The current wave of democratization in Africa with its embedded freedom of expression, which came to many of the countries in the continent after a prolonged period of autocracy, appears to have opened up a host of bottled up feelings and emotions. During the period of autocracy,, freedom of expression was muzzled and people were afraid of expressing their feelings.

Without conducting much analysis on the multiethnic texture of the country, colonial ethnographers and ethnohistorians obsessed with the ideology of ‘Somali homogeneity’, and stakeholders of the nationalist sentiments of self-same Somalia successfully demonstrated the Horn of Africa nation as an ‘egalitarian’ society pursuing a cultural mode of ‘pastoral democracy.’1 To break away from that erroneous diction, this essay aims at problematizing the vagueness of that notion by introducing a counter narrative that unravels not only the existence of other ethnic groups and cultures but also an enormous nature of subjugation, prejudice and discrimination – factors antithetical to the ideals of egalitarianism. For the sake of unlearning that early and enduring misinterpretation, this essay presents an account of the discrimination against the Bantu/Jareer people and their place in the Somali social and political system. It attempts at offering a realistic situation as compared to the idealistic image of the colonial writers’ and early Somali scholarship’s self-same tutelage. At another level, the revelation in the study challenges the fallacy in Prof. Lidwien Kapteijns’s recently formed discourse that the Bantu Jareer people benefited significant political and economic consideration in independent Somali, an extremely mendacious concoction which, despite being absent from the available literature, Prof. Kapteijns’s work shied away from producing empirically based, factual evidence to support her argument (M. Eno, 2013b:21-31). In its general scope, the study intends to contribute to the principle of “understand[ing] Somalia for what it is and not what it ought to be” (Kusow 2004: xii).
Key words: Bantu/Jareer, discrimination, ethnicity, prejudice, racism, Somalia, stereotypes.

The Nigerian state is a conglomeration of disparate ethnic groups. Despite 53 years of statehood, the task of forging a viable Nigerian state out of them is still an on-going project. Rather than the multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-religious character of Nigeria being an asset, it manifests a tendency towards being a liability. The federal principles which are invaluable in laying a centripetal basis for mutual coexistence in multiethnic states have been so distorted that they have not yielded their benefits. This paper examines the processes through which ethnic hatred is mobilised as well as the interplay between marginalisation and the prevalence of ethnic hatred in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. It contends that the construction of the psyche of marginalisation within the context of power shift is a product of elite politics aimed at gaining greater access to state power at the expense of the people.

Keywords: Marginalisation; power shift; ethnicity; geopolitical zones; federalism

Nigeria is a nation polarized into sectional, religious and ethnic contestations leading to incessant crisis of leadership. The crisis of leadership in Nigeria reflects the national psyche of the Nigerian state as expressed by the political behaviour of its elites among others. This paper considers a framework for understanding the root causes and consequences of the incessant crisis of leadership in Nigeria and the implications of this crisis for national integration and nation-building. It identifies the way in which the Nigerian state was constituted, the divide and rule colonial policy, the ‘two publics’ mentality of its elites and the character of early nationalism as root causes of this crisis. It also proffers recommendations on the way forward including the sanctions against negative political behaviour, transcultural leadership and public enlightenment.

Key terms: Crisis of Leadership, National Psyche, Political Behaviour, Hate Speech, Conflict, Ethnicity, National Integration, Nation-building

Abstract
This paper examines the nexus between hate speech and post election violence in Africa. Illustrations were mainly drawn from Nigeria and Kenya. It argues that political leaders in Africa neglect the provocative tendencies of hate speech so long as it enables them to remain in power. Observably, most hate speeches in Africa are made by political leaders. This paper recommends that African governments and civil societies should monitor the media especially the native language television and radio stations who broadcast most of these hate speeches.

Keywords: Hate speech, Africa, Kenya, Nigeria, post electoral violence, ethnic groups

Nigerians seem to enjoy profiling and pouring invectives on one another especially whenever they congregate in their in-groups to discuss the Nigerian condition. In fact the comments section in many online articles on controversial issues about Nigeria often appears to be open arenas for inter-ethnic, inter-regional or inter-religious finger-pointing, in which hate speeches are readily deployed to castigate the others while defending the in-group.
The ease with which Nigerians indulge in venomous hate-filled ethnic, religious and regional profiling on a whim raises a fundamental question of how to control the menace without undermining the free speech principle that is a key building block of democracy.
Keywords: freedom of expression, hate speech, ethnic profiling, social distance.