Language, Power and Religious Freedom: A Critical Discourse Analysis of CPC-Related Reports on Nigeria

References

[1] ABC News (2025, November 3). US designates Nigeria ‘Country of Particular Concern’ after Trump threat over alleged attacks on Christians. ABC News. https://abcnews.com/Politics/us-designates-nigeria-country-concern-after-trump-threat/story?id=127148133

[2] ADF International (2025, November 1). BREAKING: U.S. government designates Nigeria “Country of Particular Concern.” ADF International. https://adfinternational.org/news/us-government-designates-nigeria-country-of-particular-concern

[3] Archdiocese of San Antonio (2025, December 25). Members of Congress and USCIRF push to designate Nigeria as country of particular concern. https://archsa.org/members-of-congress-and-uscirf-push-to-designate-nigeria-as-country-of-particular-concern/

[4] Ayoola KA (2014). Media representation of Boko Haram in some Nigerian newspapers. International Journal of English Linguistics, 4(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v4n3p1

[5] Comerford M (2015). Boko Haram and the discourse of mimicry: A critical discourse analysis of media explanations for Boko Haram’s improved video propaganda quality. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 8(3), 475–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2015.1091657

[6] Congress.gov (2025). S.2747 – Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025, 119th Congress (2025–2026). Library of Congress. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2747/text

[7] CSI (2025, November 27). Nigeria: On the list of Countries of Particular Concern, again. https://www.csi-int.org/news/nigeria-on-the-list-of-countries-of-particular-concern-again/

[8] Darko WK (2024). A postcolonial critical discourse analysis [Master’s thesis, University of Iceland]. Skemman Repository. https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/45492/1/Winfred%20Kofi%20Darko.pdf

[9] Fairclough N (1989). Language and power. Longman.

[10] Fairclough N (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.

[11] Fairclough N (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.

[12] Fairclough N (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge.

[13] Ngha Nji J (2026). Framing Africa: A critical discourse analysis of Western media representation of Africa and Africans. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 16(5). https://doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.16.05.2026.p17311

[14] Osisanwo A (2016). Discursive representation of Boko Haram terrorism in selected Nigerian newspapers. Discourse & Communication, 10(4), 341–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481316638149

[15] Reisigl M, Wodak R (2009). The discourse-historical approach (DHA). In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed., pp. 87–121). Sage.

[16] United Nations (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations General Assembly.

[17] U.S. Department of State (2024). International Religious Freedom Act of 1998: Country of Particular Concern designations. Office of International Religious Freedom.

[18] USCIRF (2025a, November). Naming of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern is an important step to advance religious freedom. https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/releases-statements/naming-nigeria-country-particular-concern-important-step-advance

[19] USCIRF (2025b, July). Country update: Nigeria. https://www.uscirf.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/2025%20Nigeria%20Country%20Update_1.pdf

[20] USCIRF (2025c). Governance in Nigeria: Foundation for securing freedom of religion or belief [Hearing record]. https://www.uscirf.gov/events/hearings/governance-nigeria-foundation-securing-freedom-religion-or-belief

[21] USCIRF (2026, January). While President Trump designated Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern, other countries need to be called out as religious freedom violators as well. https://www.uscirf.gov/news-room/releases-statements/while-president-trump-designated-nigeria-country-particular-concern

[22] van Dijk TA (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.

[23] van Dijk TA (2006). Discourse, context and cognition. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606059565

[24] van Dijk TA (2008). Discourse and power. Palgrave Macmillan.

[25] van Dijk TA (2009). Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge University Press.

[26] Van Leeuwen T (2008). Discourse and practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. Oxford University Press.

[27] Van Leeuwen T (2013). The language of corporate annual reports: A critical discourse analysis. In L. Jack, J. Davison, & R. Craig (Eds.), The Routledge companion to accounting communication (pp. 45–57). Routledge.

[28] Van Leeuwen T, Wodak R (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445699001001005

[29] Wodak R, Meyer M (Eds.) (2009). Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.

@article{1724277,
      author = {Dr. Cynthia Adaeze Onuegwunwoke, Dr. Gloria Ukamaka Amadi, Dr. Kevin Onyewuchi Ugorji, Dr. Eugene Chukwuemeka Onuoha},
      title = {Language, Power and Religious Freedom: A Critical Discourse Analysis of CPC-Related Reports on Nigeria},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {4},
      pages = {3411-3428},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1724277.pdf},
      abstract = {This study examined how language constructs Nigeria’s image in Country of Particular Concern (CPC) and related religious-freedom reports issued between 2019 and 2025. It investigated the lexical choices, modality, naming practices, and transitivity patterns through which Nigeria, its government, religious communities, and non-state actors were represented. The study adopted Fairclough’s three-dimensional model of Critical Discourse Analysis, complemented by van Dijk’s socio-cognitive approach and informed by Hallidayan transitivity analysis. Data comprised nine purposively selected documents from the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, the U.S. Department of State, Congress, and selected advocacy organisations. Qualitative textual analysis was supported by descriptive lexical frequency counts and illustrative clause-level analysis. The findings revealed register-based differences in lexical intensity, uneven deployment of epistemic hedging, and asymmetrical naming and agency attribution. Non-state armed groups were identified more specifically as perpetrators of violence, whereas the Nigerian state was frequently represented through broad institutional labels associated with responsibility or toleration. Institutional actors also dominated evaluative discourse, while victims appeared predominantly as affected participants. The wider reporting discourse foregrounded religious-persecution narratives, particularly Christian victimisation, despite evidence of broader religious and security complexities. The study concludes that CPC reporting reflects unequal discursive power relations with implications for Nigeria’s international representation and diplomatic engagement.},
      keywords = {critical discourse analysis; Country of Particular Concern; religious freedom; transitivity; ideology; sovereignty},
      month = {October},
  }