Opinion
Law As Football
An old idiom which describes law as an ass, sends a wise message which would not fail to make an appropriate impression on individuals who can discern human shenanigans. Page 2 of The Tide newspaper of Friday, September 24, 2021, carried a headline news” “FG Considers Fresh Charges Against Igboho”. Oyo State High Court awarded N20 billion damages in favour of Igboho, against the Federal Government, arising from an action of the Department of State Services (DSS).
The news report said that the judge, Ladiran Akintola, had awarded the money as “an exemplary and aggravated damages” against the AGF and the Department of State Services, over the invasion of Igboho’s home in Ibadan on July 1. In a reaction to that judgement, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, speaking in faraway New York, said that FG may file fresh charges against Igboho. The position of the Federal Government on the judgement was about law and jurisdiction.
In the words of the AGF “As far as this matter is concerned, which court is it that has the jurisdiction to determine it?” Surely, within the context of obedience to court orders, there are associated rights and interests that are vested in the Federal Government. Apart from rights of appealing against that Oyo State High Court judgement, the AGF made other allusions. They include “right to file an application for setting aside the purported judgement” and “possibility of filing a fresh action”, including the jurisdiction of the court that gave that judgement.
The fact that Malami made statement on the Oyo State High Court judgement from New York means that the Igboho issue is not confined within Nigeria. What is the grouse of the Federal Government of Nigeria against Sunday Igboho? He is referred to as an agitator, wanting to split the unity of Nigeria. Invasion of Igboho’s house at night by security agencies resulted in the loss of a human life, but Igboho could not be arrested there and then.
While Malami was speaking in New York on the judgement of an Oyo State High Court that awarded N20 billion in favour of Igboho, there were other agitators insisting on a protest at the United Nations General Assembly, on September 24. Chairman of Nigerian Indigenous Nationalities Alliance for Self-Determination (NINA), Professor Banji Akintoye, spoke for various Nigerian agitators in diaspora. There were Yoruba and Biafra agitators as well as Middle-Belt groups insisting that the Federal Government would not stop their protest at the United Nations Headquarters in New York.
There was an allegation that the Federal Government of Nigeria planned to sponsor a counter-protest, but a vital question to ask is: What is “Million-Man Freedom March” all about? Why agitations from various quarters under NINAS? In the catalogue of the complaints of the agitators are that “the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria was a fraud against the people of South and Middle-Belt”; that “a Fulani militia group masquerading as a trade union, Miyyetii Allah, should be declared as a terrorist organisation”.
There was a news report that “The Grand Finale of the NINAS Million-Man Freedom March holds on September 24, 2021, the day President Muhammadu Buhari will be addressing the 76th Session of the United Nations General Assembly”. The goal was to “show before the world the crimes against humanity, attacks on press freedom, free speech and other criminalities being aided by the Muhammadu Buhari-led government of Nigeria”.
NINAS Director of Public Communications, Mr Maxwell Adeleye, was quoted as saying that, “no matter how the Nigerian Government try to scuttle the NINAS Grand March, the will of the people shall prevail”. He went on to say: “We refuse to be rattled. We shall not be intimidated. No oppressor has ever triumphed against the collective will of the people…” The international community is being told by the agitators that there is a “rape of our ancestral land and hijack of our assets and sovereignty by the Fulani-controlled Nigerian Government”.
Current agitations in Nigeria by various ethnic nationalities would call attention to past experiences in apartheid South Africa, when courts and security agencies were partners in oppressive practices. A situation where decisions and judgements of courts would turn legal institutions into the status of an ass or a football, portends ill for human freedom. Like the VAT issue, would the judgement of Oyo State High Court; awarding Igboho N20 billion damages, become an issue of appeals, litigations, interpretations and intimidations? Why threat of fresh charges against Igboho because a court awarded him N20 billion damages? Agitation can become a treasonable offence!
In the early days of formation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of the United States of America, some of the activities of its operatives resulted in litigations and award of damages in favour of the litigants. If in Nigeria we continue to have litigations involving “exemplary and aggravated damages” in which the Federal Government would have to pay some billions of naira to litigants, perhaps our security agencies would be less combative in their operatives. Unfortunately, court judgements which go against the establishment can be taken as brazen affronts.
Recent experiences with regards to judgements involving political litigations give us the impression that the law can be interpreted and treated like a football. A football is for everybody, players and non-players alike, yet, it is for nobody, in the sense that it can be kicked about by anybody, inside and outside a football field. Without going into various allegations made against several administrators of the legal system, at least gossips are many about judgements that conflict one with another. Judgements have been known to be written at night and sometimes under gun-point or threats.
Rising agitations coming from various ethnic groups in Nigeria have become such that they should not be addressed by threats, intimidations, or swept aside as irrelevant. The Guardian newspaper of Friday, 13 June, 2008, published an open letter by Ethnic Nationalities Movement, a part of which read: “We of the Ethnic Nationalities Movement say with emphasis that Nigeria will not be re-colonised either by foreigners or by gangster leaders”.
By: Bright Amirize
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
From all indications, Nigeria possesses enough human and material resources to become a true economic powerhouse in Africa. According to the National Population Commission (NPC, 2023), the country’s population has grown steadily within the last decade, presently standing at about 220 million people—mostly young, vibrant, and innovative. Nigeria also remains the sixth-largest oil producer in the world, with enormous reserves of gas, fertile agricultural land, and human capital.
Yet, despite this enormous potential, the country continues to grapple with underdevelopment, poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. Recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS, 2023) show that about 129 million Nigerians currently live below the poverty line. Most families can no longer afford basic necessities, even as the government continues to project a rosy economic picture.
The Subsidy Question
The removal of fuel subsidy in 2023 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been one of the most controversial policy decisions in Nigeria’s recent history. According to the president, subsidy removal was designed to reduce fiscal burden, unify the foreign exchange rate, attract investment, curb inflation, and discourage excessive government borrowing.
While these objectives are theoretically sound, the reality for ordinary Nigerians has been severe hardship. Fuel prices more than tripled, transportation costs surged, and food inflation—already high—rose above 30% (NBS, 2023). The World Bank (2023) estimates that an additional 7.1 million Nigerians were pushed into poverty after subsidy removal.
A Critical Economic View
As an economist, I argue that the problem was not subsidy removal itself—which was inevitable—but the timing, sequencing, and structural gaps in Nigeria’s implementation.
- Structural Miscalculation
Nigeria’s four state-owned refineries remain nonfunctional. By removing subsidies without local refining capacity, the government exposed the economy to import-price pass-through effects—where global oil price shocks translate directly into domestic inflation. This was not just a timing issue but a fundamental policy miscalculation.
- Neglect of Social Safety Nets
Countries like Indonesia (2005) and Ghana (2005) removed subsidies successfully only after introducing cash transfers, transport vouchers, and food subsidies for the poor (World Bank, 2005). Nigeria, however, implemented removal abruptly, shifting the fiscal burden directly onto households without protection.
- Failure to Secure Food and Energy Alternatives
Fuel subsidy removal amplified existing weaknesses in agriculture and energy. Instead of sequencing reforms, government left Nigerians without refinery capacity, renewable energy alternatives, or mechanized agricultural productivity—all of which could have cushioned the shock.
Political and Public Concerns
Prominent leaders have echoed these concerns. Mr. Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, described the subsidy removal as “good but wrongly timed.” Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party also faulted the government’s hasty approach. Human rights activists like Obodoekwe Stive stressed that refineries should have been made functional first, to reduce the suffering of citizens.
This is not just political rhetoric—it reflects a widespread economic reality. When inflation climbs above 30%, when purchasing power collapses, and when households cannot meet basic needs, the promise of reform becomes overshadowed by social pain.
Broader Implications
The consequences of this policy are multidimensional:
- Inflationary Pressures – Food inflation above 30% has made nutrition unaffordable for many households.
- Rising Poverty – 7.1 million Nigerians have been newly pushed into poverty (World Bank, 2023).
- Middle-Class Erosion – Rising transport, rent, and healthcare costs are squeezing household incomes.
- Debt Concerns – Despite promises, government borrowing has continued, raising sustainability questions.
- Public Distrust – When government promises savings but citizens feel only pain, trust in leadership erodes.
In effect, subsidy removal without structural readiness has widened inequality and eroded social stability.
Missed Opportunities
Nigeria’s leaders had the chance to approach subsidy removal differently:
- Refinery Rehabilitation – Ensuring local refining to reduce exposure to global oil price shocks.
- Renewable Energy Investment – Diversifying energy through solar, hydro, and wind to reduce reliance on imported petroleum.
- Agricultural Productivity – Mechanization, irrigation, and smallholder financing could have boosted food supply and stabilized prices.
- Social Safety Nets – Conditional cash transfers, food vouchers, and transport subsidies could have protected the most vulnerable.
Instead, reform came abruptly, leaving citizens to absorb all the pain while waiting for theoretical long-term benefits.
Conclusion: Reform With a Human Face
Fuel subsidy removal was inevitable, but Nigeria’s approach has worsened hardship for millions. True reform must go beyond fiscal savings to protect citizens.
Economic policy is not judged only by its efficiency but by its humanity. A well-sequenced reform could have balanced fiscal responsibility with equity, ensuring that ordinary Nigerians were not crushed under the weight of sudden change.
Nigeria has the resources, population, and resilience to lead Africa’s economy. But leadership requires foresight. It requires policies that are inclusive, humane, and strategically sequenced.
Reform without equity is displacement of poverty, not development. If Nigeria truly seeks progress, its policies must wear a human face.
References
- National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). (2023). Poverty and Inequality Report. Abuja.
- National Population Commission (NPC). (2023). Population Estimates. Abuja.
- World Bank. (2023). Nigeria Development Update. Washington, DC.
- World Bank. (2005). Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons from Indonesia and Ghana. Washington, DC.
- OPEC. (2023). Annual Statistical Bulletin. Vienna.
By: Amarachi Amaugo