extension a universal problem of long suffering humanity.)

And so he built his case for action now point by irrefutable point, making the considered advice of the local clergy seem like what it was, a self-serving argument keeping the blacks in their place, patient in the face of intimidation, outrage, and a white wrath ready to explode into legally sanctioned outrages against black citizens at any time.

Thus did King find the voice of moral certainty, the voice which freed so many and which resulted in time in the sacrifice of his very life, taken by those who came to know him as the dreaded prophet of black deliverance, and so necessary to destroy.

“Injustice,” he trumpeted, “anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” The haters, the entrenched segregationists, the racial purists, the purveyors of inequitable laws and legal terrorism and abuse, for all that they wrote volumes in support of their unsustainable opinions never uttered a phrase so powerful as this… a phrase that showed just where right and a better future lay. He signed his soon-to-be-world- famous “Letter from Birmingham City Jail”, “Yours for the cause of Peace and Brotherhood” and had it smuggled out in a toothpaste tube to avoid the jail’s guards.

Now this man has morphed into mythology with a grandiose civic temple for his observances. The architect Chinese artist Lei Yixin has been criticized for his work. No matter. Any architect’s work and vision would have found censure in the eyes of the jealous others who were not selected. But the truth is, this monument will soon be amongst the most popular, for all that the great monuments to Jefferson, Lincoln, and Franklin D. Roosevelt are near at hand.

“Now,” borrowing Edward Stanton’s words on Lincoln, King “belongs to the ages.” Here his greatest challenge will be in so inspiring those who follow in his footsteps, that his timeless message remains timely and is not forgotten by all those so beholden to the man who is now enshrined among the worthies of the Great Republic his life’s work so enhanced.

Genocide – Yesterday, Today And Tomorrow

Hitler was accused of this, even Saddam Hussein was hanged for the same, and this made Lemkin to combine two words from two different languages to evolve a new terminology. What is it, that when uttered turns the gooseflesh of an individual? Is this term worth so much effort and innovation that it has gobbled the minds of the globe’s most efficient organizations?

In the Age of Extremes, in a period when the World Wars were witnessed and there were a series of State sponsored murders; the mid-century scholars were groping for a new word to describe the gruesome events. In the meantime Lemkin evolved a new terminology “GENOCIDE” replacing the older one “Acts of Barbarity” by combining ‘genos’, (a Greek term used for family, tribe, race ) and ‘cide’ (from a Latin term occide which meant to massacre).

Genocide is one of the worst crimes a government can commit against its citizens. Genocide was a new terminology but the act wasn’t new. Ben Kierman, A Yale Scholar labeled the destruction of Carthage at the end of the Third Punic War (149-146 B.C) as the “First Genocide”. This signifies that the barbaric acts have been a part of the society since ages. The most recent massacre is the Burma-Myanmar incident in the 21st century. But there is one common aspect in both the above incidents, i.e. Greed. It’s quite strange that in an era when the whole world is striving for brotherhood, some groups are on a mission to end the civilization.

In the wake of the Holocaust, Lemkin successfully campaigned for the universal acceptance of international laws defining and forbidding genocide. This was achieved in 1948, with the promulgation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG).

The CPPCG was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9th December 1948 and came into effect on 12th January 1951 [Resolution 260 (III)]. It contains an internationally-recognized definition of genocide which was incorporated into the national criminal legislation of many countries, and was also adopted by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Convention (in Article II) defines genocide as:

“…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

But despite having an International Treaty since sixty long years, we are still facing the problem of genocide which is getting worse with the passage of time. Thus leaving a trail of questions in our mind like if we have a Genocide Convention, why genocide still exists? What can individuals and nations do to prevent genocide?


At times brains gobble pertaining to the origin of the bloody form of holocaust, which is GENOCIDE. But have we ever tried to analyze within our so-called intelligent brains that where from this word genocide crept into our society? Is this a result of day to day increasing greed for power and position of some mischievous brains or it popped up suddenly on one fine day out of no where? Very much obvious the later reason can be completely gain said. If we recapitulate the past we can surely get our answers that how this form of mayhem actually evolved. There has been considerable research on why a perpetrator would want to destroy a group or, if not destroy the group as such, murder people because of their group membership. Motives are often complex and intertwined, but one can usually pull out among the mix a major motive

Genocide has been there in society since times immemorial. There are numerous incidents which knock the memory from time to time like the Nuremberg Trials, the Bosnian Genocide, Rwanda and the Darfur massacres. Even the Old Testaments have references of it in the genocide of Amelekites and Midianites.
But have we ever tried to analyze why genocide occurs? The answer is straight, only a few intellectual minds on the globe analyzed the reasons. Some intellectual brains have evolved by the very meaning of genocide i.e. killing based on race, group or nationality, that one of the main causes of genocide is the RACIAL PREJUDICE. The U.S.A has witnessed the fiery Holocaust in the early nineties. Holocaust expert David Cesarani argued that the government and policies of U.S.A against certain indigenous people constituted Genocide in the Western Hemisphere. Even the Jews were subjected to Hitler’s barbaric acts, the Kurds of Iraq faced the same from the then Dictator.

The racial prejudice is much influenced by the legalized racial segregation in the past. Racial segregation used to be characterized by separation of different races in daily life, such as eating in a restaurant, drinking from a water fountain, using a rest room, attending school, going to the movies, or in the rental or purchase of a home. Segregation may be mandated by law or exist through social norms. Segregation may be maintained by means ranging from discrimination in hiring and in the rental and sale of housing to certain races to vigilante violence such as lynching; a situation that arises when members of different races mutually prefer to associate and do business with members of their own race would usually be described as separation or de facto separation of the races rather than segregation. Legal segregation in both South Africa and the U.S. was required and came with “anti-miscegenation laws” (prohibitions against interracial marriage) and laws against hiring people of the race that is the object of discrimination in any but menial positions.

Segregation in hiring practices contributes to economic imbalance between the races. Segregation, however, often allowed close contact in hierarchical situations, such as allowing a person of one race to work as a servant for a member of another race. Segregation can involve spatial separation of the races, and/or mandatory use of different institutions, such as schools and hospitals by people of different races.

Another main cause of the mayhem is the Use of propaganda and mass media. With the technological advances in communication in 21st century unprecedented levels of education have become possible. However, rather than pursuing cooperative and egalitarian world views, ethnic nationalism has continually plagued the societies. I believe that the horrid level of violence in our world is perpetuated because ethnic nationalism has been used by the elite to incite racist violent malice. I believe that this division of humanity through equating specific historical events caused by the ruling elite with the decisions or personal responsibility of vast groups of people to be the primary vehicle governments has used to justify violence. The violence that occurred in 21st century has coincided with governmental use of propaganda. In every atrocity committed by large populations we have seen unilateral control of media used to dehumanize the persecuted and disenfranchised through appeals to ethnic nationalism.

Being a part of 21st century, when there have been several laws incorporated in various domestic laws against every kind of discrimination and racial attacks, is it feasible to consider the racial prejudice the only cause of genocide? The answer would a blunt “NO”.

In the era where there have been governments with strong laws enforced by the States all over the globe, how can racist group commit such a heinous act? The answer is quite relative; that no clan can commit such an act fearlessly unless it is state sponsored or rather say state approved. The infamous Darfur incident is more or less state sponsored. The humanitarian situation is worse than is still generally appreciated, due to ongoing state sponsored violence, layer of aid obstruction, lack of overall humanitarian strategic plan and weakened sate of displaced Sudanese.

The consistent denial of Indonesian Government of any genocidal activity despite missing of about 4 million West Papuans signifies the State sponsored mayhem. These acts, where the state plays a role quite gives an evidence that Genocide denial is normally conducted by those either committing or profiting from the genocide like that of Indonesia and its business partners. The Holocaust is the object of large-scale denial efforts (think about all the publications and money poured into the productions of the negationists). The Holocaust has become a near-universal cultural code for evil in the world, in the last half-century. This has made its denial attractive to a variety of groups who have no historical connection to the events.

Another incident of the state-sanctioned incitement to genocide, whose epicenter is Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad’s Iran, where the toxic advocacy of the most horrific of crimes is embedded in the most virulent of hatreds, the 1970 parliamentary elections in Pakistan that showed the political power of East Pakistan and threatened the control over it by West Pakistan, and the power of the military government. They thus militarily seized East Pakistan and murdered over a million Bengali leaders, intellectuals, professionals, and any Hindus that the military were able to capture, the strong resistance of the Ukrainian farmer to Stalin’s program of collectivization in 1931-32 coupled with the threat of Ukrainian nationalism to communist control. So, when what would have been a mild famine hit the region in 1932, Stalin magnified the famine many fold by seizing their food and its sources (livestock, pets, seed grain, shooting birds in the trees, etc.) and boycotting the import of food to Ukraine. Even visitors to Ukraine were searched and food taken away from them before they entered the Soviet Republic. About 5 million Ukrainians were starved to death.

And the case, when the Rwandan Hutu majority government undertook to murder all Tutsi within their reach at the time when there was turmoil resulting from a major 1991 incursion of the Tutsi expatriate Rwandan Patriotic Front in the northern part of the country, thus providing substantial explanation where it can be said that the major cause of genocide in the 21st century is the state itself motive being, to destroy a group that is perceived as a threat to the ruling power. Genocide is a word that stirs up the deepest emotion, an uncanny chill that makes one realize how inhumane humanity can sometimes be.


Mass slaughter of human beings by other human beings has been a recurrent phenomenon over the centuries. But until recently neither governments nor international legal specialists had sought to devise formal rules and institutions that could help prevent, or if necessary punish, the perpetrators of large-scale atrocities. The legal application of the term genocide first occurred in the indictment of the Nazi war criminals in the 1945-1946 Nuremberg Tribunal. They were indicted for “War Crimes” (Count Three), which included the “deliberate and systematic genocide; viz., the extermination of racial and national groups, against the civilian population of certain occupied territories in order to destroy particular races and classes of people, and national, racial, or religious groups, particularly Jews, Poles, and Gypsies.” Following the UN resolution of genocide, the question of an international genocide convention was referred to the UN Economic and Social Council. Their debate and deliberation ended in the 1948 UNCG, which came into force in 1951, and since then has been ratified by 133 states.

From the commencement of World War-I till 1938 common mass weren’t much aware of the new form of holocaust except those who actually experienced it i.e., the Armenians. Reason being they had little influence on the international legal arena. The League of Nations was formed but failed being a mere puppet at the hands of the Allied powers. Few other like Hague Agreement to confine aerial bombing to military targets, Geneva Protocols against use of poisonous gas, initiative to prosecute Heads of State (Germany, Turkey) for war crimes, etc were formed as well though majority of them failed to suffice the need of the hour.

But during the World War-II the world became cognizant of the deadly term “GENOCIDE.” As a result of which War Crimes Tribunals at Nuremberg and Tokyo, Nuremberg Charter recognized as customary international law; Genocide Convention, etc were established.

In December 1946 the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution denouncing genocide as “the denial of the right of existence of entire human groups” and describing it as, “contrary to moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations.” The resolution also set up a committee to draft an international treaty that would formally outlaw genocide. The result, after protracted and often arduous negotiations, was the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which was approved by the UN General Assembly on a 55-to-0 vote in December 1948. The Genocide Convention was slated to enter into force after twenty of the fifty-five UN member-states that voted in favor of it submitted their formal instruments of ratification. Although some signatories of the convention, notably the United States, took many years before they ratified it, ratification by the twentieth country was completed in October 1950, allowing the convention to take effect in January 1951. Since then the Genocide Convention is considered as the most applicable instrument to fight the future Holocausts.
From the time Lemkin’s book appeared, the term genocide has stirred controversy both in the public arena and among scholars. Lawyers, scholars, and political leaders have differed over the scope and nature of the crimes involved. Some, like Lemkin, have sought as broad a definition as possible, not limiting it to large-scale killing. Others, including many prominent historians and political scientists, have advocated a more restrictive definition, focusing on clear-cut cases of mass slaughter and attempts at systematic extermination. Still others have questioned whether genocide necessarily requires the targeting of a specific cultural, ethnic, racial, or linguistic group.

By excluding many of the worst abuses and crimes of the twentieth century, the requirement of a targeted cultural or ethnic group has arguably been the most controversial aspect of the concept of genocide. The very definition of the Genocide provided in Article 2 of the Convention has been subject to much discussion by the international legal personnels. The phrase “in whole or in part” has been subject to much discussion by scholars of international humanitarian law.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia found in Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstic – Trial Chamber I – Judgment – IT-98-33 (2001) ICTY8 (2 August 2001) that Genocide had been committed. In Prosecutor v. Radislav Krstic – Appeals Chamber – Judgment – IT-98-33 (2004) ICTY 7 (19 April 2004) paragraphs 8, 9, 10, and 11 addressed the issue of in part and found that “the part must be a substantial part of that group. The aim of the Genocide Convention is to prevent the intentional destruction of entire human groups, and the part targeted must be significant enough to have an impact on the group as a whole.” The Appeals Chamber goes into details of other cases and the opinions of respected commentators on the Genocide Convention to explain how they came to this conclusion.


The barbaric acts in the past, forced the authorities to come up with a neutral legislation which would empower the law enforcers to curb the mayhem i.e. Genocide. After much efforts the eminent authorities came up with the Genocide Convention which was enforced post World War II in 1951. The convention was the first modern human rights treaty, adopted only a day earlier than the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which set the common standards of achievement for human civilization. But the main question is, whether the convention has been able to suffice the motive?

Since the treaty has been enforced there have been numerous genocidal incidents like the massacre of the Cambodians, the mayhem on Bosnian Muslims, the Holocaust on the Tutsis in Rwanda, the infamous Bangladesh war, most lately the Burma-Myanmar incident and many other unnoticed incidents. So how would we rate the efficiency of the treaty enforcers?

Definitions of the crime of Genocide, such as those found within the body of international law or as interpreted within the pages of law journals, tend to emphasize a legal framework of mind.
Therefore have unique aims that other members of the academic community would not necessarily prioritize.

The main purpose of such a law, as in all other laws, was to present a practical tool for punishing those that have transgressed a codified set of rules, which in turn is based on a moral imperative agreed upon by members of a society. But such laws also need to be applied fairly. In consequence, a legal definition of Genocide must abide by the spirit of the moral law it purports to represent, but must also be necessarily restrictive in such a fashion that its implementation satisfies the basic requirements of fairness and justice.

The Genocide Convention then aims to present a set of non-negotiable rules by which a strict threshold of guilt must be met in order to punish the accused. And this dichotomy results in a closed and restricted definition of Genocide. This scientific approach has a purpose of creating a regulatory and formal environment for judging guilt.

It so happens that most member states of the United Nations are signatories of the Genocide Convention, more precisely named the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. By signing and ratifying the Genocide Convention, these governments have assumed a legal obligation (not just some vague moral obligation) both to prevent genocide and to punish perpetrators of genocide. The convention continues to fail is in its task of preventing genocide on a large scale. Although the duty is set out in the convention, opinions differ about just how far it may extend. Put bluntly, are states required, as a legal obligation, to take action up to and including military intervention in order to prevent the crime from occurring?

The outrage over Iran’s hosting of a Holocaust denial conference has tended to overshadow what should be a greater outrage: Iran’s state-sanctioned incitement to commit genocide. Simply put, the denial of genocide became a media event, but incitement to genocide in violation of the prohibition against the “direct and public incitement to commit genocide” in the Genocide Convention, the “never again” convention, was greeted with a yawn.

Is this what we would call the stand of the Genocide Convention even after sixty years of its establishment? The convention though neutrally framed for the world yet has turned into a pet of selected few. The humanitarian situation is worse than is still generally appreciated. In practice, the Genocide Convention has been pretty much a dead letter (as the world’s current response to Darfur illustrates all too well). There have been few occasions when outside intervention interrupted large-scale mass murder while it was still happening. But in virtually all those cases, and in all the cases that involved serious military conflict, this was a side-effect of military interventions carried out for other strategic or political purposes.

Furthermore, the record of the so-called “international community” in bringing mass murderers to justice has not been very inspiring. Sometimes real politics plays a role here. In the case of Cambodia, even after the Khmer Rouge were dislodged from most of Cambodia by the Vietnamese they continued to get recognition and support for years from the US and China, as well as sanctuary across the border in Thailand. They were also allowed to keep control of Cambodia’s UN seat until 1993. All of which were unforgivable, but not astonishing. Within Cambodia, the new rulers installed by the Vietnamese, who are still running the country, were ex-Khmer Rouge themselves, and this may partly explain why they have showed little enthusiasm for trials that would revisit old times. Apart from that the holocaust in Burma-Myanmar has been barely subjected to any kind of trial. Decades after the Cambodian bloodbath, the mass murderers are still at loose. The assassination of Saddam Hussein and the U.S.A army taking over Iraq seemed more or less a part of a longing profitable business.

Indian Perspective

There have been similar incidents in India too where no international community has taken a firm step against it. The infamous Nandigram, India incident in short has just been left stranded to be a ball in the media’s court. The long discussion regarding the Kashmir issue has been a mere issue which is only used for hype and publicity. Geneva Convention is not at all respected in the Kashmir Valley. There are umpteen numbers of human rights violation cases recorded. Muslims killing Kashmiri Pundits is one aspect. Indian Security Forces have scant regard for humanitarian law. The do not stick to the norms laid down by the Geneva Convention in dealing with the prisoners of war. Only in Doda in the year 1994 two hundred women were raped. Rape continues to be a major instrument of Indian repression against the Kashmiri people while the majority of casualties in Kashmir are civilians. A total of 72,077, representing nearly 98 per cent of the Pundit population, were driven out of Kashmir due to ethnic cleansing. 9,309 homes have been burned down along with 1,659 small businesses. The sad part is that the Kashmir issue gets so wrapped up in global concerns on one side and obfuscated by massive state-sponsored propaganda on the other that so few people know about the tragic state of Kashmiri Pundits.

What happened in Gujarat was not a spontaneous uprising; it was a carefully orchestrated attack against Muslims. The Godhra, Gujarat massacre in India has been just news and a mere matter to express the grief of the so-called “international community” leaving thousands of Indian Muslims dead and helpless. Aren’t these the acts of Genocide? Where is the Genocide Convention playing a role to achieve its goal of curbing the heinous act of genocide worldwide?

The crime of genocide in domestic law and the domestic prosecution of persons committing genocide are subjects of international significance. Correspondingly, the failure of nations to enact laws against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes are matters of international concern. For example, in April 1999, a Swiss court threw out the charge of genocide in the trial of Rwandan mayor, Fulgence Niyonteze, because the crime of genocide was not at that time a part of Swiss law. Many countries have more effective laws for air piracy (hijacking) than for genocide.
The failure of countries to prosecute or extradite perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes has become a matter of tremendous international interest since the October 1998 arrest of former Chilean dictator Pinochet in the United Kingdom on Spanish charges of torture and genocide. Pinochet was released in March 2000 and allowed to return to Chile, but his case has become a crucial turning point in the effort to bring an end to impunity for torture, genocide and other international crimes.

The Security Council is entitled to intervene, or to authorize intervention in order to prevent persecution of ethnic minorities. Since the end of the Cold War, the Security Council cannot be seriously questioned regarding the same. Here we can somewhat say that the starting point was Resolution 688, authorizing the use of force against Iraq in order to protect the Kurdish minority from atrocities. Though late but there have been attempts to save the Burma-Myanmar Genocide victims. But the issue is not whether the international community may intervene but rather whether it must intervene when a group protected by the Genocide Convention is threatened with extermination.

Its better late then never, the anguish within the international community as the reaction to the genocide victims and its deliberate and honest efforts implies that there will be prompt action to prevent a future genocide.


The failure to prevent past genocides caused UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to lament as follows on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide in 2004: “We must never forget our collective failure to protect at least 800,000 defenseless men, women and children who perished in Rwanda 10 years ago. Such crimes cannot be reversed. Such failures cannot be repaired. The dead cannot be brought back to life. So, what can we do?”

The answer is for the international community to pay heed to the early warnings of genocide – and incitement has been demonstrated to be a predictor of the genocide to come – and to act now, as mandated under the Genocide Convention, to prevent this clear and present danger, not only to Israel and the Jewish people, but to international peace and security.

The international community needs to review on few matters regarding the weakened application of the Genocide Convention. There should be serious amendments in the meaning of genocide stated under Article II of the convention in order to broaden its scope. With the passage of time the technology is racing in full throttle so is the criminal minds. The holocaust is not at all restricted but growing along with technology which has given rise to new terminology such as democide, populicide, politicide, etc.

The law and politics of genocide stagnated for several decades following the adoption of the convention in 1948. The thinking and writing about its scope since 1948 have been meager and sometimes superficial, with a few notable exceptions. When the horrors of ethnic conflict became the scourge of the last decade of the millennium, the convention was, so to speak, hauled off the shelf and dusted off. Unlike other human rights treaties, there has been no “treaty body” or committee charged with ensuring the Genocide Convention’s implementation and helping to define its content.

Despite being a member of the treaty, the member states treat the Convention like a dead- letter. What is really required is a formal recognition of the duty to intervene to prevent genocide. That would require serious amendments of the Genocide Convention through the UN and a serious enforcement of the same in the state laws individually. Whatever the means is, if the message is clear it will be taken as authoritative interpretation of the convention’s obligation to prevent genocide. Political scientist R. J. Rummel described the concept of Democide not with an intention that the world would be cognizant of the term but to alert the international community of the fast growth and broadening ambit of the Holocaust.

Genocide have tended to wholly equate it with the murder and only the murder by government of people due to their national, ethnical, racial or religious (or, what is called indelible) group membership. This way of viewing genocide has become so ingrained that it seems utterly false to say. The crime leaders have invented new ways to suffice their lust for hue and cry.
A human being is complete when he has his body and soul together, if one of them dies the existence of a human is completely worthless. The presence of soul and conscience makes a person different from an animal. Isn’t the continuous growth of rape victims, compelling the downtrodden to commit suicide (the increasing rate of rapes through out the world, the suicide of Indian farmers) by the corrupt officials and the government burying their heads in the sand instead of solving the problem, commit mass-murder impliedly? The convention needs to be more focused on the new genre of mayhem with the appointment of innovative monitoring staff to keep a prompt eye on occurrence world wide. In an era of globalization, the United States alone cannot exert effective pressure on the government of a despotic nation without multilateral cooperation. The international effort to combat tyranny worldwide lies solely in words, not actions, as evidenced by the refusal of rest of the world nations to take a strong stand against the Government indulged in genocidal activities. From classification to organization, preparation through extermination, genocide is something that the whole world has witnessed. Stopping genocide during its first six stages is more logical than attempting to stop it during its seventh stage, extermination. As a global community it is our job to learn these steps, so when the phases of genocide begin we can prevent them from progressing and save millions of lives.

Genocide is first and foremost a crime (and only secondarily a historical event or sociological process). Therefore a judgment as to whether a specific act is an act of genocide should eventually be made by a court having jurisdiction over the crime. When a crime is ongoing (or when the perpetrators are likely to repeat the offense) of special urgency is the duty of governmental authorities to enforce the law by acting to halt or suppress the crime. In such cases enforcing the law means protecting potential victims and apprehending suspected perpetrators.

War isn’t this century’s biggest killer. It’s the human being themselves who are the killers as turning there heads away from their responsibility to stand as one against the crime of genocide. Once the common mass starts raising their voice against the crime no body would dare to commit such heinous crime in future.

Sexual Assault in the Military Justice System

What Are the Ramifications of the Changes in Article 120, U.C.M.J. to the Legal System?

The change of the name of this Article, effective October 1, 2007 to “Rape, sexual assault and other sexual misconduct” leaves very few loop holes in what the Article represents.

The name wasn’t the only significant change either, as the new Article now includes 36 potential offenses that replace all prior ones under the original Article but also include offenses that were originally found under Article 134. The offenses, as they are laid out in this Article, are clear and concise, and leave very little room for debate as to what they apply to. Although many offenses that were found in the previous Article remain intact, the changes that were made have serious impacts on the offenses themselves.

Examples of those changes include:

  • Consent is basically no longer a major issue when it comes to rape charges. This modification means, in part, that if the victim did not fight back during an alleged rape, it does not automatically mean that consent had been given.
  • With respect to the offence of carnal knowledge, if the child was 12 or over, a defense argument that the accused believed the individual was at least 16 can be used. This defense can now be used in other offenses such as sexual assault, abusive sexual contact, and indecent liberty (all pertaining to a child).
  • An affirmative defense is also permissible in a mistake of fact circumstance.
  • Mistake of fact as to consent is being allowed as an affirmative offense, but the burden of proof is upon the accused.

There are just a few examples of several changes that took place. Although updating the law and keeping it current with the crimes of the time is critical, we must also consider the burden to the legal system to keep up and implement these changes. This includes the upgrading and educating of law enforcement officials, defense attorneys, prosecutors, and judges.

If each of these divisions of the law do not bring themselves up-to-date, we risk not only the miscarriage of justice, but a great deal of time and money spent needlessly on long court proceedings. Learning, enforcing, and testing the validity of substantial changes to law requires a great deal of time. It also establishes a new precedent for cases built and defended or prosecuted on the strength of case law. With so many new enforcements, it will take several years before case law pertaining to the new Article 120 becomes effective.

So does this mean that laws should not be changed? While laws must keep up with the times, one wonders if it would not be far more beneficial to change laws in accordance with contemporary needs. If a new form of crime is becoming evident and consistent, would it not be more prudent to address this in the laws at the time this became fact, and allow those in the legal system to adjust on an ongoing basis rather than in one fell swoop, and with such major impact?

Understanding Youth Conflict And Sustainable Initiative Model (Part 1)

Conflict is a natural phenomenon, it is as old as mankind, and conflict is a state of discord caused by the actual or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests. A conflict can be internal (within oneself) or external (between two or more individuals). Conflict as a concept can help explain many aspects of social life such as social disagreement, conflicts of interests, and fights between individuals, groups, or organizations. Conflicts in social settings can result to stress or tensions among stakeholders, seen as working towards certain goals. When interpersonal conflicts occur, its effect is often broader than two individuals involved, and can affect collective individual needs and relationships in more or less adverse and sometimes even humorous way.

Conflict is one of the major concerns not only in any given continent, it also affect the international community as well. Conflict is simply the absence of peace, and the successive introduction of diversify sense of humor of people within the context of a community or society. If this is the case then, what are the root causes of conflict? Let me approach this issue from an African viewpoint, especially with the Niger Delta Area of Nigeria as a case study. Conflict does not mean people engaging in riots, or situation of economic inhumanity or the expression of calculated grievances, conflict could be within a person. Regardless of the nature of conflict, whether within or without transcends our mere study of individualized conflict escalation.

Scholars, peace and security experts, and conflict management professionals have brainstormed on several recurrent and perpetuated conflicts involving the Ageing, youths and the Government. Answers to this has been quite cumbersome; the least in mind includes but not limited to the following:

o Inadequate Resources
o Environmental and economic degeneration etc.
o Communal attitudes
o Social and economic dilemmas
o Uneven distribution of scare resources
o Environmental degradation and spills
o Government’s lukewarmness in community and Ariel developments
o Lack of Social Infrastructures etc.
o Boundaries Problems
o Inter/intra communal clashes

It is true that after a young man/woman complete his/her studies, the expectation is to get a job and start well in their various careers. A government that denies the timid and all encompassing youths these adequate supports, entrepreneurial guidance and civil liberties; the outcome in most cases have always resulted to nationwide or sectarian violence, militancy and piracy. When expectations are high and strategically become impossible such as unavailable access to resources; resultant outcome could emanates to sequential riots, theft just to mention a few. Sickness can cause conflict especially from within an individual. In an instance where people get ill and cannot afford proper Medicare or inability to access available treatments within the area, internal crisis evolves and this is called “the Preliminary stage of conflict”.

A clash of interests, values, actions or directions often sparks a conflict; a conflict refers to the existence of that clash. Psychologically, conflict exists when the reduction of one motivating stimulus result to an increase in another, that requires new set of variable adjustment in needs and characteristic factors. A potential conflict situation does imply that there is already a conflict of direction, even though a clash may not yet have occurred. Conflict however depicts, in a crude and academic parlance, a natural disagreement resulting from individuals or groups that differ in attitudes, beliefs, values or needs. It is needless to note that there are varying causes of conflict, some of which are indicative and known, while others are synergic and morphological.

Some basic way to deal with conflicts, apart from its detailed analysis in our preceding chapters can be based on the following:

– Accommodation – surrender one’s own needs and wishes to accommodate the other party.
– Avoidance- avoid or postpone conflict by ignoring it, changing the subject, etc. avoidance can be useful as a temporary measure to buy time or as an expedient means of dealing with very minor, non-recurring conflicts. In more severe cases, conflict avoidance can involve severing a relationship or leaving a group.
– Collaboration – work together to find a mutually beneficial solution to conflict, this has to be built on an appropriate trust, respect or communication among participants.
– Compromise – find a middle ground in which each party is partially satisfied.
– Positive competition asserting one’s viewpoint at the potential expense of another can be useful when achieving one’s objectives outweighs one’s concern for the relationship. It is quite important that these competences need to be built among the young generation to enable them to make rational decisions.

Youth violence is a result of the high percentage of unemployment. Young people today in various facets of the Nigerian Economic and the socio-political life are normally misused by politician especially during electoral campaign period for their selfish and political gains. The best way to curb violence is to educate youths and young people in non-violence and in their rights as individuals and the need to embrace peace. They should be empowered on the importance of protecting their country against misuse by political bigwigs to gain political mileage and cause ethnic divisions.


Nigerians, and the youth in particular are vexed by issues of massive unemployment and underemployment across the Niger Delta. It is not that they are ignorant of it nor of its attendant socio-economic dehumanization of people across the nation but to inform the present government that the time has come to make it a national experience of the past and no more of the present. Statistics abound in the records of the World Bank, Transparency International and other Monitoring International Organizations of the alarming rate of unemployment in the country. There is no need to go into intellectual and statistical exercise in this discussion, but to put this matter raw as there are numerous victims of this quagmire in the area, whom I have personally interviews before anything else. Over 60% of Niger Delta active and highly productive populations are out of employment.

Since 1982 there has been overt embargo on Federal and State government employment. Think of the army of youths graduating from secondary and tertiary institutions that are shut out of jobs bearing in mind that the low level and degradable state of industrialization naturally makes Government the highest employer of labour. Even children born in 1983 up to 1990s are now men and women enlisted involuntarily into the army of the unemployed and socio-economically dehumanized of Nigeria. As citizens of this great nation, an average Nigerian consciousness has been thwarted, and has now become citizens of an otherwise resource rich country. This is the irony of Nigerians, yet we stifle like the poorest nations in Africa

The private sector was a viable employer of labour until the early 1980s when Nigeria’s huge trade deficit and international debt burdens literally shut off importation of vital raw materials for production. Gradually many otherwise buoyant companies either folded up or staggered on far below their productive capacity. The inevitable consequence of this was mass retrenchment of workers and closed doors to fresh employments. Again we dare say that the indigenization Decree as patriotic as it was to a large extent turned over foreign owned businesses to Nigerians but failed to consider our experience and technical abilities to profitably run these businesses. These businesses went under throwing their employees into the labour market. In my sustainable development proposal, I suggested that the youths of Niger Delta should be engaged through skill acquisition institutions and programmes, which should instill in the youth the necessary technical capacities and manpower.

Unemployment in the cities has mutually, inclusive of its relationship with the macro economic lives of the rural population where statistics which have shown that majority of Nigerians reside in abject poverty and economic sagacity. Our rural population still produces at subsistence level and depends heavily on financial repatriations from kinsmen and women in the cities to finance education, health care and other financially intensive projects.

To this end, unemployment in the government and the industrial sectors has had multiplier effect on our huge rural population, creating a sour scenario of an idle but virile economic population. Thanks to Nigerians in the European and American Diasporas who through thick and thin repatriate home millions of Pounds and Dollars annually to keep families alive. The consequences of massive unemployment in Nigeria are to say the least ominous.


Transparency international in 2005 ranked Nigeria as 152 of the world 157 poorest nations, as more than 50% of Nigerians live under $1 per day. There is no blackmail in this as we see sorry evidence of poverty in urban and rural areas. The world bank also estimates that only 1% of Nigerians benefit from the countries huge oil revenue, the bulk of our oil revenue end up in white elephant projects like the Festival of Arts and Culture embarked upon by the General Obasonjo administration in 1977; while others end up in frivolous contracts and in private accounts abroad. The FESTAC edifice in Lagos called the National Theater is now a den of Robbers and Public toilet. What a waste!

A miserable and unbalanced meal a day is now luxury in most homes, accommodation in urban areas is a mirage for most Nigerians, as we cannot afford galloping house rents. Medicare is beyond the reach of Nigerians as our dilapidated hospitals are mere consultation and prescription centers. Helpless Nigerians leaves the hospitals without money to procure their drugs, some of us before the day go dark, resort to primitive unscientific concoctions and millions die in the process.

Many of our people who are lucky to secure European and American visas flee out of the country to take up menial jobs abroad. Every responsible Government strives to provide her people with the basics of life such as food and shelter. While we suffer under man made poverty, our political leaders go on jamborees abroad with public funds and even flaunt their opulence before our very faces.

It is imperative to note that, with the way things are going, politically, socially and economically, we have come naturally to the elastic limit of our national endurance. Most Nigerians during election and on the ballot consciously elected their Hancock leaders for a turn around in their fate to restore DIGNITY to their fellow countrymen as embodied in our National Anthem and in their oath of office.


In every country or even community youths are the engines of socio-economic development. Age gives the youth the advantage of strength, motivation, innovation and adventure. An ageing population is a spent force. It has mainly experience to give to the society, and is obviously less productive than the youths. Economically youths are 70% of the work force and any country that neglects this fact and depends on the ageing population through the recycling process is destined for doom.

Through employment embargoes in the Public Service spanning over 25years now and the failure of the private sector to actively engage in reasonable production millions of Niger Delta youths are rendered idle and unproductive, thereby resorting to militancy, kidnapping and other social vices too many to be mentioned here. There are cases of Nigerian graduates who have remained unemployed for over ten years. In most cases they went through Federal Educational institutions with public funds by way of Government subsidies and capital investments in these institutions. The result is a colossal waste of valuable public funds and productive labour necessary for the socio-economic advancement of the nation.

The neglect of the youths in the economic process of this country has so many socio-economic consequences, economic revival and growth despite several government visionary programmes will continue to remain a mirage. The Nation’s youths are impoverished and their remix for survival have become ready agents of destruction, anarchy and confusion in the service of the privileged few who are mostly politicians.

Many of our youths are now experts in international scam called ‘419’ and the ‘Yahoo-Yahoo’ panorama in Nigeria. This activity of Nigerian youths which was born out of a degenerated national economy has become an anathema to our country; created international loss of confidence in Nigeria and its people and has scared away much needed foreign capital and enterprise.

In our present day nascent democratically coined due process/rule of law mechanism, the principle of succession and continuity is ignored in this country with fatal consequences. As the Youths are denied administrative, political and economic training and involvement in our nation, we are steadily heading towards anarchy because nature abhors vacuum and the aged will inevitably quit the stage someday for their inexperienced successors to run a jungle government. Is this not an Irony of a Nation?

The youths of America fights American battles, and answer patriotic calls to duty for what their country does for them. To have job, or being employed in America is not to go hungry or begging; their country cares for them in times of distress, while our experience in Nigeria is different. The leadership of our country has been very selfish, non visionary, insensitive to the youths and have killed in them every sense of patriotism and nationalism.

The purpose of this book is to provide an advocacy channel in the removal of every obstacle to foreign investment inherent in the indigenization decree, which is a part of the constitutional concurrent list of states’ fundamental rights in the country; liberalize further the economy, reduce unemployment to its barest minimum and move the nation out of its economic quagmire.

The present administration’s policies on the application of the 7 point Agenda is a challenge to the youths of Rivers State, Beyelsa, Edo, Ondo and elsewhere in other parts of Niger Delta, the East and South-South geo-political zones; underpinning this administration and its successive ones, several methods of political card-scoring techniques have been initiated. The masses have thrown their support on this current Yar ‘Adua/Jonathan Administration as they have collectively, with all hands on deck pulled down anti-progressive structures in our country that at best serve the interest of a few at the expense of the majority.

It is paramount to note that few things in the scheme of things is required to galvanize development in the nation, through the execution of three (3) or at least four (4) of the overall number 7-plus-2-point Agenda, and as long as governance is concern the masses actually do not have a clue on bent economic, political and socio-political issues in terms of development. This may be in their crude state, yet we cannot underscore the economic importance of the youth so far in Mr. President’s 7 point Agenda policy.

Nigerians’ hope for better patriotic governance is yet to come, but we must all work out modalities collectively towards sustaining our democracy and undivided federalism. The case is half solved if this administration through its think-tank is able to combine all technical and academic scholarship in result reaching goals. Non governmental organization, International donor agencies and Multinational Corporation can also share in the overall implementations of the MDGs and the 7-point Agenda; instead of hiding in the shadows of dirty politics. While donor agencies, NGOs and private philanthropic Organisation have be praised for a job well done in several communities, a handful of multi-national organization have received such recommendation in terms of civil/corporate responsibilities.

It is time we shake off this dust of stupidity, concentrate on our economy, politics, society, culture and people, other than going through an unfortunate marigold of our national taboo. While 78% of Nigerian may claim the “it is well” syndrome, many Nigerians are of the nation that our national development is eminent, without this our long-protected federalism is in jeopardy and the foundation of our people; in terms of unity and peace may linger anti-clockwise.


I may fail in my hypothesis to typically equate the sum-total of the overall reality principles of poverty, and wealth in correspondence with their aggravating limits in the Nigeria socio-economic dynamics. A lot of our activities in societies today can be defined by a sharp series of limitation on every living thing, at least those with corporate existence; the final boundary being death.

In the ideal world of matter, we only have so much energy to expend before our strength are gone or where we get tired, only so much in the way of food and resources is available to us; our skills and capacities can go only so far. Every one of us lives within the aforementioned limits, both the poor and the wealthy, in fact every living thing in the animal world live within this threshold. What differentiates us from animals is that while we are colossal replica of sufficient reason for our existence, and while we may have all the necessary reason bequeathed to all of the essential monads (we being subjects containing predicates). Though animals too have the same, yet minor sufficient monads for existence. It does not try to fly higher or run faster or expend endless energies amassing a pile of food (or in the case of man wealth), for that would exhaust it and leave it vulnerable to attack and other forms of degeneration and degradation. It simply tries to make the most of what it has. A monkey, for instance, instinctively practices an economy of motion and jumping, yet never wasting effort.

The above behooves the state of poverty, and the hypothesis we have exhausted so far explains all the exemplary variables, and their awareness of their limits, forced to make the most of what they have, they are endlessly inventive without efforts, yet accurate motion. Necessity has a powerful effect in their creativity.

Although the wealthy and affluent have course to remain contented, nevertheless the rich also cry, and they suffer much by virtue of the necessitated ignorance of their limits. The problem face by the rich and wealthy that live in a society of abundance is that they some times in more than 92% variation lose a sense of limit. They are carefully shielded from death, misery, pains, troubles etc, and pass months, even years, without contemplating those regulating limits. The rich imagine endless time at their disposal and slowly drift further from reality; they imagine endless energy drawn to their fantasies and testacy, thinking they can get what they want simply by trying harder – by virtue of this analysis I am a living witness.

An accurate example can be drawn using the variances that exist in most societies in the Niger Delta; I have been of several impoverished communities in the Niger Delta Oil Producing Communities, what anyone will see is usually disheartening, only seen in movies and textbooks; yet the poverty in this places caused by high level conspiracy between the federal government, Multinational corporations, state government, local government, political jobbers and mediocre in high places, the ‘who’s who’ in Nigeria, the oil magnet, the boy that does the dirty work, and the blue-bloods etc. while the poor or the inhabitant of these communities suffers the consequence of the spillage and economic sabotage done to the places in the name of federalism or the ‘one Nigeria ‘ syndrome, yet this obsession and greed has thwarted justices and fairness even within the ambit of the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria.

The Federal structure and their unholy romance with the conspirators have fashioned a new name, a ceasefire roll call for the aggrieved (Militants) groups of Niger Delta; they nick-named called “Amnesty”. Those very wealthy people who perpetrated this necessary evil, (one can’t blame them) have begun to see everything as limitless the goodwill of friends and their perpetrators, the possibilities of wealth and fame. The question is, who does really need the Amnesty; those sabotaging or those whose land and prosperity are being sabotaged?

The rich possesses more classes and books and they can extend their talents and skills to the points where they become different people. Technology can make everything achievable, with their obsession exceeding the limit of conscience and justice. Their thoughts have transformed the goodwill in them into the worst form of barbarity and inhumanity against their countrymen. They have exceeded their limits to the threshold of ignorance; to a height of murder; assassination, genocide and civil injustice against their fellow citizen simply for a limited resources, which by right belong to the inhabitant of same society they intend to annihilate. This facts negates the fundamental human right advocated by Transparency International, it flows into the heart of civil liberty and social contract contained in our hallow Constitution.

Since 1958 Oil in the Niger-Delta has made a lot of wealthy Nigerian especially the Northerners sick and psychotic, this schizophrenic tendencies is transmissive and non-contagions. These folks in the north, west, and east and in the south-south Niger-Delta, who swims in the abundance of oil have restored to high level conspiracy with the federal structure in preparatory genocide, this in collaboration with multinational companies, strategists in the federal structure the presidency and every body in the cartel of national, continental and international conspirators. It is now a do or die affair, the great mystical political Order and the caretakers of Nigeria cannot claim innocence, they certainly have a clue of the ongoing national oil crisis, and manslaughter in Gbaramatu in Delta State. The aforementioned are one of the series of abominations, barbarity and perpetuated against the Niger-Delta region by the federal government and its cohorts.

Apologist may argue on this matter, and will refute any blame levied on the federal government. A thoughtful reflection on the whole scenario will assist us in who carried the huge blame, as the communities themselves also share in this atrocity, as they recurrently perpetrated self-style economic and environmental degradation through pipe vandal, bombardment of Multinational oil companies’ facilities operating in the region, kidnapping and other forms of criminal activities.

As regard the affluent that have fattened themselves with the blood and sweat of the innocent, and have provoked ethnic violence and other religiously motivated conflict across the country for seemingly political reasons understand the rhetoric to amass wealth. Abundance makes them swim in dreams, for in dreams there are no limits but the manipulation of grandeur. In reality it makes them very poor simply for the unavailability of peace, civil liberty and justice in their lives. Instinctively these folks are not happy, and can’t move freely. Due to unguided actions and collaboration in the grand conspiracy, have limited their freedom. It makes them soft and decadent, bored with what they have and in need of constant stocks to remind them that they are alive.


There is rumored claimed for the actualization of the Vision 202020, which abounds in the present Administration’s Seven point Agenda. Dubai will serve as a reawakening grip on the phony contained in this administration’s theoretical fallacy, and may provoke the twist of what development entails. The United Arab Emirate (UAE) and its economic heart Dubai was planned and modeled in anticipation. Under ten (15) Dubai became the present fast growing economy of the 21st century, because the Dubai governance was transparent irrespective of the leadership structure in place. The Shirk who’s the paramount Ruler along with his team of reformers need Dubai to growth faster, which in 1989, a team of geologist predicted the dry-up of the crude oil reserve. The leadership structure had to spice up their leads on the economic sustainability of the Island rounded by salty ocean.

A round table conference of entrepreneurs, economist, and both foreign and domestic investors amongst others was called. They deliberated, and agreed on several issues. This can also be called a sovereign national conference, which was aborted and sabotage by the Obasanjo’s administration. One of the brilliant issues was for proper, planned and dynamically feasible investment plans; and tourism was keyed in as the locus standi of the economic revolution of Dubai. A new boom of investment commenced, with the Shirk taking the lead, and initiating the building of the first seven (7) Star Hotel in the world; a project that caused the investors almost Ten Billion Dollars (USD$10B). The process for the Dubai economic revolution was a swift one, yet it declared by World Bank 2000 Journal on 20 economies of the world, as the Jet age economy; because of its fast growing nature.

In all aspect, the entire economic had a definite revolution. In Aviation, Agriculture, Tourism, Housing, International/Bilateral relations and trade etc, the economy savage its difficult times, and utilized proficiently its limited resources. In Importation, tariffs were reduced at no cost, and the Dubai Port was entirely duty-free. Because Dubai has no freshwater zone, there was a proposal for Salination was initiated, and today Dubai has the biggest Salination plant in the world. In housing the revolution was carried out through the sand-filling process of its Island and to a great extent the land mass has increased spontaneously; the ‘Palm Island’ of more than a thousand (1000) housing units is an example of this Economic development and revolutionary score-card in their housing scheme.

The economy of Dubai was transformed overnight with all the necessary sacrifices made by its leaders, and they were willing to sacrifice anything, even their lives to preserve the life of the unborn. The Economy itself has trained professionals over the 10years development target, and today, Etisalat Network in Nigeria, amongst other Companies are example of Dubai’s economic expansion. Yet the Niger Delta which creates more than 58% of the nation’s wealth, and doubles the Oil and Gas exploration of Dubai is in economic quagmire. An Ariel Photography reveals the sour propaganda of the government over time, and its attempt to resolve conflict in the region.

With the right principles of due process and the rule of law, Niger Delta is too meager to develop, that is, if the Federal government is ready to make the appropriate sacrifices. The revenue allocation principles and its agitation for a fair share of the resources by the Niger Delta people may not be the immediate solution to the restive problems in the area, the government and stakeholders should initiate a development plans solely for the region and not a framework of project in conjunction with other states. The error of policy formulation is that, the federal government has likened the Region as parts of a federal structure that will naturally develop along with certain policies that are holistic.

The N-Delta region itself needs a radical policy implementation, different from national economic development master plans. We cannot play on the psyche of the people, rather, as Transparency International Coined “Draconian Approach of Economic Revolution” of the Region. The idea was that, whatever the situation, it requires effective collaboration of both the federal government and Private sector investments; those that behooves Federal and State Government partnership and participation in economic development of the aforesaid Niger Delta Region. If this is the case, within a span of less than 10yrs, the region can experience adverse structural development spine and place the area in the forefront of government agenda. With the Master Plans initiated by investors and think-thank thinkers, the area under 10 years can surface to the status of Dubai, placing development in the area in spontaneous phases.