International law was created to establish world peace, security and justice to make this international law effective, the United Nations was established, and at the heart of the United Nations stands the United Nations Security Council, reality is that while the primary objective of the Security Council is to maintain global peace and security, the veto power often creates unrest and poses serious threats in that very arena. The United Nations Security Council is like a kite- it appears capable of passing urgent and necessary resolutions, but the string that controls that kite is that veto. In other words no matter how important a proposal may be, if it conflicts with the interests of the permanent members, it will be rejected. This is in essence, the power to say no. It is these five permanent (P5) members who possess the power of Veto. This power can hold a state’s highly important decisions and even reject appeals to the likes of certain populations. This research paper shows how instead of using the veto power to establish peace and justice, it has often supported injustice and inhumanity, prioritizing the political interests of a few over the protection of global populations.

The rapid expansion of global patent filings has increased the complexity of prior art searches and intensified pressure on patent offices to maintain examination quality. Within the Organisation African Intellectual Property Organisation known by its French acronym (OAPI), the 2015 revision of Annex I to the Bangui Agreement strengthened substantive examination procedures, including prior art search obligations. However, structural and technological constraints may limit the effective implementation of these reforms. This article examines the opportunities and challenges of integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into prior art search within the OAPI system. Using a doctrinal analysis of Annex I, combined with a comparative examination of the use of AI in major patent offices, it argues that AI can enhance semantic search capabilities, improve efficiency, and strengthen patent quality across OAPI Member States. Yet uncritical adoption risks technological dependency, algorithmic opacity, and weakened institutional autonomy. The article proposes a calibrated integration model grounded in phased adoption, human oversight, capacity-building, and transparency safeguards to ensure modernization without compromising legal legitimacy.

This article critically examines the incorporation of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms into the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria, with particular emphasis on the reformist objectives underlying their adoption and the absence of a coherent structural and legal foundation to support their effective implementation. While the integration of ADR is intended to decongest courts, promote restorative justice, and enhance access to justice, Nigeria’s criminal justice system remains predominantly adversarial and retributive. This structural orientation generates significant tension between entrenched procedural norms and emerging reformist aspirations. The article identifies persistent legislative gaps, institutional weaknesses, procedural ambiguities, and inconsistencies in policy and practice that undermine the operational viability of ADR in criminal proceedings. It further interrogates the suitability and enforceability of ADR outcomes, particularly in cases involving serious offences where public interest considerations and victims’ rights are paramount. Employing doctrinal and empirical methodologies, the study argues that, in the absence of comprehensive legal reform, institutional capacity building, and normative reorientation of justice sector actors, the adoption of ADR in criminal justice constitutes a largely symbolic reform. The article concludes by proposing a structured framework for the principled integration of ADR into Nigeria’s criminal justice system, grounded in legislative coherence, institutional accountability, and restorative justice values, with a view to ensuring its long-term effectiveness and legitimacy.