Management of Covid-19 in Nigeria: Contending Paradigms of Democratic State’s Protectionist Rights Versus Individuals’ Libertarian Rights

Abstract

COVID-19 Pandemic put forward a new regime of paradigmatic contention as to the supremacy of state versus individual rights in a social contractual existence. John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and Rousseau just like other ancient and medieval political thinkers hypothesised the collective existence of man under the umbrella called state. Such existence epitomises a relatively peaceful and harmonious relationship between, first, man and his fellow man, and second, men and the state. The COVID-19 Pandemic presented with a new question: which among the two variants of rights (individual or state) owns supremacy? While the state’s right advocates an express non-consultative, unconventional action to quell the pandemic, individual rights advocate a consultative, constitutional, flexible and intentional consideration of individual convenience regardless of the rampaging effects of the pandemic. Each of these paradigmatic variances claims legitimacy on law and rights. This paper seeks to examine the various COVID-19 Pandemic Management Strategies adopted by the Nigerian state and how these have affected individual rights of citizens. It is the position of the authors that consistent divestment of human rights or appropriation of state’s law over human rights and freedom creates a pathway for new regime of autocratic democracy which is the rule of (not law) but institutions created by law; an event where the democratic institutions are stronger than the law itself. The paper further recommends new measures to address pandemics while keeping with the stability of the state and individual rights.