Lynching of Leo Frank 3 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

LYNCHING: A STAIN ON OUR HUMANITY

Lynching is the act of executing a person in public such as at a market place, on the street, etc. It is done by an angry mob. Lynching is not a novel phenomenon in Africa. It is common to states in the Middle East and to North America. In Nigeria, cases of lynching aren’t new. Lynching is an ugly scene to behold_ a case where those participating in the act care little to afford the victim a fair-hearing. As far as the person is been caught, he is thought to be guilty. But just how does it begin? Why do people choose to take a life instead of following the law? Can this phenomenon be nipped in the bud?  There are certain factors that contribute to its occurrence.

The first is the alarm factor. Someone raises an alarm. He does it based on suspicion, or at the moment the victim starts to act funny. The alarm may be raised thrice or four times and when those near-by hear it, a curious crowd converges. At first, the victim’s instinct is to run. He is given a hot chase and while on the run his next move is to mix with the crowd and vanish or escape into hiding. If he is unsuccessful, he is given a severe beating in order to weaken him.

Another way it starts is through suspicion. The victim is surrounded for questioning if he is suspected to have committed a breach. If the victim tries to play smart either by lying or by dodging the question, he cuts trouble and if he is unable to defend himself, he is seized and dragged off.

Faith or religion is another trigger.  If the victim is believed to have offended the faith of a religious fanatic and particularly if the area is dominated by the religion practiced, lynching is bound to result. A case in point is the lynching of a Christian old woman in Kano state few months ago.  She was murdered in her husband’s presence for refusing to allow a Muslim fellow to perform ablution by the front of her shop.  
Her action was considered as blasphemy against Allah!

Mistaken identity puts vulnerable young people in danger. Identical face, identical dressing, etc, can implicate one who has no idea about what is going on and this happens at dark hours.  These few factors go a little way to put people in needless danger and to be frank; lynching has no relief for the perpetrators except shame and guilt.


Lynching is a stain on our humanity. It debases our esteem in the community of right-thinking individuals. The reasons for its repeated occurrence on different occasions are not far-fetched.  Our law enforcement agents are not positioned to contain incidents of mob-violence.  As a result, their absence motivates the perpetrators of the act. They show up after the damage has been done.
Even when the act is executed, nobody bothers to call the law enforcement agents. It is an attitude of indifference towards the victim. All that matters is how interesting the view is_ the sight of the victim’s nudity, the piling of used tires, the dousing of the victim with petrol or any other style of the act, and his being set afire. It all seems hilarious or exciting to watch. Some take photo shots of the scene or record it on video. So, it’s a case of on-lookers watching with excitement as there is no sense of right to do the needful_ save the victim’s life.

The last reason lynching occurs is due to the loss of faith in the justice system. People don’t trust the system enough because corruption has eaten deep into the fabric of the society. A crime is committed. The suspect is arrested. Instead of charging him to court he is given a slap on the wrist! The judiciary which is thought to be the last hope of the common man communizes itself by giving a light sentence.  Sometimes the charge may be struck out for want of evidence. So, how can one have faith in our criminal justice system?

Lynching, like I have stated, is a stain on our humanity. Taking a life does not solve a crime no matter its gravity.  Beating the victim may be fair enough but as law-abiding citizens the proper and right thing to do is to hand the victim over to the law enforcement agents. The greater crime is to take a life. Two wrongs can’t make right. In resorting to jungle justice, one goes too far. People mask themselves as saints when a public breach is committed. The reality is that some saints are demons. So, the devil we know is better known than the unknown angel. Lynching belongs to the Stone Age. It is a debasing act that should not be entertained by conscionable individuals.

The incident of the UNIPORT four calls to mind what happened in Aluu community area of Rivers State. On October 5, 2012, four students of the University of Port-Harcourt were stripped naked, battered beyond recognition and set ablaze at the orgy of mean fellows among whom an officer of the law figured prominently. In the end, it was learnt that the victims were innocent. Imagine the disgust and ill-feeling the incident attracted. Some students of the institution took to the streets of the community, protesting and setting cars and houses ablaze.  The young men were murdered because an alarm was raised by a co- student from the same community who is now at large!

In conclusion, lynching can be curbed if given the kind of seriousness it deserves. Those who sponsor and promote jungle justice should be severely sanctioned in accordance with the law. No person should be tortured naked and killed in a barbaric manner no matter the degree of provocation and breach committed.. It can be avoided if a concerned citizen is willing to save a life and that is by understanding that lynching is a stain on our humanity.

- yugoboss

Related articles

• Foreign investors set to boost healthcare in Nigeria
• The 13 most dangerous countries in the world

POST-UTME: A BLESSING OR A CURSE?

When the minister of education, Professor Adamu Adamu announced that the post-UTME was scrapped and that JAMB was the proper body to conduct entrance matriculation examinations into higher institutions, stakeholders, professors, VCs, and a host of others, strongly kicked against the move. Eminent legal jurist, Afe Babalola(SAN)  reasoned that the move was ridiculous as the standard of education would be on the decline. Indeed, the minister’s announcement was greeted with strong vituperations. After all, the objective of the exercise is aimed at checkmating the dismal rate of academic performance by undergraduates and to ascertain the credibility and competence of admission-seeking candidates. Besides, the dismal rate of academic performance has raised questions about the competence of JAMB to set standard examination questions; as well as the credibility of the scores obtained by candidates.

The minister’s line of thought is that JAMB is the proper body established by law to set examination questions, score the candidates and determine their admission status. On the other divide, those in support of the post-UTME screening exercise argue that JAMB has outlived its relevance hence the need for universities to adopt their method of screening candidates. Ideally both parties are correct in the following ways: JAMB is a statutory examination body saddled with the task of screening candidates, scoring them and determining their admission status. On the other hand, the post-UTME is thought to be a shield and not a sword. It is initiated to thoroughly ensure that every candidate seeking admission into the Ivory Towers is fit and proper, competent to excel in any course of study. But the issue that arises for a rethink of the post-UTME screening exercise is whether it is a blessing or a curse going by the trend of events arising from it.

It is sad that rather than bring the much desired result, the post-UTME concept has been used as an instrument of fraud, exploitation and manipulation of all sorts. It is has resulted in large-scale corruption cutting across both federal and state universities to the exclusion of the private-owned ones. The objective of the exercise has been abandoned.  The exercise has become a tool to fund their projects and to all intents and purposes enrich their lackeys and cronies. Ask me how? This writer has been a victim of manipulation and corruption in his quest for admission into one of the federal universities. In fact it was during those difficult moments that the ‘trade’ became clearer to him.
In most federal and state universities corruption and exploitation manifest in different shades under the pretext of post-UTME. The problem occurs especially where a candidate fails to meet the merit mark ab initio. It is compounded where the course of study is a professional one whether medicine, law, accountancy, pharmacology, etc. Rather than allot an optional course of study to the candidate, undue delay results. There is what is known as the Second List. The Merit List comprises the names of candidates who have successfully met the cut-off mark but the publication of the Second List is fraught with corruption and to the detriment of the ignorant candidate. How do I mean by ignorant? The candidate is ignorant because he does not know how to cut corners as the others. He only hopes he would be granted admission to pursue another course of study.

The Second List comprises mostly the names of candidates who have ‘settled’ their way with high-ranking officials of the said institution. This is the real business of the post-UTME exercise! What’s more? As funny as this trend appears the so-called Second List is thought as undergoing ‘deliberation’ and the list of candidates is classified bearing different titles such as VC’s List, Lecturers’ List, etc.  The candidates whose names feature on the list are those who desperately need admission, so they pay as much as N 450,000 (four hundred and fifty thousand naira ) and above depending on the particular course of study. In fact, professional courses attract heavy cost when compared to the non-professional ones. The ignorant, honest candidate still hopes to be granted admission. His hope is anchored on the fact his score is close to the cut-off mark. Unfortunately his hope is dashed when he surfs the internet to find that he is not admitted or that his name does not feature on the admission list.

The whole exercise may seem preposterous but it is the reality on ground. Private universities conduct theirs and admit candidates whether they meet the cut-off or otherwise since their sponsors can afford the huge fee cost. When stakeholders and academics kicked against the policy one wonders the real motive for their objecting. Therefore it became expedient to expose the underbelly of this exercise. If indeed the object of the exercise is to maintain high academic standard of learning; as well as admit candidates who are fit and proper , then the institutions concerned should shun corruption and manipulation, conduct examinations and without undue delay admit those who have successfully passed. Also where a candidate did not meet the merit mark for a particular course, an alternative course of study should be offered without recourse to cutting corners. This is to ensure equality and fairness to all candidates. For instance if a candidate applied for Accountancy and the merit mark is 80 but had 74 he could be offered Commerce or  Economics to choose from. While it is understandable that our institutions don’t have enough slots available the same does not mean that a candidate should be shut out for not cutting corners to secure admission.

Furthermore the manipulation and maneuvering by which desperate admission seekers secure their way must be jettisoned. Candidates should be given an even and equal opportunity to prove their worth. Screening candidates at the front and at the back door would amount to double standard. If the post-UTME exercise is to remain the objective must be strictly adhered to. Candidates should not be guaranteed any other means of securing admission than hard work and excellent performance. The irony about the exercise is that the porous candidates are given leverage over the brilliant ones on ‘settlement’ basis. This is the very act of corruption that seems to elude the attention of columnists, analysts and commentators who argued in favor of the exercise.

The honorable minister of education should be commended for this action in the sense that it is a means to ending corruption and manipulation.  The object of the exercise as intended is to checkmate the high rate of poor performance by undergraduates and not a pretext for aiding desperate admission seekers by corrupt means. In this way the post-UTME screening exercise may be regarded as a blessing and not a curse.    

- yugoboss

Related articles

• JAMB says hasn't commenced sales of 2017 UTME application documents
• Mixed reactions trail 2016 November/December WASSCE result
• The Most Innovating and Promising College Startups