'Balance of Terror' -- Rival Militias and Vigilantes in Nigeria

Militias and vigilantes that assume public authority by fighting crime reject the laws of the state, yet they have no other set of rules to regulate their activities. Many of them claim to be accountable to their ethnic or religious community on whose behalf they operate. But their communities have found no means to institutionalise control over them. Moreover, there are no institutions to settle conflicts between different militias and vigilantes. On a local level, rival groups have reached informal arrangements. However, these compromises are unstable, as they reflect fragile alliances and shifting balances of power. Leaders of militias and other 'self-determination groups' have suggested organising a conference of all ethnic nationalities in Nigeria in order to design a new constitution that would give militias and vigilantes a legal role and define their authority. But the groups compared in this article – Oodua People's Congress, Sharia Vigilantes, Bakassi Boys, MASSOB, and Niger Delta militias – pursue very divergent interests, and they are far from reaching a consensus on how to contain violence between them.

Ist die staatliche Risikoübernahme bei Terrorrismusrisiken mit dem europäischen Wettbewerbsrecht vereinbar?

Nach den terroristischen Anschlägen vom 11. September 2001 wurde sowohl in der Versicherungspraxis als auch in der Wissenschaft kontrovers darüber diskutiert, ob der Staat bei solchen als "nicht versicherbar" geltenden Terrorismusrisiken mithaften soll. Als Folge der Ereignisse des 11. September 2001 ist in Deutschland die Extremus Versicherungsaktiengesellschaft entstanden, die Versicherungsschutz gegen Terrorismusrisiken anbietet und an de-ren Haftung der deutsche Staat beteiligt ist. Fraglich ist, ob eine solche Staatsbeteiligung an der Extremus AG eine unzulässige Beihilfe im Sinne des Art. 87 EGV darstellt und damit gegen das europäische Wettbewerbsrecht verstößt. Die wettbewerbsrechtliche Überprüfung der Extremus AG hat ergeben, dass die der Extremus AG gegebene staatliche Beihilfe in Form von Staatsgarantie ausnahmsweise zulässig ist.

Post-9/11 Terrorism Threats, News Coverage, and Public Perceptions in the United States

Terrorists, policy-makers, and terrorism scholars have long assumed that the mere threat of terrorist strikes affects societies that have experienced actual acts of terrorism. For this reason, most definitions of terrorism include the threat of violent political acts against civilians. But so far research has neither validated this conventional wisdom nor demonstrated how actual and mass-mediated threat messages by terrorists and terror alerts and threat assessments by government officials affect the public in targeted states. This paper fills the gap providing evidence that who conveys such messages matters and that mass-mediated threat messages by al Qaeda leaders and announced alerts and threat assessments by U.S. administration officials had a significant impact on the American public’s threat perceptions in the post-9/11 years.