Is Labour taking it too far in its demand for a living wage by shutting down critical infrastructure? Does this amount to economic sabotage and should its leaders be held legally liable? Deputy News Editor JOSEPH JIBUEZE, ADEBISI ONANUGA and ANNE AGBI examine the legal implications of the protests.
Labour made good its threat to embark on a nationwide strike after an agreement could not be reached on a new minimum wage.
However, the cutting off of the power supply and shutting down of flight operations brought another dimension to the issues.
Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, said Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC) members who want to withdraw their services have the right to do so.
“What they can’t do, however, is to shut down critical national infrastructure like the power grid and other installations. That is economic sabotage.
“The right to go on strike does not allow for criminal actions under any guise and assault on citizens who are going about their lawful activities,” he stated in a tweet on X, formerly Twitter, via his handle @TheTope_Ajayi.
Special Adviser Information and Strategy to President Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga, added that it was “saddening that Labour could go to this extreme.
“What is clear is that the issue they claim to be fighting for cannot be resolved by blackmail or sabotage.
“They cannot even be resolved by the Federal Government unilaterally.
“The Labour leaders will still have to return to the negotiating table,” he stated in a post on X, via his handle @aonanuga1956.
The Federal Government had accused Labour of failing to meet all statutory requirements and International Labour Organisation (ILO) principles before the declaration of industrial action.
It also said there was a subsisting court order precluding Labour from embarking on strike, which is yet to be vacated.
Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) reminded Labour of the non-vacation of June 5, 2023, interim order by the National Industrial Court barring them from “embarking on any industrial action or strike of any nature.”
The government listed sections 41(1) and 42(1) of the Trade Disputes Act 2004 (as amended) which requires labour to give a 15-day prior strike notice before embarking on a strike.
Fagbemi, in a June 1 letter to the two labour centres, claimed the unions did not take “recourse to conciliation, meditation, and (voluntary) arbitration procedures” as outlined by the ILO before declaring the strike.
Strike declaration
The NLC and TUC on Friday directed their affiliate unions to mobilise for the strike to register their displeasure over the outcome of Thursday’s meeting by the wage committee.
The Federal Government and the private sector increased their offers to N60,000 while labour buckled down from its initial demand of N615,000 to N494,000.
On Saturday, Information and National Orientation Minister Mohammed Idris explained that the government rejected the N494,000 demand by labour because it would lead to a rise in its wage bill of N9.5 trillion annually.
The National Assembly leadership intervened late Sunday, but Labour insisted there was no going back on the strike.
The result was the shutting down of critical national infrastructure.
Grid shut down
The Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) claimed Labout shut down the national grid, resulting in a blackout nationwide.
“The national grid shutdown occurred at about 2.19am this morning, June 3, 2024,” said TCN General Manager, Public Affairs, Ndidi Mbah.
He added: “At about 1:15 am this morning, the Benin Transmission Operator under the Independent System Operations unit of TCN reported that all operators were driven away from the control room and that staff that resisted were beaten while some were wounded in the course of forcing them out of the control room and without any form of control or supervision, the Benin Area Control Center was brought to zero.
“Other transmission substations that were shut down by the Labour Union include the Ganmo, Benin, Ayede, Olorunsogo, Akangba and Osogbo Transmission Substations.”
TCN said the sudden forced load cuts led to high frequency and system instability, which eventually shut down the national grid at 2:19am.
At about 3.23am, it commenced grid recovery, using the Shiroro Substation to attempt to feed the transmission lines supplying bulk electricity to the Katampe Transmission Substation.
“The situation is such that the labour Union is still obstructing grid recovery nationwide.
“We will continue to make effort to recover and stabilise the grid to enable the restoration of normal bulk transmission of electricity to distribution load centres nationwide,” the TCN said.
NLC, in a statement by its president Joe Ajaero, denied TCN’s allegations that it forcefully shut down the national grid.
He said in a statement: “One wonders whether TCN’s management needs education on the dynamics of industrial action.
“It is not true that anybody was manhandled by us in any TCN location.
“Maybe, TCN in its effort to scuttle the strike tried to force workers to be at work, not realising the resolve of all workers to stay away.
“Why would the grid not go down when the workers who operate them decide to withdraw their service?
“That is how it works and it further demonstrates that without workers, no wheel can turn; no work can take place anywhere.
“Nigerian workers led by the NLC and TUC have exercised due caution and unusual patience in our engagement with our social partners and this restraint has been grossly abused unfortunately which has led us to the present impasse.
“Trying to buck pass instead of accepting blame and taking necessary steps to put its house in order will not allow the TCN to make discernible progress.
“We would like the organisation to take adequate measures to ensure that it discharges its responsibilities to Nigerians especially the electricity sector instead of dissipating its energy on trying to insult Nigerian workers by its deliberate peddling of falsehood.”
Has Labour gone beyond legal bounds?
The development sparked a huge debate as to whether Labour was overstepping its bounds.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Wahab Shittu, analysed the legal implicaations.
On whether he sees any illegality in Labour’s actions so far, he said: “Several factors need to be considered. Under national labour laws and international conventions, such as the standards set by the ILO, workers have the right to strike and protest.
“These legal provisions enable workers to engage in collective bargaining and protest for improved wages and working conditions.
In this context, the actions taken by the NLC appear to be within the bounds of the law. They are exercising their legally protected rights to strike and protest.
“As long as their actions adhere to the regulations governing such activities, including any procedural requirements and restrictions, there does not seem to be any legal violation.”
Asked whether Labour is crossing the legal lines of protest given threats to national security, Shittu said: “Labour’s actions that severely disrupt essential services could be seen as crossing legal lines, particularly when they pose a threat to national security.
“Shutting down electricity, petroleum supply, and airports can have significant impacts on public safety and economic stability.
“Such disruptions can affect healthcare, emergency services, and critical infrastructure, endangering lives and well-being.
“The economic repercussions of these actions can be severe, potentially leading to legal actions against Labour for causing undue harm to the economy and public welfare.
“When Labour’s actions violate specific laws governing strikes in essential services, they may face legal penalties.
“Governments often have emergency powers to ensure the continuity of essential services during strikes, emphasising the critical nature of maintaining these services for public safety and national security.”
Shittu stressed Labour’s right to protest but noted that like all rights, it is not absolute and has limitations.
The limits of the right to protest, the SAN said, include:
•The protest must be peaceful and non-violent. Any form of violence or destruction of property can lead to criminal charges.
•The protest must be a lawful assembly, and the NLC must comply with public order laws and regulations.
•The protest must not obstruct public roads, sidewalks, or access to buildings.
•The protest must not incite violence, hatred, or discrimination.
•The NLC must respect the right of counter-demonstrations and not interfere with their peaceful assembly.
•The NLC must comply with reasonable police directives and instructions to maintain public order.
•The protest must not result in damage to public or private property.
•The protest must not breach the public peace or cause a disturbance that could lead to a breach of the peace.
According to Shittu, these limitations are based on Nigerian law and court decisions and are subject to interpretation by the courts.
Adegboruwa: no line crossed
Leading rights activist, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN), believes Labour’s actions do not pose any threat to national security.
He noted that notices were issued to the government, adding that there was no court order prohibiting the strike.
Adegboruwa said: “I do not think the NLC is crossing the lines by embarking on this strike.
“Under Section 39 of the Constitution, every citizen has a right to freedom of expression, whether by way of protest or strike actions.
“The Trade Dispute Act also gives power to citizens to exercise their rights and so we cannot be right to say that labour is crossing the lines.
“They are within their rights and there is no issue of national security involved in it at all.
“They gave notices to the government, which should have been complied with and I believe that it is not a matter of illegality given the current economic conditions in the country.
“There is a National Minimum Wage Act that the government should abide by in fixing minimum wages regularly.
“Labour has embarked on this strike action to enforce that law, so we cannot in any way accuse them of illegality.
“It is now left for the government to sit down with labour to agree on a mutually beneficial roadmap for the economy of Nigeria.”
Adegboruwa does not think shutting down the national grid is a crime.
He added: “The issue of national security is not affected by the strike because the action they have taken is recognised by law.
“They gave notices; negotiations were embarked upon before it broke down and there is no court order prohibiting the strike as it were, so there is no threat to national security.”
Abe: good faith negotiations key
A legal expert, Dr. Oyeniyi Abe, said compromise and good faith negotiations should be the focus.
On whether he thinks action should be taken against Labour leaders for the disruptions, he said: “I don’t think that’s necessary in order not to inflate tensions unless they are overtly participating in a crime.
“Mere words or threats are not prosecutable crimes to the best of my knowledge.
“Right to strike is guaranteed under our laws.”
Abe, who chairs the Committee on Business and Human Rights at the International Law Association (ILA) Nigeria, stressed that there is a limit to protests.
“While they have the right to defend the interests of their members, such defence must not translate to unnecessary hardships on Nigerians.
“Shutting down the national grid will lead many to darkness in a country where there’s endemic power failure already – same for other acts that can further deprive Nigerians access to necessities.”
Way forward
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Ahmed Raji, called for dialogue.
He said: “The labour leaders, the government and all relevant stakeholders should come to a roundtable and resolve the issues.
“They all have their points but that is left to the public to deduce.
“Dialogue is the best solution. I passionately appeal to all concerned to approach the issues pragmatically.
“Maybe, all sides may consider a minimum wage of around N100,000. However, it must not be made mandatory for the states since fingers are not equal.”
Dr Abe also called for continued negotiation.
“They must approach these negotiations with an open mind and in the realisation of what’s practically possible in line with recent inflationary reports and cost of living metrics
“Compromise is needed. They shouldn’t take the ‘my way or highway’ approach.
“Compromise may not achieve the desired result but it’s a step in the right direction,” he said.
Adegboruwa called for a middle ground between Labour’s demand and the government’s offer.
The SAN said: “The economic reality does not make N60,000 a workable minimum wage as the government is offering.
“At the same time, I think that the demand for over N400,000 as minimum wage is not realistic on the part of Labour.
“There has to be some dialogue that will lead to a resolution.
“The government and leaders should go back to the drawing board so this matter can be resolved through negotiation and discussions.
“Both parties should embrace mutual discussions that will lead to some kind of agreement.
“Labour will have to shift its grounds and government will have to also embrace changes.”
For Shittu, the way forward is to address the situation constructively.
He said: “Firstly, both Labour and the government should engage in sincere dialogue to address the underlying issues.
“Mediation by an independent body might facilitate a resolution and help bridge differences.
“Secondly, it is crucial to ensure that all actions taken by both parties are within the legal framework to prevent escalation and potential legal repercussions.
“Adhering to the law can create a more stable and predictable environment for negotiations.
“Thirdly, implementing interim measures to guarantee the continuity of essential services while negotiations are ongoing can protect public safety and national security.
“These measures can provide a buffer that allows critical services to function despite the ongoing dispute.
“Lastly, the government and Labour should work together to address the root causes of the grievances.
“This includes improving wages and working conditions to prevent future conflicts.
“By tackling the fundamental issues, both parties can create a more sustainable and harmonious working environment.”
