TERRORISM AND COUNTER-TERRORISM PARADIGMS AND MODELS IN SELECTED JURISDICTIONS: LESSONS FOR NIGERIA

Abstract

As terrorism continues to pose serious threat to global peace and security, the quest to preserve the human race necessitated a progressively evolving legal response across jurisdictions in the bid to address the menace. The development consequently gave rise to the drive for states to transplant mechanism and framework that have succeeded elsewhere. It is in the light of the above that this article offers a legal analysis of counter-terrorism frameworks in select jurisdictions, touching the United States, the United Kingdom, Egypt and India, largely from the Nigerian standpoint. It focuses on legislative strategies, institutional structures, human rights safeguards, and operational effectiveness. Drawing on statutory provisions such as Nigeria’s Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, the USA Patriot Act, and similar laws in the UK, Egypt and India, this article critically examined how states balanced security imperatives with democratic accountability and the rule of law. Using the doctrinal approach, it explored the legal underpinnings of preventive detention, surveillance powers, asset forfeiture, and trial procedures for terrorism-related offences. The study identified key strengths and limitations in each legal regime, highlighting recurring challenges such as overreach, procedural opacity, and the erosion of civil liberties. It further distills actionable lessons for legislative refinement, institutional collaboration, and rights-respecting enforcement in developing jurisdictions, particularly Nigeria. The work concluded by advocating for Nigeria’s strict adherence to best practices; adopting a more harmonized counter-terrorism model that incorporates international human rights norms, fosters inter-agency coordination, and prioritizes both security and justice in the global fight against terrorism.