This roundtable on “Preventing And Countering Violent Extremism (PCVE) In Nigeria: Lessons From The Implementation of the Policy Framework And National Action Plan (PFNAP) For PCVE In Nigeria” is not only apt, within the current context, at a time when we are still undergoing transition in governance from one elected government to another, it is also coming at the right time, given the ongoing, and deepening conversations about the necessity, as well as the urgency of a comprehensive review of the PCVDE PFNAP.
Why has such a review become necessary and urgent? The reason is very simple. The PFNAP was developed in 2016 and approved in 2017, and as such as a policy document it is more than six years old, and given the context of developments within PCVE nationally, regionally and globally since then, it has also arguably become quite dated.
But more importantly, a review, has become urgent because of the necessity to draw on lessons from our wealth of experience in PCVE in general, and in implementing the PCVE PFNAP in particular, over the last half a decade; to improve our understanding of the dynamics and challenges of PCVE, and as well to improve on our responses, in such a manner that we are better able to achieve and realise the overarching objective of the PFNAP, captured in the phrase, “Partnering for safer and resilient communities”.
This paper/presentation will be looking at what the strategy document says; what is implied in what the PFNAP says, what the practice has been, and what lessons can be drawn from our practice in order to improve our understanding and responses. It is also important to state clearly from the onset that what follows are the reflections of a PCVE practitioner, and not the report and findings of a structured research and or study into the subject matter. That said, nothing about this invalidates the content of the reflection.
We begin by looking at the PCVE PFNAP for guidance. There are four core objectives identified in the PFNAP, and these also double as, and frame the content of the four components of program implementation for the PFNAP.
These are institutionalise, mainstream and coordinate PCVE programmes at national, state and local levels; strengthen accessible justice system and respect for human rights and rule of law; enhance capacity of individuals/communities to prevent and counter violent extremism; and recover from violent occurrences; and institutionalise, mainstream and integrate strategic communication in PCVE programmes at all levels.
As can be seen from the above this paper will speak to the first objective and component one of the programs. It is important to note at this point that as for any serious, integrated and holistic approach and policy, although each objective helps us to focus on specific sets of processes and programs, nevertheless, the objectives are such that they are interrelated, interlinked, interconnected, and interdependent, in such a way that the overall goal can and will only be achieved in the context of the mutual reinforcement and mutual dependency of all the objectives taken together.
For example, without achieving objective one, which focuses on institutionalization, mainstreaming and coordination of PCVE at all levels; it will be difficult, if not nearly impossible to achieve any of the following three objectives, and vice versa; just as it will not be possible to achieve objective one, without implementing it within the context of the understanding of its interconnectedness with the other objectives, and without deliberately and intentionally tailoring implementation towards realising the import of the following three subsequent objectives.
When we are strengthening institutions, enabling mainstreaming, and deepening coordination, at all levels, and in general, it means in order to realise the subsequent objectives, we must prioritise the justice sector, individuals and communities [in particular community institutions].
And we must also do these in a manner that ensures that we are developing shared and common understanding of the problem, and we are communicating strategically about both the problem and our response.
This understanding of the approach is quite clearly stated in the PFNAP, under its conceptual clarifications section. The relevant portion is reproduced here :
For conceptual clarification, the following terms used in this document are defined as follows: Whole-of-Government Approach: means the coordinated, collaborative and integrated efforts, required by all Government actors, line Ministries, Departments and Agencies as required by their established mandates, and as provided in this Policy Framework to prevent and counter violent extremism.
Whole-of-Society Approach: means the efforts required by individuals, families, communities, civil society organisations, academia, media, voluntary organisations and the private sector to prevent and counter violent extremism in accordance with the guiding principles and core objectives set forth in the policy framework.
This article is an abridge first part of paper presented at Roundtable on PCVE In Nigeria: Lessons From The Implementation Of The National Action Plan for PCVE; Organised By The Institute For Peace And Conflict Resolution (IPCR); October, 24th, 2023).
