Tag: protests

The federal government has not disclosed exactly how many protesters from the August 1-10 #EndBadGovernance action are still in detention, or what is being done about them other than a few haphazard arraignments. But some independent estimates, mostly by human rights organisations and other civil society organisations, suggest that over 1,000 might still be in detention in some nine or more states awaiting trial or freedom. The campaign for their release, some reports show, is being undertaken by a number of media establishments and CSOs, with some of these groups calling for the detainees’ unconditional release. There were no indications of any arrest during the largely symbolic and unenthusiastic Fearless in October protests organised in some states on October 1, Independence Day anniversary.

Published reports about the August and October protests, both before and after, had been curiously inciting and patronising. The expectations of the offending media were, however, not met for many reasons. The organisation of the protests was shambolic, the reasons were tenuous, and the execution incompetent. The reasons included the restoration of fuel subsidy without any convincing economic argument, return to fixed currency exchange regime without any sensible argument woven around why currencies weaken or strengthen, and the release of Nnamdi Kanu against which nearly the whole of the old political North was dead set. Right from the beginning there was no consensus about the protests, despite the obvious pervasion of hunger and hardship in nearly all parts of the country.

If the campaign for the unconditional release of detained protesters received attention nationwide and gained traction in the media, it was because the state and federal governments had been noticeably tardy in arraigning suspects, were slow in assembling evidence, and together with a ponderous and demotivated judiciary were inefficient in prosecuting the detainees. There is indeed a clear reluctance by state governments and the police to prosecute the protesters thereby allowing the media and many commentators to reframe the protest narratives away from the burglary, robbery and unmitigated violence that accompanied the protests in some states. Protests are a fundamental right, but the brazen criminalities that sometimes accompany them are not a right. Until the government firmly applies the law, violent protests that threaten and destabilise the polity will not cease. After all, there will always be reasons to protest, as long as the constitution guarantees that right.

The October protest fizzled out partly because the government managed to uncover the destabilising plots that fuelled the August 1-10 protests. Disturbingly, no high-profile suspect is being prosecuted for inciting an insurrection despite the seizure of billions of naira and millions of dollars slush funds funneled to energise the action against the government and the country. In August, some states foolishly reasoned that the protests would be directed solely against the federal administration. The expectation proved shortsighted, for no sooner the protests began than all hell broke loose, without discrimination. Businesses were lost and properties looted and destroyed. On October 1, having learnt a few lessons, and despite the strangulating economy, Nigerians were predictably loth to embrace any street action with undetermined outcome.

Had protesters sharpened their focus and limited it to, say, fuel subsidy removal, it would have stood some chances of succeeding. Comparing the August 1-10 protest to the 2012 fuel subsidy removal protests during the Goodluck Jonathan administration was, therefore, far-fetched. The 2024 protests were childish, amorphous, ineptly led, and unduly politicised. They were a clear example of good causes bastardised by hatred, bigotry and sundry ulterior motives. The economics of fuel subsidy removal are so compelling that it beggars belief that any group could seize upon the fatuous logic of inflation to galvanise a protest. In 2012, there were some intellectual underpinnings to the protest of that time and era. They proved shortsighted, but they made some sense. The leaders of the August and October protest made no pretence to logic or common sense. As this column has consistently argued, no administration will restore the subsidy. It is both senseless and counterproductive to do so. Where the present government errs is not in policy conception but in policy execution: some of the spade work that should assuage the misery of the people were either glossed over or casually applied.

Read Also: I’ll pay N70,000 minimum wage, Makinde assures workers

The policy of floating the naira could also no longer be avoided, especially given the dire straits previous administrations had consigned the economy. A few factors influence the strength of any currency, but before the floating of the naira, previous administrations had ignored those factors because of the attendant pains. Lessons from the Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998, the Japanese Yen gyrations of 2008 to mid-2013, and the European Union break-up fears of 2010-2012 serve as potent examples of how and why currencies lose value and what could be done to restore sanity. Protesters mouthing piffle about artificially restoring naira value made nonsense of their arguments for street action. For them it became protest for protest sake. If protesters had a basic understanding of why currencies fluctuate, with particular reference to the naira, and had suggested ways to tackle the crisis, their protests would have gained considerable traction. Currency fluctuations, such as Nigeria is experiencing, has huge impacts on the economy, but it is nevertheless a reflection of the strength or weakness of the economy as a whole. Policy fiat would not provide the remedy, nor would the emotional nonsense about what the exchange rates used to be years ago compared to what it is today.

After the massive breakdown of law and order during the August 1-10 protests in the North, Lagos stood the only chance of a fairly successful protest in October. But the interviews granted by some of the Lagos protesters showed they were a disgrace. They complained of hunger, but their indolence blinded them to why Southeast and northern youths made no such silly arguments. The Southwest youths adopted area boys tactics, grumbling and complaining about everything, while the Southeast youths worked their buttocks out in apprenticeship of all kinds, and northern youths stayed back on their farms or came down to the South to make significant inroad into the Okada and Keke businesses. The Nigerian economy is being reset, admittedly awkwardly; but only hard working and enterprising youths will take advantage. No one can abort the reset, and no one can delay it; not even with a thousand protests. The hardship is real, and the economy is in turmoil, but that is why youths must show ingenuity in navigating what is clearly a hard and treacherous economic and social terrain. Instead of complaining and whining about what the state has not done, it may be time for everyone to buckle up, particularly entitled Lagos ‘ebi’n pawa’ youths in order to envision a tantalising future. The war in Ukraine and the chaos in the Middle East will make life much harder for everyone. While protests may help the government to fine-tune policies and significantly cut costs, which they are yet to do, it is either Nigerians adapt or they die.

The seeds for today’s grave economic crisis were sown years ago, as analysed in this place last week. Having matured robustly and come to a head in the closing years of the Muhammadu Buhari administration, the crisis is unlikely to be resolved quickly or without pains. But while the crisis remains, and even grows in intensity, public reactions through protests will become a desperate, cathartic tool to either lessen or deaden the pains. Unwilling to confront what was certain to be a virulent public reaction to the painful administration of long-term remedies, the past administration borrowed heavily to smother the crisis and kick the nuisance down the road for the next administration to handle. There is, however, no consensus that the Bola Tinubu administration adequately explained before the elections the grave economic threat the republic faced, nor has it satisfactorily broken the crisis down in ways Nigerians could grasp or endure. There is also no consensus that the sacrifices needed to weather the crisis have been equitably shared, nor have the panaceas themselves been unimpeachable.

Despite the misgivings and apprehensions, nothing adequately explains or justifies the volume and virulence of protests that have inundated the country since the last elections. The protests have taken on a life of their own, and they seem increasingly less directed at extirpating the crisis than scuttling democracy. This is where abundant care is needed. Protests and their freedom corollaries are guaranteed by the constitution in many sections, particularly Sections 39 and 40; but they are also caveated by other sections and laws, particularly Section 45 of the constitution and the Public Order Act, 1979. Notwithstanding these freedoms and caveats, protests have become the casual weapon of civil society organisations and labour unions whose countercultural understanding of civil engagements is a marked departure from the past when strikes were specific and targeted. What should cause deep apprehension is that protests have today become an omnibus weapon in the hands of every internet guru adept at manipulating the social media. Literally speaking, as the Nigerian condition is demonstrating with the dangerous proliferation of irresponsible and often foreign-funded activists, anyone can conjure a cause out of the blue or, worse, furnish a war.

Putting a lid on protests-induced centrifugal forces will almost certainly be complicated by a number of factors ranging from class, low literacy, religion, regional and ethnic biases, and gross misreading and misunderstanding of constitutional protections. Protests have, therefore, become badly distorted by these factors into extreme opposition tactics. It is no longer enough to have a great cause, say for instance a campaign for higher wages, the trend is to irrationally weaponise the cause and turn it into a tool for a far worse, but cleverly disguised, agenda. Most historical protests have either led to wars or worsened the plight of protesters, but ignorant of the past, unwilling to learn from experience, and sometimes determined to even cut their nose to spite their face, protesters bungle what should ordinarily be a great tool to advance the cause of democracy or better the living conditions of the people. Sudan, Somalia, Ukraine, Russia, Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, France, among other countries, have too many unsavoury and bloody stories to tell. What was designed to be a tailored and forceful overthrow of elected government in Nigeria in January 1966 quickly snowballed, under heavy ethnic intrusions, into a civil war just months later. Given the intransigence of protesters, agitators, and critics, not to say their inflexible and opinionated discourses, it does not appear Nigerians have realised that there is no easy or controlled or healthy way to undermine or even overthrow an elected government outside of elections.

Read Also: FG begins distribution, installation of CNG kits in Ogun

It is now more urgent than ever that defending democracy is far safer than the naïve optimism that a forceful change would lead to desirable outcomes. Had democracy being defended in 1966, imagine how entrenched it would have been today, not to talk of avoiding the embarrassment of now having to campaign for a return to the parliamentary system of government. And what if democracy, despite all its imperfections and electoral maladies, had been defended in 1983? The facts speak for themselves. Sadly, protest organisers today adopt the extremist goal of advocating forceful change, bloodbath, and disintegration, among other ignoble objectives, instead of policy correction or amelioration. The social media makes sloganeering of protests sexy and macho, with many ethnic supremacists with a grudge masquerading under social and economic activism. Political rhetoric has become flagrant and incendiary, and a dismal, spectral pall now hangs over the country, encouraged by irresponsible labour unionism and hard-line activists. Only last week, after having exhausted itself over threats to call a strike on behalf of their beleaguered president, Joe Ajaero, organised labour was again threatening to shut down the country over illegal and malfeasant miners. Clearly, separatist forces are at work, far beyond protesting the Tinubu administration’s harsh measures designed to correct the country’s economic disequilibrium.

So far, the government has not found a practical and fitting answer to the maddening campaigns and incitement on social media. However, Nigeria is not alone contending with the social media malady. But while the chaos on social media predisposes many countries to danger, in Nigeria, with its unresolved national question, that danger is more imminent and its consequences dire. It is either the country steps back from the brink or takes a fatal plunge from which recovery might be impossible. The political opposition have incomprehensibly disallowed a closure to the 2023 presidential poll, and are setting themselves and the country up for a crisis that may consume everybody. It is not only the government that must rule responsibly, the opposition must also oppose responsibly by eschewing inflammatory language of framing discourses as winner takes all. Protests must also be responsibly directed at pertinent and specific issues, in order not to become a political manifesto underpinned by beguiling slogans. The August protests, egged on by sensational traditional and online media, were nothing but a potpourri of political agenda otherwise capable of propelling a well-organised political party into office. Too many disgruntled people are clearly looking for quick fixes instead of the careful, patient and methodical orchestration needed to win office and effect course changes.

If the government is to pacify the country, it must understand and clearly enunciate the problems. There is the issue of the economic crisis caused by years of governmental incompetence, infrastructural decay, stagnation, and profligacy. There is also the controversial mix of policies designed by the current administration to arrest social and economic chaos such as fuel subsidy removal, currency exchange float, and hunger crisis exacerbated by insecurity and low wages. And there is the deep political divisions approaching chasmic proportions. Convulsing these problems is social media either gone berserk or unresponsive to any form of regulation or control. The administration must get the best brains together to help fashion a response a little removed from the fits and starts it has seemed accustomed to injecting in the past few months. The end result must be that the constitutional rights of citizens will be preserved, while the multifarious threats to the country will be extinguished, irrespective of whose ox is gored. The solutions will not be a cakewalk, especially in the face of mounting and provocative defiance by powerful interests now used to acting freely and irresponsibly.