Rethinking State Responsibility for Non-State Actor Violence in Nigeria: A Theoretical and Doctrinal Reconstruction

This doctoral research reconstructs the doctrine of state responsibility under international human rights law as applied to non-state actor violence in Nigeria, generating an original theoretical framework that better captures Nigeria's distinctive governance, security, and human rights realities. Classical international law attributes state responsibility primarily to acts of state agents, yet Nigeria's human rights crisis is substantially driven by non-state actors, including Boko Haram, ISWAP, armed bandits, vigilante groups, and criminal syndicates, operating in contexts of state absence or partial complicity. Existing doctrines of due diligence and positive obligations provide partial frameworks but are inadequate for Nigeria's complex territorial governance reality. The research engages critically with the International Law Commission's Articles on State Responsibility, the European Court of Human Rights' positive obligations jurisprudence, the Inter-American Court's due diligence standard in domestic violence cases, and the African Commission's expansive approach to state responsibility in SERAC v. Nigeria. An original Graduated State Responsibility Model (GSRM) is constructed, incorporating territorial control indicators, state capacity assessments, and governance gap analysis as variables modulating the content of state human rights obligations. The model is tested empirically through application to three Nigerian non-state actor violence contexts: Northeast insurgency, Northwest banditry, and Southeast separatist violence. The dissertation makes a foundational original contribution to international human rights law doctrine on state responsibility in fragile governance contexts. Keywords: state responsibility, non-state actors, positive obligations, human rights doctrine, Nigeria.