JUSTICE IN ROBERT NOZICK AND MICHAELS ANDEL: IMPACTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN NIGERIA’S DEMOCRACY

Abstract

.Justice remains a concept defying investigative exhaustion. Different eras elicit different approaches, emphases, and consequences. Presently, marriage of justice and human rights is underscored so highly some theorists reckon the union typical of democracy. Robert Nozick argues a “minimal state” exemplifies justice due to assertion of human rights unrestricted by government mechanisms— libertarianism. This proceeded from a conviction human rights are inherent whose unchecked mediation by a state endangers possessors’ humanity. It challenges popular pursuit of common good at expense of individual good. Meanwhile, Michael Sandel argues justice is premised on patriotic virtues. Onus is on a state to prioritize it, including cases wherein human rights can be impacted—liberalism. Common good trumps individual good. Hence, his discontent with lingering infiltration of market values into human values. These various viewpoints stir problems about possibility of reconciliation and workability, respectively and collectively, in a democratic state. This paper contends welded positions of Nozick and Sandel can address recurrence of human rights abuses sustainably and conquer bad governance in Nigeria. The research coincides with perplexity of impoverishment amidst abundance in Africa’s most populous nation. Underpinning these are analytical, critical, and dialectical methodologies. Revolution of this discourse around Nozick, Sandel, and Nigeria is widespread. The paper concludes perfection of justice is idealistic and excellence of justice realistic.