Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict: Can Victims of Boko Haram Benefit? By A. H. Diram* and Bello Hamman Diram** 1. Introduction During armed conflict, civilians often pay a heavy price. They may face daily threats of violence and death as they find themselves inadvertently caught up in the middle of a conflict. 1 Providing protection to civilian-victims of Boko Haram attacks can contribute immensely towards managing and reducing the effects of the conflict on the affected populations. For example, providing protection can help to ensure that the negative intents of armed groups (including Boko Haram fighters) are less inclined to target civilians; that they could be less likely to use civilian populations to achieve their military objectives; and that civilian victims can have access to humanitarian assistance. Without this protection, civilians anywhere in the world (not only in Boko Haram hostility) are always on the receiving end. Despite being provided with protection under international humanitarian law and international human rights law, civilians continue to be victims of violence and are sometimes deliberately targeted by belligerents as can be seen in the case of Boko Haram in the subsequent topics in this paper. These deliberate attacks by Boko Haram fighters can include campaigns of sexual violence (as in the case of Chibok girls) or deliberate killings to instil fear and coerce compliance from the local population (as in the case of towns like Baga, Dalori, Bama, Gwaza etc.). For example, the Boko Haram insurgents frequenting Internally Displace Persons camps and planting bombs to destroy civilians lives and instil fear into their minds. 2. Boko Haram s hostilities on Civilians at a Glance Take for instance on 11 th September 2015, Nigerian Red Cross Society confirmed an explosion at the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) Camp Coordination Office in Malkohi Camp 3 (Yola) where 3 children below the ages of 5 years died, and about 10 civilians adults were injured and 1 staff of American University of Nigeria Yola Community on Humanitarian Mission to the camp also died. 2 Similar attacks also happened in Maiduguri- Yerwa Camp and Maiduguri-Dikwa Camp. 3 In addition to these direct attacks, civilians also need protection from the consequences of conflict such as being forced to move from their homes and thus losing ownership of land and property. 4 Some may find temporary, but often only relative safety in camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) or refugees, but the less fortunate may simply have to fend for themselves in inhospitable terrain. In recent years, their access to *Diram is currently a lecturer in the Faculty of Law, University of Maiduguri, Nigeria **Diram is the National Secretary General of the Nigerian Red Cross Society, Abuja - Nigeria 1 See Diram, B. H., An Examination of Civilian Protection in Armed Conflict under International Humanitarian Law, (Being a LL.M. Dissertation submitted to the School of Postgraduate Studies, University of Maiduguri, 2015) p 75 2 Report from the Nigerian Red Cross Society, Adamawa State Branch Secretary s office. This happened in several IDP camps around North-East, notably Yola-Malkohi camp (2015), Maiduguri-Yerwa camp (2015) 3 In Yerwa camp, according to both Borno Radio-Television News and National Television Authority News aired that one Abdulkadir was caught after planting and exploring the bomb. Members of the civilian JTF believed him to be a member of the Boko Haram sect. 4 Diram, B. H. op cit p 76 119
humanitarian assistance has been increasingly restricted by bureaucratic constraints, intense hostilities or violent attacks against humanitarian personnel and assets. 5 For example Boko Haram attacked officials of NEMA in Yola-Malkohi Camp through an explosion and about 10 officers lost their lives, so also in Dikwa several members of humanitarian organisations were killed by the insurgents during an attack launched on the camp. 6 Protection of civilian population matters from both moral and legal perspectives. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of their life and the right not to be tortured. 7 Protection of civilians against the consequence of Boko Haram conflict matters from a legal perspective as well, because Nigeria as a state-party to Geneva Conventions have specific obligations concerning the protection of civilians in situations where military action is involved. 8 International humanitarian law (IHL) provides that civilians shall enjoy general protection from the effects of armed conflict, protects civilians from being the object of attack, and prohibits attacks that are indiscriminate. State-parties are strong supporters of the standards set out in international humanitarian law which Nigeria is one. It should be noted that several bodies are to play important roles in protecting civilians during Boko Haram hostilities in Nigeria; these bodies among others include Nigerian state as an individual state, the UN, regional organisations and humanitarian agencies including Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs). 9 They can render their respective roles whether through political and legal action, military activities or humanitarian action. 10 However, international efforts to protect civilians in this nature of conflict can often be insufficient, inconsistent or ineffective due to non-compliance with humanitarian law by the Boko Haram belligerents. The non-compliance with IHL for instance the act of deliberate targeting of civilians by state or non-state armed groups seems to operate in obvious disregard of the law. 11 As parties to armed conflicts commonly violate a range of IHL rules pertaining to the protection of civilians, the focus of this paper is not limited to the rules governing the conduct of hostilities but to the sufferings faced by civilian population during Boko Haram hostilities of an armed conflict nature. 3. Global Perspective of Civilian Protection in Armed Conflict International instruments such as the IHL and IHRL have provided for rights which are recognized by the international world and organisations protecting human rights during armed conflict. It is important to note that most of the protections available to civilians are governed by the resolutions of bodies established by the United Nations. Some of the abuses done by Boko Haram to the rights of civilians are discussed as follows. a) Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 5 UK Government Strategy on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflicts, available at www.frc.gov.uk accessed on the 18 th November 2013 at 10:26pm 6 See Maiduguri update: Mail to the Nigerian Red Cross Society Headquaters by the Maiduguri Branch Secretary on August 2015. 7 Art. 27 and 32 of the 4 th Geneva Convention 8 ICRC, Basic Rules of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, Geneva: ICRC,2006) p 43 9 Diram, B. H. op cit p 77 10 ICRC Basic Rules op cit 11 op cit p 78 120
The prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is found in both IHL and IHRL. The prohibition is absolute in all circumstances and not restricted to armed conflict alone. 12 Torture is defined in article 1 of the Convention Against Torture 1984 (CAT) to mean: Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or the acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. 13 (emphasis added) From the above provision, inhuman treatment in the case of Boko Haram hostility may be illustrated as such intimidation, pain, suffering or coercion on a person based on discrimination of ideology when such pain or suffering is inflicted at the instigation of an imam or other person acting in such official capacity. This is buttressed in the case of Osman V. Prosecutor 14 wherein two girl secretaries at a bank in Singapore were killed by an explosion caused by a bag containing 25lb, of nitro-glycerine, placed by the two appellants on the stairs of the building. The appellants were not wearing uniform and they had no identification papers nor were they wearing uniform when arrested. They were charged under the Penal Code with the murder of the two girl secretaries and of another person injured by the explosion who died later, and tried in the High Court of Singapore. The appellants claimed to be members of the Indonesian armed forces and entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 1949. The trial judge ruled that they were not entitled to the status of prisoners of war and convicted them. Relating this issue to the Boko Haram hostility, one may recall the situation of Gombe market bomb blast, Jimeta-Yola market bomb blast, Kano central mosque bomb blast, Yobe moto-park bomb blast and Maidguri Monday market bomb blast. Several lives were lost and uncountable civilians were injured. If the court in Osman V. Prosecutor above will declare the dead of two secretaries as inhuman treatment, these situations would be better described as inhuman treatment. But the question is what protection did the stakeholders offer in case of future occurrence? The content and nature of the rule (Art. 1, CAT) exemplify the complementary nature of the two bodies of law and demonstrate how IHRL can harmonize the substance of IHL. More specifically, unlike the relevant norms of IHL, the content of the rule prohibiting torture has been elaborated by several human rights bodies. 15 Consequently, the substance of the rule prohibiting torture, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment under IHRL complements and contributes to the substance of the relevant rule in IHL. 12 Art. 27, 32 of 4 th Geneva Convention 13 Shaw op cit p 304 14 Vol. 1, 1969, Appeal Cases, pp. 430 455; see also Sassoli op. cit. p 1112 15 Shaw op. cit. for details especially pp. 274-318 121
Resolutions on the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are adopted annually within the framework of the General Assembly (GA), Human Right Council (HRC) and Committee for Human Rights (CHR) all of which are bodies under the umbrella of the United Nations (UN). The HRC adopts series of directives on the field of application of the resolutions protecting inhuman treatment that should be followed by States in situations of human rights violation which Boko Haram hostility is part and parcel of such violations in Nigeria. Most of these directives are taken from human rights instruments. Some of these resolutions contain comments which are the bases for the interpretation of what behaviour that may amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. These behaviours include: gender-based violence (situations where Boko Haram fighters execute male gender who refuses their offer and abduct female gender), corporal punishment (Boko Haram fighters slaughtering anyone who refuses to submit to its ideology) or intimidation and coercion (Boko Haram leadership forcing young children to suicide bombings in public gatherings), including serious and credible threats, as well as death threats, threats to the physical integrity of the victim of a third person, and prolonged incommunicado detention (the case of over 300 Chibok girls). It is instructive to note that these acts amount to torture and inhuman treatments under the UN resolutions. 16 No investigation is needed to ascertain whether such behaviour violates the human rights of the person concerned, although in circumstances other than that of Boko Haram state authorities need to conduct such investigations. 17 It should be noted as well that Medical and other personnel, whose role in documenting such incidents is essential, are to be protected. 18 Although there is no record as at the time of writing this paper showing attacks on medical personnel still Governments should assure that victims obtain redress and are awarded fair and adequate compensation and receive appropriate socio-medical rehabilitation 19 where medical personnel are attacked. Finally, preventive measures should be adopted so as to see that medical and humanitarian personnel are protected against Boko Haram hostilities. 20 b) Abuse of Right to Life in Armed Conflict The importance of right to life is constantly repeated and reaffirmed in many UN resolutions and the fourth Geneva Convention. 21 The right is mentioned in the context of indiscriminate attacks affecting civilians, by emphasizing the fundamental value of the right to life and calling relevant parties to abide by their obligations in this respect. 22 The HRC has stressed that the right to life is the most fundamental of all rights. 23 It condemns attacks against the civilian population either by state forces or by the armed groups like the Boko Haram. 24 References to, and special focus upon vulnerable groups (women, children, IDPs), as well as human rights defenders and humanitarian workers show the influence of HRL on armed 16 A/CHR/RES/58/38 (2002), Opp 4-6 & 14. 17 A/CHR/RES/58/38 (2002), Opp 8; GA, A/RES/64/153 (2009), Opp 6. 18 Ibid Opp 11. 19 Ibid Opp 10. 20 A/CHR/RES/58/38 (2002), Opp 12. 21 Arts. 3 (a) and 68 of 4 th Geneva Convention 22 A/HRC/RES/10/19 (2009), Opp 2; HRC, A/HRC/RES/S-12/1 (2009), Prp 3. 23 A/HRC/RES/13/8 (2010), Prp 10 24 A/HRC/RES/13/25 (2010), Opp 14. 122
conflict situations. 25 It can be seen that none of these groups is free from the effects of Boko Haram hostilities within the north-east of Nigeria. The International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR s) safeguards provides that: 26 Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 27 It is on records that the Boko Haram fighters do not appreciate this provision (that is if they know the provision at all). In this context, targeted attacks against civilians have repeatedly been condemned by the Security Council (SC) as violating both IHL and IHRL. 28 The relevant bodies tend to employ HRL terms regarding the question of targeted killings and extra-judicial executions which have been condemned by all UN bodies on several occasions. 29 Furthermore, the CHR has invoked the obligation to take measures to prevent loss of life in all circumstances. 30 In sum, the right to life represents an important component of the majority of the conflict-related resolutions. Thus, civilians life should be protected by the individual state by several measures the states think fit in such circumstances. d. Discrimination and Gender Inequality Non-discrimination and gender equality are among the issues that keep appearing in SC and GA resolutions, especially those pertaining to the situation in Afghanistan which can be liken to the Boko Haram hostility in north east of Nigeria. The SC has repeatedly expressed its concern regarding the manner some women and girls are treated during armed conflict. 31 It has also referred to more specific issues such as the use of violence to prevent girls from going to school 32 as in the case of Chibok girls. Similarly HRC has placed emphasis on the principles of non-discrimination between genders. 33 The SC also makes a reference to gender-based violence in Sudan, the wording of which reveals the influence of IHRL 34 Resolutions on the Cote d lvoire which stresses the importance of the participation of women in the peace process 35 and the need to ensure their security. 36 The SC has urged all Afghan parties to respect all international human rights instruments, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, to bring to an end without delay all violations of the human rights of women and girls, to take urgent measures to ensure respect for all fundamental freedoms and to respect international humanitarian law with regard to the conduct of hostilities. 37 The question is how far did Nigerian government go to achieve this provision? The government ought to engage the Boko Haram fighters into an 25 A/HRC/RES/9/17 (2008) & A/HRC/RES/7/16 (2008), Opp 9 & 6 26 Art. 3 (1) (b and c) of 4 th Geneva Convention; CHR, A/CHR/RES/57714 (2001), Opp 2 (d). 27 Art. 6 of ICCPR 1966 28 SC, S/RES/1906 (2009), op. cit., Prp 8. 29 SC, S/RES/1906 (2009), op. cit., Prp 8; A/CHR/RES/61/83, Opp 5; GA, A/RES/63/182 (2008); GA, A/RES/64/94 (2009), Opp 2. 30 CHR, A/CHR/RES/56/31 (2000), Opp 8. 31 Shaw op cit pp. 300-303 32 SC, S/RES/1917 (2010), Opp 35; SC, S/RES/1868 (2009), Opp 29. 33 A/HRC/RES/6/19 (2010), Opp 1. 34 SC, S/RES/1881 (2009), Opp 4; S/RES/1706 (2006), Prp 8. 35 SC, S/RES/1865 (2009), Prp 12. 36 SC, S/RES/1795 (2008), Opp 11. 37 GA, A/RES/55/119 (2000), Opp 13. 123
understanding so as to protect women and girls since women gain lager part of protection under the Islamic law. 4. Nature of Civilian Suffering during the Boko Haram Hostility in Nigeria Civilian suffering in wars and hostilities is not a new phenomenon world over. Throughout history, civilians have been targeted by belligerents, who often have made no distinction between combatants and civilians when fighting against their enemies. Massacres, rapes, tortures, starvations, enslavements, force conscriptions and displacements (just to mention but a few) have all been common features of war at different places. Sometimes civilian suffering has been an unintended result of the fighting, and at other times suffering has been inflicted as a deliberate military strategy 38 just like the suffering incurred by civilian population in north-east of Nigeria in the hands of Boko Haram fighters. Civilians are affected in many ways by Boko Haram fighters, whether as the direct victims of death, injury, rape, abduction, kidnap and forcible displacement or as indirect victims through conflict-induced increases in disease, hunger and malnutrition. 39 The impact and experience of wars and hostilities will not be the same for all civilians, but can vary enormously among the members of different groups, for example depending on whether they are men or women, young or old, living in urban or rural areas. Not least, impact of wars and hostilities will depend on the conduct of the combatants and the extent to which they endeavour to target or protect civilians during such acts. Even though war-norms exist, they are abused greatly, especially on certain groups who have been spared from attack. These groups are considered to be innocent, vulnerable or weak persons since they do not take part in the hostility, such as children, women and the elderly. 40 However, this category happens to fall victims of Boko Haram hostility in Nigeria. As the idea of limited war and non-combatant immunity developed, especially in medieval Europe, the issue of civilian protection became more sophisticated gradually. However, it was only after the genocide and widespread atrocities against civilians committed during the Second World War and the armed conflicts in the 1950s to the 1970s that a specific legal framework was established for the protection of civilians. 41 Today, all parties to armed conflicts are bound by the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) also known as the law of armed conflict to take a broad range of measures to protect civilians from the effects of military operations. 42 The 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols constitute the core of the legal framework regulating behaviour in war, including for the protection of civilians and other persons who do not take part in hostilities (e.g. wounded, sick and captured combatants). Although significantly less detailed than the rules applicable to international armed conflicts, Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions and 38 Case No. 101, US, Us v. William L. Calley, Jr (U. S. court of Military Appeals, 21 december 1973) also see Sassoli, M., and Bouvier, A. A. How Does Law Protect in War?, (Geneva: ICRC, 2006) p 1131 39 Art. 147 of the Fourth Geneva convention 1949; also Sassoli Ibid p 1318 40 Us v. William L. Calley, Jr (Supra) also see Sassoli, Ibid p 1129 41 Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of war, 12 August 1949 42 Sassoli, op. cit. p 208 124
Additional Protocol II 43 establish rules for non-international i.e internal-armed conflicts, imposing obligation on state and non-state armed groups alike. Moreover, most of the fundamental rules pertaining to the protection of civilians are considered to be customary humanitarian law in both international and internal armed conflict, and binding on all states, whether signatories or not to the relevant treaty, as well as non-state armed groups. 44 IHL has proven to be an adaptable legal framework with additional rules being adopted in response to new developments. A case in point is adoption of the first two additional protocols in 1977, partly in response to the humanitarian concerns arising from liberation. The treaties prohibiting anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions are more recent examples. These devices are no doubt being in use by Boko Haram fighters against civilians and the Nigerian Armed Forces in Maiduguri town of Borno State especially around the Sambisa forest. 45 As the nature of warfare continues to evolve, new protection needs arises. A recent International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) study identified several but specific existing gaps or weaknesses in the current legal framework for controlling conduct of belligerents in conflicts. 46 Due to the current prevalence of internal armed conflicts, the interaction between IHL and IHRL is also becoming a matter of increased importance and debate. 47 The latter protects the individual in all situations, although governments may derogate from some provisions in public emergencies, including during an armed conflict. The need for further regulation and clarification of the rules should be continuously assessed in light of emerging humanitarian concerns. However, it is widely acknowledged that if only the rules of IHL that aim at protecting civilians were fully implemented, the situation of civilians during armed conflicts would vastly improve. 48 In 2010, while identifying certain areas in which IHL should be strengthened, the ICRC s President reiterated that what is required in most cases is greater compliance of new rules. 49 This confirms the widely accepted view that the main obstacles to better protection of civilians relate primarily to the way in which the existing rules of IHL are implemented or to a lack of respect for the rules by the parties to armed conflicts. The concept of protection - in the context of armed conflict - encompasses all activities aimed at ensuring full respect for the rights of the individuals in accordance with the spirit of relevant bodies of laws, thus human rights law, international humanitarian law and refugee law. 50 43 The threshold for the application of protocol II is higher than that of common article 3 and it only applies to international armed conflicts that meet specific criteria. 44 See Henckaets, J. and Louise, D., Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. I, (Cambridge: ICRC, 2007) pp. 299-475 45 BBC News (Hausa Service) of 1 st May 2016 by 6:30am 46 Dr. Jacob Kellengerger, ICRC President, Strengthening Legal Protection for Victims of Armed Conflict, Official statement 21 September 2010. Available at http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/statement/ihl-development-statement- 210910.htm.accessed on 18th May 2011 47 See for example Corula Droege, The Interplay between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights law in situation of Armed conflict, Vol. 40 No. 2, 2007, International Review of the Red Cross pp. 310-355 48 Kellengerge, op. cit. 49 Ibid 50 This definition was agreed in 1999 by a wide group of humanitarian and human rights agencies regularly convened by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in Geneva. It was subsequently adopted by the inter-agency Standing Committee (IASC), the forum for coordination, policy development and decision making involving the key UN and non-un humanitarian partners. Under the leadership of the Emergency Relief Coordinator, the IASC develops humanitarian policies, 125
Protections for civilians in Boko Haram hostility in Nigeria are contained in international humanitarian, human rights, refugee and criminal law. Numerous UN Security Council resolutions have also increasingly dealt with the protection of civilians in armed conflict, for instance by reminding warring parties of their legal obligations. The confused, messy and uncontrollable aspect of Boko Haram hostility complicates the practicalities of how civilians are protected. Separating people from the conflict is impossible and their protection relies on a comprehensive approach to conflict resolution which laws are designed to support. Take for instance, the conflict between the Boko Haram fighters and the government forces of Nigeria, Cameroon, Niger and Chad has devastated the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians. Despite advances by the armed forces, Boko Haram fighters continue to deliberately target civilians, while its leaders evade justice. In addition the response from the government forces has been marred by serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. 51 On 1 st April 2015 the Human Rights Council requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to collect information and report on human rights abuses by Boko Haram fighters. 52 According to Amnesty International the High Commissioner s oral statement 53 at the last HRC session that expressed concerns about human rights abuse by Boko Haram and violations by Nigerian security was alarming. 54 The High Commissioner s reports contribute to truth, justice and reparations to victims in affected areas. These reports are also vital to ensuring that the affected States meet their obligations under international law and the mass atrocities committed in the region remain on the international community s agenda. 55 It is of importance to understand that Boko Haram fighters have continued to attack towns and villages without military presence. 56 In the raids documented by Amnesty International, Boko Haram gunmen frequently rounded up residents, shot those who tried to escape and executed male gender. 57 Fighters stole any food supplies they needed and set fire to people s homes, shops and markets. 58 One of the most lethal attacks in recent times occurred on 2 nd July 2015 when Boko Haram fighters killed more than 120 civilians in a raid on Kukawa, Borno State. 59 The people were assembled at the Village Head s palace and killed about 58 persons. agrees on a clear division of responsibility for the various aspects of humanitarian assistance, identifies and addresses gaps in response, and advocates for effective application of humanitarian principles. 51 Amnesty International, Boko Haram: Civilians Continue to be at Risk of Human Rights Abuses by Boko Haram and Human Rights Violations by State Security Forces, (Written Statement to the 30 th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, 14 th September 2 nd October 2015) p 1 52 United Nation Human Rights Council Resolution S-23.1 Atrocities commited by the terrorist group Boko Haram and its effects on Human Rights in the affected States. (A/HRC/RES/S-23.1) 53 Oral Update on Boko Haram at the Human Rights Council 29 th Session by Zeid Ra ad Al-Hussein, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, on 1 st July 2015. 54 Amnesty International, Boko Haram op cit. 55 Ibid 56 BBC News (Hausa Service) of 1 st May 2016 by 6:30 am 57 Ibid 58 Amnesty op cit p 2 59 Ibid 126
It is also on record that boys and girls are used by the Boko Haram to facilitate suicide bombing in Nigeria 60. This has affected people in mosques, churches, cinema houses, moto-parks, markets and any other places where people patronise. For instance in Maiduguri abattoir 12 people were killed on the 2 nd June 2015; Baga Road Moto-park 16 civilians died on the 3 rd and 22 nd June 2015; a tricycle motorist exploded in traffic near Gamboru market on the 31 st July 2015 and 4 civilians were killed; 75 people were killed by 4 explosions at a mosque and viewing centre near Ajilari on 20 th September 2015; 16 people were killed at Kasuwan Albasa in Mongono by 2 explosions on the 20 th September 2015. 61 In Yobe State, an explosion killed 5 worshippers during end of Ramadan celebration on 17 th July 2015; 17 people died as they queued at the security check point while getting into Damaturu main market on the 26 th July 2015; Bomb blast killed 5 civilians at the central bus station at Damaturu on 25 th August 2015; Suicide bomber has killed 8 worshippers inside the Redeemed Church in Potiskum on the 5 th July 2015. 62 Bomb attacks in other cities in Nigeria have spread fear beyond the states most affected by the conflict. 63 On 5 th July 2015, two attacks in Jos killed 40 civilians. Two gunmen killed worshippers at Yan-taya mosque while observing magrib prayers; on 16 th July 2015 bomb exploded at Gombe central market where 50 people lost their lives; on 22 nd July 2015 21 people lost their lives through bomb blast at Dadin Kowa bus station in Gombe town. 64 The above discourse signifies the nature of civilian suffering in the affected areas of Boko Haram hostility. It should be noted that apart from loss of lives and properties, thousands of civilians have flee their homes and are currently surviving under the shed of internally displaced persons camps in several states of North-East Zone of Nigeria. 5. Conclusion This paper reveals that States are responsible for addressing the issue of human rights abuses in armed conflict. In particular, the right to life and the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, the prohibition of discrimination are very relevant. The relevant resolutions studied lead to the conclusion that States tend to treat these as the primary rights applicable in all circumstances. The repeated calls upon relevant parties and the international community at large to respect, protect and ensure respect of these rights by various means should be taken as an indication of a trend toward considering that certain rights impose erga omnes obligations upon States, including in times of armed conflict. 65 It should be concluded that the state cannot protect its civilians against the effects of Boko Haram fighters but state is eligible to provide humanitarian assistance to victims of the conflict. This is 60 Ibid 61 Nigerian Red Cross Society (Maiduguri branch) Maiduguri Update Report mailed to the National Headquarters between June and September 2015 62 Nigerian Red Cross Society (Yobe branch) Yobe Update Report mailed to the National Headquarters between June and September 2015 63 Amnesty International, Boko Haram op cit p 3 64 Nigerian Red Cross Society (Plateau and Gombe Branches updates to the National Headquarters) between June and September 2015 65 Linos-Alexander S., The human dimension of International Law, Interplay of General International Law and Human Rights, (Athens: Nomiki Vivliothiki Group, 2010), p 376 127
because the Boko Haram fighters do not respect or recognise the norms enshrine in the Geneva Conventions. 6. Recommendations 1) The Nigerian government should as a matter of urgency provide means of sustenance for the civilians living in IDP camps throughout Nigeria even through Bank facilities; 2) Internally Displaced Persons living in camps should be returned to the main cities for the avoidance of further attacks by the belligerents through suicide bombings, this is because their continue stay in the camps contribute to further attacks on them or encourage laziness on their part; 3) State should sensitize its military forces on the rules of war so as to render protection on civilian population should they participate in peace keeping assignment in the future. 128