Description
Terrorism is an issue of global concern, and the use of the term is widely contested with no agreed definition. Yet, there exists a paucity of research on how affected communities construe terrorism as a language and construct in informing attitude towards the reintegration of those once affiliated with terrorism and their families from a critical terrorism perspective. Drawing on a Critical Terrorism Studies lens and underpinned by social constructionist and social identity theories, the study dissects how the language of ‘terrorism’ is used in problematic and contested terms to decide, justify and sustain who gets labelled as unrepentant terrorists and reaction towards reintegration. The study drew on empirical data collected from 150 participants recruited from Borno, Adamawa and Plateau states in Nigeria. It also finds that factors such as government responses to repentant terrorists seem to influence how terrorism is construed, distrust in government reintegration approach, and the inadvertent labelling of former Boko Haram members and their families as terrorists underserving of forgiveness and reintegration. The study also found affected community resentment and a quest for harsher punishment and responses to such groups due to perceived government support in incentives to encourage desistance from terrorism whilst affected communities and those in internally displaced persons camps are left to languish in poverty. In conclusion, the study calls for and recommends a better conceptualisation and fair usage of the term ‘terrorism’ to avoid the blanket extension and negative adverse impact on former Boko Haram members and affected families with implications for undermining government reintegration efforts.
