Right to Dignity of the Human Person: What It Means Under Nigerian Law

Introduction: The Inviolable Core of Humanity

The concept of human dignity stands as a cornerstone of international human rights law and, indeed, of any just society. It posits that every individual, by virtue of being human, possesses inherent worth and deserves to be treated with respect and honor, regardless of their background, status, or circumstances. In Nigeria, this fundamental principle is not merely an abstract ideal; it is enshrined in the very fabric of its constitutional law, offering a robust protection against all forms of dehumanization and degradation.

This blog post delves deep into the meaning and implications of the right to dignity of the human person under Nigerian law. We will explore its constitutional basis, its scope, and the various ways in which it has been interpreted and applied by Nigerian courts. Furthermore, we will examine the challenges to its full realization and the ongoing efforts to strengthen its enforcement, ultimately demonstrating its critical role in fostering a society where every individual can live a life of respect and self-worth.

I. Constitutional Foundation: Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution

The primary legal bedrock for the right to dignity of the human person in Nigeria is found in Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). This section unequivocally declares:

(1) Every individual is entitled to respect for the dignity of his person, and accordingly— (a) no person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment; (b) no person shall be held in slavery or servitude; and (c) no person shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.

This constitutional provision is not merely a declarative statement; it is a legally enforceable right that places a positive obligation on the Nigerian state and its agents to respect, protect, and fulfill the dignity of every individual within its jurisdiction. It also imposes a negative obligation, prohibiting actions that would undermine or violate this dignity.

A. Interpretation of “Dignity of the Human Person”

While the Constitution explicitly outlines prohibitions against torture, inhuman or degrading treatment, slavery, servitude, and forced labor as manifestations of dignity, the term “dignity of the human person” itself is broad and open to judicial interpretation. Nigerian courts have, over time, sought to give practical meaning to this concept, drawing inspiration from international human rights instruments and the socio-cultural context of the nation.

The concept of dignity encompasses:

Physical Integrity: Protection from physical harm, violence, and unwanted touching. This extends beyond outright torture to include excessive force by law enforcement, poor prison conditions, and even unwarranted medical procedures without consent.
Psychological and Emotional Well-being: Protection from acts that inflict severe mental anguish, humiliation, or degradation. This can include verbal abuse, public shaming, discriminatory practices, and intimidation.
Autonomy and Self-determination: The right of individuals to make choices about their own lives, bodies, and future, free from coercion or undue influence, provided these choices do not infringe upon the rights of others. This links to privacy, freedom of thought, and control over one’s own narrative and image.
Reputation and Honor: Protection against defamation, slander, and actions that unjustly damage an individual’s standing in society.
Social Inclusion and Non-discrimination: The right to be treated equally and to participate fully in society without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, religion, social origin, or any other status. Discrimination inherently undermines an individual’s dignity by suggesting they are of lesser worth.
Access to Basic Necessities: While not explicitly stated as a component of dignity in Section 34, a holistic understanding of dignity often implies access to conditions that enable a dignified existence, such as adequate food, shelter, healthcare, and education. Courts have sometimes alluded to this indirectly when interpreting the scope of human rights.

B. The Prohibitions Under Section 34(1)(a), (b), and (c)

These subsections specify concrete actions that are deemed to violate the dignity of the human person.

1. No Torture or Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (Section 34(1)(a))

This is perhaps the most frequently litigated aspect of Section 34.

Torture: Refers to the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, for purposes such as obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation, or coercion, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind. Nigerian courts have often referenced international definitions, such as that found in the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), which Nigeria has ratified.
Inhuman Treatment: Covers acts that cause intense physical or mental suffering but may not reach the severity threshold of torture. It implies treatment that causes grave suffering, debasement, or severe physical or mental pain.
Degrading Treatment: Refers to treatment that arouses feelings of fear, anguish, and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing an individual and possibly breaking their physical or moral resistance. This can include actions that publicly shame, ridicule, or diminish a person’s self-worth. Examples include parading suspects, strip searches carried out in public view, or subjecting individuals to unhygienic and unsanitary detention conditions.

It’s crucial to note that the distinction between these terms can be fluid, and courts often consider the cumulative effect of various forms of mistreatment. The “minimum level of severity” is a key consideration in determining whether treatment is inhuman or degrading, a standard that is relative and depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects, and, in some cases, the sex, age, and state of health of the victim.

2. No Slavery or Servitude (Section 34(1)(b))

Slavery: Denotes a state or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised. This includes debt bondage, forced marriage, and the sale of children. While historical chattel slavery is largely abolished globally, modern forms of slavery persist and are vigorously prohibited under Nigerian law.
Servitude: Is a broader concept than slavery and implies an obligation to provide services that is imposed by coercion, without the ability to change employers, and under conditions resembling slavery. It signifies a person being compelled to live on another’s property and perform duties for them, losing their personal liberty and autonomy. This can encompass domestic servitude, forced labor exploitation, and human trafficking where individuals are held and exploited.

Nigeria’s fight against human trafficking, especially of women and children, is directly linked to the enforcement of this provision, as victims are often subjected to conditions of servitude.

3. No Forced or Compulsory Labour (Section 34(1)(c))

Forced or Compulsory Labour: Refers to all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily. This definition is largely aligned with Article 2 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 29 concerning Forced or Compulsory Labour, which Nigeria has ratified.

However, the Constitution itself provides exceptions to what constitutes forced or compulsory labor. These exceptions typically include:

Any labor required in consequence of a sentence or order of a court.
Any labor required of members of the armed forces, police force, or other disciplined forces in pursuance of their duties.
Any labor required during an emergency or calamity threatening the life or well-being of the community.
Any communal service that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society in the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public morality or public health or for the purpose of alleviating the suffering of the community.

These exceptions are narrowly interpreted to prevent their misuse and ensure they do not undermine the fundamental right to dignity. The key element remains the absence of voluntary consent and the presence of coercion or penalty.

II. Judicial Interpretation and Application: Landmark Cases

Nigerian courts, particularly the superior courts of record, have played a pivotal role in expounding on the meaning and scope of the right to dignity. Through various judgments, they have clarified its applicability and established precedents for its enforcement.

A. Cases on Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v. Okonkwo (2001): While not directly about torture by state agents, this Supreme Court case reinforced the idea of bodily autonomy and the right to refuse medical treatment based on religious belief. The court upheld the patient’s right to make decisions concerning their body, even if it leads to death, affirming a component of personal dignity and self-determination. This judgment highlights that dignity extends to individual choices over one’s physical person.
Cases Involving Police Brutality and Detention Conditions: Numerous cases have come before Nigerian courts challenging the actions of law enforcement agencies. Judgments against the police for excessive force, arbitrary arrests, and particularly, for detaining suspects in overcrowded, unsanitary, and inhumane conditions (e.g., cells without ventilation, toilet facilities, or bedding) have affirmed that such conditions constitute degrading treatment and a violation of dignity. The courts have often awarded damages against the state in such instances.
- Oluwatimilehin Adebayo v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2024, ECOWAS Court of Justice): The ECOWAS Court ordered Nigeria to pay ₦5 million in compensation to the applicant for torture by police officers, which included severe physical abuse (beating with an axe handle, tying limbs with chains). The Court ruled that these acts constituted torture, violating Article 5 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and ordered an investigation and prosecution of those responsible. This recent judgment underscores the ongoing judicial commitment to addressing torture and inhuman treatment.
- Martin Gegenheimer & 4 Ors. v. The Republic of Nigeria & Anor. (Application No. ECW/CCJ/APP/23/20, ECOWAS Court of Justice): The ECOWAS Court held that the applicant’s “inappropriate placement in the overcrowded cells in a single shirt where he slept on the bare floor for days coupled with lack of requisite sanitary facilities in the face of highly infectious Covid-19 pandemic at the time clearly amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment” and a violation of his right to dignity under Article 5 of the African Charter. This case clearly links poor detention conditions to a violation of dignity.
- Odafe and others v Attorney General and others (2004): This case involved HIV/AIDS positive remand prisoners challenging their continuous detention and segregation, as well as the failure of prison officials to provide proper medical care. The court held that the failure to provide proper medical care amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Section 34(1)(a) of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 5 of the African Charter. This case highlights dignity in the context of prisoner welfare and health.
Parading of Suspects: A recurring issue in Nigeria has been the practice by law enforcement agencies of parading criminal suspects before the media and public, often before conviction. The courts have consistently held this practice to be unconstitutional and a violation of the suspect’s right to dignity (and sometimes their right to presumption of innocence). The rationale is that such public shaming and humiliation degrade the individual, irrespective of their guilt or innocence.
- While specific Supreme Court pronouncements directly on “parading” might be harder to pinpoint by name, numerous Federal High Court and Court of Appeal judgments have consistently condemned this practice. The Attorney General of the Federation and the Inspector General of Police have recently reiterated bans on this practice, citing the need to uphold human rights and align with global best practices, acknowledging that multiple court judgments have declared it illegal.

B. Cases on Slavery, Servitude, and Forced Labour

Human Trafficking Cases: Nigerian courts have increasingly been involved in prosecuting cases related to human trafficking. Convictions under the Trafficking in Persons (Prohibition) Law Enforcement and Administration Act, 2015 (TIPPEA Act) directly address the issues of slavery and servitude. When individuals are trafficked for sexual exploitation, forced labor, or domestic servitude, the judicial pronouncements in these cases implicitly and explicitly uphold Section 34(1)(b) by condemning such practices as severe violations of human dignity.
Child Labour Cases: While specific landmark cases might be harder to pinpoint outside of the general framework of child rights enforcement, legal actions against individuals or entities employing children in hazardous conditions or exploiting them for labor are fundamentally rooted in the protection of the child’s dignity and freedom from servitude and forced labor. The Child Rights Act of 2003, adopted by many states, reinforces these protections.
Communal Service vs. Forced Labour: Courts have sometimes had to distinguish between genuine communal service, which is permissible under the exceptions to Section 34(1)(c), and disguised forms of forced labor. The voluntariness of the service, its public benefit, and whether it is imposed under menace of penalty are key differentiating factors. In Nkpa v. Nkume, the court acknowledged that Section 34(2)(d) allows for certain forms of communal service as not being forced labor.

III. Scope and Dimensions of the Right to Dignity

The right to dignity extends beyond the explicit prohibitions in Section 34 and permeates various other fundamental rights, acting as an overarching principle.

A. Interconnection with Other Fundamental Rights

The right to dignity is often considered the foundation upon which many other human rights are built. Its violation can, and often does, lead to the violation of other rights.

Right to Life (Section 33): The arbitrary deprivation of life is the ultimate affront to human dignity. A life lived without dignity can be seen as a diminished existence, and conversely, ensuring the right to life often necessitates ensuring conditions that uphold dignity.
Right to Personal Liberty (Section 35): Unlawful detention, arbitrary arrest, and the deprivation of freedom without due process are direct assaults on an individual’s dignity. When a person is stripped of their liberty, their autonomy and self-worth are inherently threatened.
Right to Fair Hearing (Section 36): The right to a fair trial and due process ensures that individuals are treated with respect within the justice system, upholding their dignity even when accused of crimes. Denial of a fair hearing can lead to unjust outcomes that are inherently degrading.
Right to Private and Family Life (Section 37): This right protects an individual’s personal space, privacy, and family relationships from unwarranted interference. Breaches of privacy, public exposure of private matters, or arbitrary interference with family life can be deeply humiliating and degrading, thus violating dignity.
Right to Freedom of Expression and the Press (Section 39): While freedom of expression is crucial, its exercise must respect the dignity of others. Defamation, hate speech, and incitement to violence against individuals or groups can severely undermine their dignity and honor. Conversely, the ability to express oneself freely is often seen as a component of human flourishing and dignity.
Right to Freedom from Discrimination (Section 42): Discrimination, by its very nature, treats individuals as inherently inferior based on certain characteristics, thereby directly assaulting their dignity. The right to non-discrimination is a direct corollary of the principle of equal dignity for all persons.
Right to Property (Section 44): While less direct, arbitrary confiscation of property or economic deprivation can, in certain contexts, lead to conditions that are undignified, particularly when it deprives individuals of the means to live a respectable life.

B. Dignity in Specific Contexts

The right to dignity takes on particular significance in various contexts:

Prisons and Detention Centers: This is a critical area. Overcrowding, lack of proper sanitation, inadequate medical care, poor nutrition, and instances of brutality by prison officials all constitute violations of the dignity of inmates. Courts have consistently condemned these conditions, emphasizing that even incarcerated individuals retain their fundamental human dignity.
Healthcare Settings: Patients have a right to be treated with dignity and respect by medical professionals. This includes informed consent, privacy during medical procedures, and protection from neglect or abusive treatment.
Workplace: The right to dignity in the workplace prohibits harassment, discrimination, unsafe working conditions, and exploitation. It ensures that employees are treated with respect and that their labor is not subjected to conditions that undermine their worth.
Public Spaces and Interactions with State Agents: The conduct of law enforcement, public officials, and even ordinary citizens in public spaces must be consistent with the respect for the dignity of others. Public humiliation, unwarranted searches, or discriminatory treatment in public violate this right.
Treatment of Vulnerable Groups: The right to dignity is particularly vital for vulnerable populations, including women, children, persons with disabilities, refugees, and internally displaced persons. These groups are often more susceptible to practices that undermine their dignity, such as trafficking, exploitation, and discrimination. Special measures are often required to protect their dignity.
Environmental Justice: The link between environmental degradation and human dignity has also emerged in Nigerian jurisprudence.
- Gbemre v. Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) of Nigeria Ltd. and others (2005): In this landmark Federal High Court case, the court ruled that the continuous gas flaring by Shell in the Niger Delta violated the fundamental rights to life and dignity of the human person of the residents of Iwherekan community, as guaranteed by Sections 33 and 34 of the 1999 Constitution and Articles 4 and 16 of the African Charter. The court acknowledged that environmental pollution could lead to conditions that undermine human dignity.

IV. Enforcement Mechanisms and Challenges

The constitutional entrenchment of the right to dignity is only as effective as its enforcement mechanisms.

A. Judicial Enforcement

Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules: These rules provide a simplified and expedited procedure for individuals to approach the High Court to seek redress for violations of their fundamental rights, including the right to dignity. This allows for swift judicial intervention.
Locus Standi: The courts have generally adopted a liberal approach to locus standi (the right to bring an action) in fundamental rights cases, allowing public-spirited individuals or organizations to bring cases on behalf of others whose rights have been violated, particularly in cases involving collective rights or vulnerable groups.
Remedies: Courts can grant various remedies for violations of the right to dignity, including:
- Declaration: A declaration that the respondent’s action or inaction constitutes a violation of the applicant’s right to dignity.
- Injunction: An order restraining the respondent from further violating the right or compelling them to take specific actions to uphold it.
- Damages: Monetary compensation for the physical, psychological, and emotional harm suffered as a result of the dignity violation. Damages in these cases are often aimed at both compensation and deterrence.
- Public Apology/Retraction: In cases involving reputational damage or public humiliation, courts may order a public apology or retraction.
- Structural Injunctions: In some cases, particularly those involving systemic issues like prison conditions, courts might issue orders requiring the government to undertake specific reforms to ensure compliance with dignity standards.

B. Role of National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)

The National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria plays a crucial role in promoting and protecting human rights, including the right to dignity.

Investigation of Complaints: The NHRC receives and investigates complaints of human rights violations.
Mediation and Conciliation: It attempts to resolve disputes through mediation.
Public Education and Advocacy: The Commission engages in extensive public awareness campaigns about human rights.
Monitoring and Reporting: It monitors the human rights situation in the country and submits reports to the government and international bodies.
Recommendation for Redress: While it cannot issue binding judgments like a court, its recommendations often carry significant weight and can prompt government action or serve as a basis for judicial proceedings.

C. Challenges to Enforcement

Despite the legal framework, the full realization of the right to dignity faces significant challenges:

Awareness and Access to Justice: Many Nigerians, especially in rural areas, are unaware of their rights or lack the resources (financial, educational) to access legal remedies.
Corruption and Impunity: Corruption within the law enforcement and judicial systems can impede justice and allow perpetrators of dignity violations to escape accountability. Reports by organizations like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have consistently highlighted issues of police torture and lack of prosecution for perpetrators.
Slow Judicial Process: Despite the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules, court cases can still be protracted, leading to delays in justice.
Overcrowded Prisons and Poor Conditions: Despite judicial pronouncements, the systemic issues of overcrowded and dilapidated prisons persist, making it challenging to fully uphold the dignity of inmates. Many Nigerian prisons operate significantly above their capacity, leading to severe health and sanitation issues.
Societal Attitudes and Cultural Practices: Some societal norms or cultural practices might, at times, conflict with the universal principle of dignity, making enforcement challenging (e.g., certain forms of corporal punishment, discriminatory traditional practices against women or specific groups).
Funding and Resources: The NHRC and other oversight bodies often face limitations in funding and resources, impacting their effectiveness.
Security Challenges: In areas facing insurgency or widespread criminality (e.g., in the North-East due to Boko Haram, or parts of the North-West due to banditry), the protection of dignity becomes exceptionally difficult, with vulnerable populations often bearing the brunt of human rights abuses, including forced displacement, sexual violence, and arbitrary killings.
Lack of Political Will: The consistent and robust enforcement of human rights, including dignity, requires strong political will from all levels of government.

V. International and Regional Influences

Nigerian law on the right to dignity is not developed in isolation. It is significantly shaped by international and regional human rights instruments, which provide a broader framework and interpretive guidance.

A. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

The UDHR, adopted in 1948, explicitly recognizes dignity as foundational: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Article 5 of the UDHR states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” This universal standard heavily influenced the drafting of fundamental rights provisions in constitutions worldwide, including Nigeria’s.

B. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

Nigeria is a signatory to the ICCPR. Article 7 of the ICCPR mirrors the UDHR on torture and inhuman/degrading treatment, stating: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.” Article 8 prohibits slavery, servitude, and forced labor. The principles enshrined in the ICCPR provide strong interpretive guidance for Nigerian courts when considering the scope of Section 34.

C. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR)

As a member of the African Union, Nigeria is bound by the ACHPR, which is domesticated into Nigerian law as Cap. A9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. Article 5 of the ACHPR states: “Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited.”

The African Charter’s emphasis on “peoples’ rights” alongside individual rights adds another dimension, suggesting that the dignity of communities and peoples also deserves respect. Decisions of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights can influence judicial thinking in Nigeria, as seen in the ECOWAS Court judgments.

D. Convention Against Torture (CAT)

Nigeria has ratified the CAT, further solidifying its commitment to prohibiting torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. The CAT defines torture, outlines states’ obligations to prevent torture, investigate allegations, prosecute perpetrators, and provide redress to victims. This ratification places a legal obligation on Nigeria to align its domestic laws and practices with the convention’s provisions, strengthening the enforcement of Section 34(1)(a). The Anti-Torture Act of 2017 was enacted in part to fulfill these obligations.

The influence of these international and regional instruments means that Nigerian courts can and do refer to the jurisprudence of international human rights bodies when interpreting and applying Section 34, enriching the understanding and scope of the right to dignity.

VI. The Way Forward: Strengthening the Right to Dignity in Nigeria

Ensuring the robust protection of the right to dignity of the human person in Nigeria requires a multi-pronged approach involving legislative, judicial, executive, and societal efforts.

A. Legislative Reforms:

Enhancement of the Anti-Torture Act: While the Anti-Torture Act of 2017 is a significant step, continuous review and strengthening of laws to define and criminalize all forms of torture and inhuman treatment, aligning fully with international standards. This could include clear provisions for victim rehabilitation and institutional accountability.
Comprehensive Criminal Justice Reform: Holistic reform of the criminal justice system to address issues like arbitrary arrests, prolonged pre-trial detentions, and to drastically improve prison conditions. This includes exploring alternatives to incarceration for minor offenses and investing in modern, humane correctional facilities.
Protection for Whistleblowers: Strengthening legal protection for whistleblowers who expose human rights abuses, including violations of dignity within public institutions.

B. Judicial Activism and Capacity Building:

Continued Progressive Interpretation: Courts should continue to interpret the right to dignity broadly and progressively, recognizing its evolving dimensions in a modern society, including challenges posed by technology and new forms of social interaction.
Specialized Training for Judges: Regular and mandatory training for judges and magistrates on human rights law, with a specific focus on the nuances of dignity, trauma-informed justice, and the practical implications of their rulings on individuals’ lives.
Prompt Dispensation of Justice: Initiatives to reduce case backlogs and ensure the speedy trial of fundamental rights enforcement applications, as delayed justice can itself be a form of degrading treatment.

C. Executive and Law Enforcement Accountability:

Strict Enforcement of Laws: The executive arm of government must demonstrate unwavering political will to enforce existing laws against torture, illegal detention, and other violations of dignity. This means moving beyond pronouncements to tangible action.
Reorientation and Training of Security Agencies: Continuous, comprehensive, and practical human rights training for police, military, and other security agencies, emphasizing respect for human dignity during all operations, including arrests, interrogations, and crowd control. This must be coupled with robust, independent accountability mechanisms for officers who violate rights, including effective investigation and prosecution.
Adequate Funding for Institutions: Providing adequate, sustained funding and operational autonomy to institutions like the NHRC, the Legal Aid Council, and correctional services to enable them to effectively carry out their mandates without political interference.

D. Public Awareness and Education:

Widespread Human Rights Education: Integrating practical human rights education, particularly on the right to dignity, into school curricula from an early age, community programs, and public awareness campaigns. This should be culturally sensitive and accessible.
Empowering Citizens: Educating citizens about their rights, how to recognize violations, and the accessible avenues for seeking redress when those rights are violated. This can be done through legal clinics, community outreach, media campaigns, and active civil society engagement.
Role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs): Supporting and strengthening the capacity of CSOs that monitor human rights, provide legal aid, and advocate for victims of dignity violations. Their role in documenting abuses and advocating for reform is crucial.
Media Responsibility: Encouraging responsible journalism that upholds the dignity of individuals, especially suspects, and avoids sensationalism or practices that contribute to dehumanization.

E. International Cooperation:

Full Adherence to International Obligations: Consistent adherence to and domestication of international human rights treaties and their principles, beyond mere ratification. This involves regularly submitting reports to treaty bodies and implementing their recommendations.
Learning from Best Practices: Engaging in active international cooperation and knowledge exchange to learn from other jurisdictions’ best practices in upholding human dignity, particularly in areas like prison reform, police accountability, and victim support.

Conclusion: A Continuous Journey Towards a Dignified Society

The right to dignity of the human person under Nigerian law, as enshrined in Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution, is a powerful and indispensable safeguard for every individual. It stands as a testament to the nation’s commitment to protecting the inherent worth and respect due to every human being. While the legal framework is robust and the judiciary has made significant strides in its interpretation and enforcement, challenges persist due to systemic issues, gaps in implementation, and societal attitudes.

The journey towards a society where the dignity of every person is truly respected, protected, and fulfilled is a continuous one. It demands vigilance, sustained advocacy, strong political will, and the collective effort of all citizens, government institutions, and civil society. By upholding the right to dignity, Nigeria not only strengthens its democratic foundations but also fosters a more humane, just, and equitable society for all its people. The commitment to this fundamental right is not merely a legal obligation; it is a moral imperative that defines the essence of our shared humanity.

Table of Contents