Setting The Context
What is the connection between civic engagement, the civic space within which civic engagement takes place, human rights precepts, and the quest for, as well as the trajectory of human development, that is, societal development?
Why is the concept and practice of national security, which trumps the guarantee and protection of rights, harmful to human and societal development?
What is the connection between human security and human development? Is the human security approach properly understood, mutually exclusive, or mutually reinforcing with the quest for human development as conceptualised in the Sustainable Development Approach, in general, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in particular?
A society built on exploitation and exploitative processes and relationships is inherently unjust and has a natural tendency towards exclusion and inequality.
The thrust of my approach centres around the proposition that: At the heart and core of human development, understood within the context of social justice, is the promotion and guarantee of human security; while there can be no human security (that is, the security of all humanity, every human, and not just some human), outside of an equitable, equal, inclusive, fair, and socially just human and societal development process.

We can add to this proposition the caveat that, in order for the development process to be truly inclusive, fair, equitable, and socially just, it will have to be devoid of exploitation and exploitative processes. What this means is that the processes we undertake in order to meet our needs as human beings, and the relationships we necessarily have to enter into, cultivate, and nurture in the processes of undertaking these activities, between us and nature, that is, the environment, on the one hand, and amongst ourselves as human beings engaged in those activities, on the other hand, as well as the dynamic of the two processes (between us and nature, and among ourselves), and the two relationship spheres, will have to cease to be exploitative and extractive; they will have to become transformed and have to become utilisation processes, and relationships of cooperation.
A society built on exploitation and exploitative processes and relationships is inherently unjust and has a natural tendency towards exclusion and inequality. The outcome is invariably unequal development within and between society, as well as the proliferation of human misery and the devastation of the environment.
It follows therefore that in order to achieve different outcomes, the outcome of equality, equity, fairness, inclusiveness, and justice for all, we would have to strive to radically alter the way society is presently organised, and radically transform the way we produce to meet our needs [the way we organise production, across the entire spectrum of production, distribution, exchange and consumption]; as well as the nature and character of the relationships we enter into among ourselves and with nature, in order to organise the productive processes required to meet our needs [that is the relations of production, including around the ownership, and deployment of the means of production].
This requires organising and mobilising towards social transformation to achieve social justice. This in turn requires the existence of a secure, safe and robust space within which the organising and mobilisation takes place.
Civic Engagement
For our purpose, civic engagement encompasses the range of activities involving the more or less deliberate, more or less conscious interaction between citizens and the governance process, including intended and unintended actions or inactions between citizens and the institutions of the state, that drive the processes and mechanisms of governance.
The social interactions that constitute civic engagement range across a broad spectrum; from routine daily individual and collective actions between and within state and non-state actors in response to, and or aimed at influencing governance processes, through more or less active and more vibrant contestations, to intensified and sustained confrontations between and among the contending social formations and forces in society.
The Civic Space
From the foregoing, the civic space can therefore be taken to encapsulate the broad context and environment within which this range of civic engagements take place, and or occur. It follows thus that civic engagement takes place within a civic space, the nature, character, depth, breadth, scope, scale, and quality of which are determined by certain organic parameters that are changing and evolving.
The degree to which a robust civic space exists is directly dependent on the quality and quantum of the range of interactions that constitute civic engagement in such a context.
Another way of saying this is that the status of the civic space at any point in time is predicated on the actual balance of social forces, the acquired and evolving nature of the equilibrium between, among, and within the interacting and contending social formations within society.
Civic Engagement, Civic Space and Rights Protection
Core civic space rights
In order for civic engagements to take place, certain core rights are required to be protected and guaranteed: the rights to freedom of association, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of expression. These rights must be guaranteed by law.
Without the existence and protection of these rights and the defiance of subjugation of these rights, it would be near impossible to undertake the activities necessary for civic engagement, including organising, meeting, raising awareness, establishing and running associations, etc.
These rights have, through time, been codified into international conventions, etc. States that are signatories to these international human rights conventions and other regional treaties containing similar provisions are thus obliged to respect and protect these rights.
These states are also obligated to protect these rights under domestic law, and many of the ratifying states have included protection of these rights in their constitutions as fundamental freedoms. They are obliged not only to respect and promote these rights but also to protect them from infringement by both state and non-state actors.
A progressive constitution supported by a sound legislative framework that is upheld by a responsive and independent law enforcement machinery in the context of the active agency of citizens is key to enabling and preserving civic space.
Nevertheless, regardless of constitutional inclusion, many states occasionally or routinely undermine these rights, either through their deliberate actions or their intentional inactions. Ensuring that these rights are not only recognised, included in constitutions and laws, and respected and guaranteed, requires the active vigilance of citizens.
Given the foregoing, a progressive constitution supported by a sound legislative framework that is upheld by a responsive and independent law enforcement machinery in the context of the active agency of citizens is key to enabling and preserving civic space.
Core Civic Space Rights
Freedom of Association
The right to freely associate includes the right of every person, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, sexual orientation, or other status, to organise and establish an organisation as well as to freely join one or choose not to participate in one. Individuals may operate civil society organisations and participate in their activities without fear or unwarranted interference.
Freedom of association also encompasses the right to establish branches, recruit staff, raise funds freely, to fair taxation levels, and to affiliate with and cooperate with other organisations locally, nationally, or internationally. It also includes the right of workers to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests.
Without the ability, the opportunity, and the enablement to freely come together in an organisation, to join and participate in the activities of an organisation or association, it will be near impossible, if not impossible, to take conscious collective action and to amplify voice.
Freedom of Expression
The right to freedom of expression entails, according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the “freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
This right is fundamental to the existence of civil society. It includes “the right to access information, critically evaluate, and speak out against the policies and actions of state and non-state actors, as well as to publicly draw attention to and carry out advocacy actions to promote shared concerns without fear of retribution from any quarter. Civil society organisations are also assured the freedom to carry out investigations and document their findings under this right.”
Without freedom of expression, we are unable to articulate and disseminate our thoughts and views, raise awareness about issues we are concerned about, document and disseminate information about injustice, or even participate in governance and influence policy processes. It will also be near impossible to network, build alliances or coalitions, and take wider informed and collective action. Not only will it be impossible to build individual organisations, but it will also be difficult to build relationships with other organisations, and with one’s constituency and target, as well.
Freedom of Assembly
The right to freely assemble “assures civil society the freedom to exercise legitimate dissent through peaceful forms of protests as well as organise meetings and hold demonstrations to forward matters of common interest.” International law places the same limitations on the restriction of this right as in the case of freedom of association.
Moreover, international standards limit the use of force by authorities in managing public assemblies. For example, see the International Right to Protest Principles, which affirm the obligation of the state to respect, protect, and fulfill the right to protest [A set of voluntary principles developed by Article 19 in 2016].
As with the two previous rights and freedoms, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to organise, establish, run, and operate an organisation or association and to articulate and disseminate views about the goals of the organisation, and the issues the organisation have been established to pursue, if members of the organisation are unable to hold meetings among themselves, as well as between themselves and others, including engaging with other citizens, and even with government institutions. The ability to come together within a specific space is central to taking collective action.
It can be seen from the foregoing that these three freedoms are mutually reinforcing and mutually interdependent; one cannot exist without the other. The suppression and/or violation of one of these freedoms renders the remaining two freedoms redundant and ineffective, to the extent of that suppression and/or violation.
At this point, it is also very important to reiterate the centrality of these three freedoms to the existence, viability, and nurturing of human society, given that in order for us to meet our basic needs, we have to enter into relationships with one another and with our environment.
Without the freedoms of association (right to associate), expression (right to express oneself), and assembly (right to assemble), it will be impossible to take collective, that is, social, action, and our existence as social beings will quite rightly be imperiled.
National Security and Civic Space
Usually, however, the threat to the civic space from the state comes from what the state sees as the requirements of national security.
However, a conflict between the requirements of national security and the necessity to guarantee a robust civic space is inherent to a conception of national security as being exclusively equivalent to “state security” or “regime security” in particular and the security of an exploitative system (‘systemic security’) in general.
By state security, we refer to the privileging of the security of the state and its institutions. By regime security, we refer to the privileging of the security of specific regimes superintending over the state; and by systemic security, we refer to the privileging of the security of the overarching mechanisms and institutions of the socioeconomic, political, and sociocultural system and order of society.
In this understanding of national security, regime, state, and systemic security are interrelated, differentiated, and interdependent spheres of national security, that is, the security of the nation/nation-state. The degree to which a state system is authoritarian, totalitarian, or liberal informs the nature of the relationship between these spheres of national security. The more state and systemic security are conflated and equated to regime security, the more authoritarian such a state system is, for instance.
By regime security, we refer to the privileging of the security of specific regimes superintending over the state; and by systemic security, we refer to the privileging of the security of the overarching mechanisms and institutions of the socioeconomic, political, and sociocultural system and order of society.
The Human Security Approach
A more robust and human security-anchored notion of security provides a framework that is more elastic and more broadly accommodates dissent and grievance in society and thus enables the promotion, preservation, and guarantee of civic space rights in particular, and human rights in general.
In this regard, if governance can be undertaken more in line with the spirit, letter, and intent of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN 1999), as amended, particularly the provisions of S 14(2)(b) and (c) of Chapter Two, it stands to reason that national security will be conceived more in the context of human security, and less friction will be generated at the intersection of national security and the civic space. The aforementioned subsection (2)(b) provides that “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government,” while (2)(C) provides for the guaranteed participation of the people in their government.
In this sense, it can be said that the notion and conception of security envisaged by the Nigerian constitution is that of human security.
Human Security as Basis of National Security
The concept of human security is a paradigm shift from the concept of state security, which is seen essentially through military and law-and-order prisms.
Human security is a people-centred, multi-disciplinary, and multidimensional understanding of security.
It encapsulates an elaboration of three broad categories of freedoms: freedom from fear, freedom from want, and freedom to act in one’s own interest.
Freedom from fear encapsulates the absence of the presence or threat of harm, aggression, or danger, physical and/or mental; the safety of the individual and/or community/collective; and the safeguarding of their persons, community, and properties.
Freedom from want refers to the ability of everyone to meet their basic needs and requirements for their existence and survival, with respect to food, shelter, clothing, health, life education, etc.
Freedom to act in one’s own interest encapsulates the ability to take informed and conscious action, or steps in the pursuit of one’s interest within society, with a view to living a life of freedom and dignity. This freedom is essentially about the active agency of the individual within the collective and of the collective as an aggregation of individuals.
These three freedoms are like the civic space rights, mutually reinforcing and interdependent, and they also overlap with the civic space rights.
In particular, in order for one to be able to effectively act in one’s own interest in the pursuit of a life of happiness, fulfilment, dignity, and freedom and to be free of want and fear, there must be the existence of a robust and expansive civic space, with one being able to fully access and enjoy the freedoms of association, expression, and assembly.
Part 2 of this article is available here. Jaye Gaskia is associated with Praxis Academy
Follow the AkweyaTV channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Va7m7dvJuyA7h5XMc22i