military rule is by force and not the wil of the people
unlike civil rule.
Yes, because in millitary rule there is no freedom of speech.
Its not because under military rule there was less crime and the economy was prosperous. Also there was less problems with Muslim militant groups than there is now. The military rules by force and not by the will of the people. Military rule is seldom for the good of the people. Civil rights, in fact basic human rights are often none existent under military rule.
cilivian rule is better than military because cilivian are more civilized than the military they are more peaceful than military
Military rule is one that cannot be broken by the Military
civilian rule is better than military rule because there is freedom and peace in the nation better than when the military was ruling us
Regionlization. Of political parties
The military rules by force and not by the will of the people. Military rule is seldom for the good of the people. Civil rights, in fact basic human rights are often none existent under military rule.The military are AUTHORITARIAN in nature.The civilians gives room for public opinion which is lacking in military
the Foraker act was to end the military rule and to set up a civil government
Under a good civilian rule, people have the right to express their feeling on whatsoever matter that may arrive the country but under a military rule everything is done through the use of coersion, there is no room for your Opinion, everything is just done by forces
The achievements of Nigerian military rule since independence is that there has been less crime, less destruction and bombings, and less violence. Nigeria has also made strides in the educational and economical fields.
Because it was under strict military rule.
It has already been stopped. It has been gone since 1985.
Military rule represents a failure to make civil rule work. Civil rule can look ineffectual, but it is actually a triumph of civilization to have an army reporting to an elected civilian assembly. Military governments look efficient, but they usually conceal terrible inefficiency and corruption behind the uniforms and medals.
The same as it would be elsewhere. A country ruled by one or more of the armed forces.
Democracy has been raging in Nigeria since 1999. This occurred when the military rule ended in the country that same year.
Through military dictatorship and civil law.
the answer is simple its not even better than civilian rule why do you think that the civilian governors are the ones ruling us now because nobody wanted military governors
It leads to speedy and urgent development without bottleneck
a rule which the military has
air space through which aeroplanes are bound by Civil or Military rule, to fly
state the nigeria constitution
Nigeria was under British rule from 1914 until 1960
I would say not really. But the bad democracy can progress where as the military rule will most likely become a terrible dictatorship and the democracy would (obviously) be better. This is my opinion.
It's enforced by the military, but may be imposed under civil rule. Its particular terms may be determined by the military or by a civilian administration.
Idris Tanu Ejenavwo has written: 'A true servant leader' 'Military rule in Nigeria, 1966-1999' -- subject(s): Chronology, History, History, Military, Military History 'Nigeria Fourth Republic, 1999-2009' -- subject(s): Chronology, Politics and government, History