Abstract
This study examines the Nigerian Government designation of Indigenous People of
Biafra (IPOB) and Shiite as terrorist groups. In outlining the causes of these labelling,
the article is framed with Balzacq's securitization discussion and employs a qualitative
instrumental case study of the debate around civil society groups and terrorism in
Nigeria. This study proposes that while there is no universally acceptable definition
and theoretical explanation for terrorism and the clear ambiguity of the Terrorism
(Prevention) Act 2011, under Nigerian law, the labelling of the IPOB and Shiite groups,
whose actions are mainly “peaceful protest” against the Government emanates from
bias and prejudice. The article argues that, records of IPOB and Shiite activities show
high level of non-violence and whenever violence ensues, it is because of government
security agencies' confrontation with the groups. It posits that if Boko Haram that is
internationally known for violence and under International Criminal Court (ICC)
preliminary investigation for crimes against humanity cannot be proscribed as
terrorist group by the Nigerian government, then, the proscription of IPOB and Shiite
amounts to nothing but bias and political targeting. Therefore, the proscription of these
groups as terrorist groups led to the closure of civic spaces, with little to no solutions
offered for the security issues presented by these groups.