For the past few weeks, Nigeria has been rocked by protests over a cost-of-living crisis. The organised protests built off the momentum of anti-corruption protests in Uganda and demonstrations in Kenya against increased tax on essential goods. Like its predecessors, the protests in Nigeria have been characterised by violence, destruction of property, and allegations of human rights violations at the hands of the government. Following Nigerian President Bola Tinubu’s unheeded calls to stop the protests, authorities instigated a crackdown on protestors that sparked outrage among human rights organisations. So, why did the protests come about and how did everything get so out of hand?
What are the protests about?
The protests, dubbed “ten days of rage,” were a product of worsening poverty, food insecurity and allegations of political corruption. Nigeria is currently experiencing its worst economic crisis in 30 years. A report by the WHO entitled “Global Report on Food Crises 2024,” listed Nigeria as one of five countries with the largest number of people facing high levels of acute food insecurity.
The planned protests, coordinated through digital activism over social media and championed by numerous civil organisations under the hashtag #EndBadGovernanceinNigeria, are a call for recognition of economic hardship and systemic corruption that has grown deep roots in the West African state. Rallied to the cause were organized groups such as Students for Change, Nigerians Against Corruption Initiative, Nigerians Against Hunger and the Take it Back Movement, among others.
The protestors organized around ten core demands concerning:
- Insecurity and Hunger;
- The immediate Release for #EndSARS Victims;
- INEC and electoral Reform;
- Governance accountability;
- Recovery of stolen funds;
- Implementation of a living wage and standard of living;
- Judicial, legislative and constitutional reforms;
- Comprehensive infrastructural development;
- Transition to a unicameral legislature; and
- Education and human capital development.
In many ways, the protests were a push-back against the economic reforms of the Bola Tinubu administration. In spite of the administration’s reforms, Nigeria’s inflation rate hit 34.19 percent in June. The reforms have devaluated the Naira (Nigeria’s currency), eliminated fuel and energy subsidies, and borne witness to a sharp increase in food prices. A report by the IMF showed real GDP growth slowed to 2.8 percent in 2023; agriculture and trade were weak, and the Naira depreciated sharply after the unification of the official foreign exchange windows in June 2023. The removal of fuel subsidies in May 2023 worsened hardship and has been an ongoing cause for discontent.
Most notably, the reforms resulted in a tug-of-war to lift minimum wages above 30,000 Naira ($20,02) per month. When the Nigerian government refused to budge, flights were disrupted or suspended, and the national power grid was completely shut down. Nigeria’s two biggest labour unions, the Nigerian Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress, would eventually pause their strikes pending the government’s promise of more meaningful negotiations. While the Nigerian Minister of Information had announced an agreement on a monthly minimum wage of N70,000 ($44), disgruntlement remained—the N70,000 figure was far below the unions’ initial demand for N494,000 ($329.60).
The protests were also the product of allegations of political corruption. In July, Nigeria’s Federal High Court in Abuja ordered the Independent Electoral Commission to prosecute involvement with electoral violence, bribery, vote buying and collusion that overshadowed the 2023 general elections
What happened during the protests?
On July 29, the same day the National Minimum Wage Bill was assented to, protestors took to the streets to block a highway to the Nigerian capital, Abuja.
On July 31, the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, issued a statement urging all groups planning to participate in the protest to submit their details to the commissioners of police in their respective states. Lamenting that the organisers had not done so, Egbetokun claimed that intelligence showed the protests were aimed at “unleashing mayhem” that threatened to throw the situation into a state of anarchy. Ahead of the demonstrations, Amnesty International called on Nigerian authorities to protect the right to peaceful protest.
Egebtokun’s concerns were not initially realised. On the first official day of the marches, August 1, protests began peacefully through Nigerian states accompanied by signs and chants. The protests soon escalated: reports would arise that the Nigeria Police Force shot tear gas and live bullets at protestors in Abuja in an attempt to disperse them.
On August 2, Amnesty International reported 13 deaths of peaceful protesters. A curfew was declared in multiple states, prohibiting protestors from demonstrating. A police statement cited widespread destruction including destruction of police stations, attempts to take over government houses, looting and other such destruction of property. Amnesty International would criticise the crackdown on protestors, indiscriminate shooting into crowds, and attempts to hire thugs to hijack the protests.
On August 4, the police arbitrarily arrested 81 youth protestors in Sokoto state. Amnesty International called for an investigation into the deaths of 10 peaceful hunger protestors in Kano, some of whom, according to their sources, were children chanting “peace.”
As the protests progressed, many of the leaders were arrested. On August 6, over 40 were arrested for waving the Russian flag. By August 7, over 1,000 people had been remanded over the protest. To round off the ten days, the Take it Back Movement, a leading organizer of the protest, scheduled a One-Million-Man demonstration across all 36 states for August 10.
How has President Bola Tinubu responded to the protests?
President Bola Tinubu broke his silence on August 4, calling for an end to protests during an address to the nation, saying, “Our government will not stand idly by and allow a few with a clear political agenda to tear this nation apart.” He expressed a desire for dialogue and sadness over the lives lost:
As your President, I am committed to ensuring public order and protecting the lives and property of every Nigerian. We must come together, suspending further protests, and embrace dialogue for the sake of our nation’s unity and progress.
While Tinubu stressed the scarcity of resources, in the face of the cost of living crisis, he claimed, “[O]ur government is making significant strides”. He went on to cite reduced debt services and major infrastructure initiatives to improve quality of life. He confirmed that the government had ordered the suspension of duties on critical food items and medical supplies for the next six months. Tinubu also confirmed the purchase of tractors and planting equipment from overseas to kickstart the agriculture industry.
On August 8, Tinubu addressed the nation again to reassure against what he described as “temporary pains,” saying “every effort is being made to ensure a stable and prosperous future for all Nigerians.” Tinubu said:
All our good and helpful plans are in the works. More importantly, I know that they will work. Sadly, there was an unavoidable lag between subsidy removal and these plans coming fully online. However, we are swiftly closing the time gap.
Tinubu assured that the government would fulfil its promise to make education more affordable and provide loans to higher education students under the “Renewed Hope Agenda.” He also expressed plans to open up 1.4 million jobs through a revamp of the cotton and textile industry and to deploy ten thousand “agro rangers” to 19 states for farmers and farmland protection.
Why has the government’s response garnered criticism?
Despite the government’s promise that Nigeria will soon overcome the “temporary pains” of the administration’s economic reforms, the government remains under pressure from protestors and international organizations.
The African Charter provides for the right to freedom of assembly and association as well as the right to property. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 similarly provides for the right to freedom of expression and the press; the right to peaceful assembly and association, and the right to property. Nigeria is also a party to the ICCPR.
In light of the above commitments, the government has faced criticism for using excessive force against protestors and opposition leaders. The official response to the protests has created flashbacks to the #EndSARS protests, which arose following the death of a Nigerian man at the hands of the NPG unit Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS). The government considered the SARS protests to be unlawful and denied all claims that the police shot at protestors. A ruling by the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) last month held that Nigeria violated the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights in its response to the #EndSARS protests.
Further to these complaints, Human Rights Watch has described the government’s framing of protestors as unwarranted and sinister. “Rather than undermining the right to protest, authorities should address the underlying issues that are driving the protests. They should ensure that protests can occur safely and peacefully and people’s fundamental rights are respected,” the organization said.
Conclusion
The protests are a lesson in the power of organized protests and the balancing act required of states to protect the rights to freedom of speech and assembly while upholding the equally important rights to health and property. Amnesty International’s Nigeria Director, Isa Sanusi has advised that the “Nigerian authorities must begin to seriously address the underlying issues driving the protests instead of ramping up repression and stifling peaceful dissent.”
While we await the next chapter with hopes that economic reforms will prove fruitful and that legal accountability for the countless deaths of protestors will be delivered, the Executive Directors at IMF have issued various recommendations to the Tinubu administration. The Directors encouraged all-encompassing reforms to reinforce the resilience of Nigeria’s economy. The Directors also stressed the need for “steadfast, well-sequenced and well-communicated reforms.” They warned that further adverse shocks to food and oil would exacerbate inflation and pressure on the exchange rate.
The likelihood of civil unrest is certainly high if the pains of the economic crisis do not prove to be “temporary” as Tinubu describes.
