Editorial
ASUU: No To NLC Strike
As part of efforts to compel the Federal Government to meet the demands of striking university-based unions, including the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and its affiliate unions, said it would embark on a two-day national solidarity protest tomorrow and Wednesday.
Labour’s threat follows the lack of progress in the negotiations with the leadership of the ASUU, Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Universities (SSANU), Non-Academic Staff Union of Educational and Associated Institutions (NASU), and the National Association of Academic Technologists (NAAT). The NLC President, Ayuba Wabba, had directed all affiliate unions to comply with the directives on the planned protest at the National Executive Council (NEC) meeting of the Congress.
It is sad that universities in the country have been shut down for five months following strike by the various unions over the alleged failure of the Federal Government to meet their demands. Given the protracted nature of the strike, President Muhammadu Buhari, last week, directed the Ministers of Education, Adamu Adamu; and Labour and Employment, Chris Ngige; to resolve the lingering strike by ASUU and report back to him within two weeks.
ASUU had embarked on a warning strike on February 14, 2022, which clandestinely metamorphosed into an indefinite industrial action, leading to the suspension of all academic activities in federal universities. Some state universities also joined in sympathy. Since then, efforts by the authorities and other stakeholders to resolve the impasse have failed.
At the centre of the strike are the alleged government’s failure to honour the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) it signed with the union, the government’s poor commitment to the payment of Earned Academic Allowance (EAA) and release of revitalisation funds, inadequate funding of the universities, the continued use of the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) and refusal to adopt the University Transparency and Accountability Solution (UTAS), and proliferation of public universities in the country.
For its part, the Federal Government stated that it had implemented most of the contents of the agreements with the union. It said that substantial amounts have been released for EAA and revitalisation of the institutions while UTAS, according to the Nigeria Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), has “passed acceptability test but failed integrity test and credibility test, which formed the bulwark against hacking”. The government, therefore, set up a seven-man Prof Nemi Briggs-led committee to renegotiate the 2009 pact. The committee is said to have submitted its report to the government for implementation.
This is not the first time organised labour has intervened in labour disputes in the nation’s Ivory Tower. In 2013, NLC mediated in an ASUU strike by writing to the Presidency to devise modalities to resolve the industrial action. In 2021, it again, played vital role to resolve the standoff between the Federal Government and ASUU for university students. The NLC has been making failed efforts to end the current strike. However, the propriety of this intervention remains questionable, particularly as it affects Rivers State.
We condemn the penchant for strikes, which has done incalculable damage to the educational development of the country. Since the return of democracy in 1999, ASUU has spent, at least, 1,500 days on strike. The quick resort to strikes by ASUU members is irrational since the union can as well adopt other proactive and constructive alternatives. We are worried that for a country with over 40 million out-of-school children, prolonged stay out of tertiary institutions by youths will fill the growing crime pool. ASUU has to realise this fact and quickly suspend the strike.
Labour’s planned solidarity protest must be taken seriously because if carried out, may shut down businesses and stoke anarchy, thereby compounding the nation’s feeble economy. Nothing can justify this! We implore labour to immediately rescind its decision, and allow government implement the committee’s report.
We say so for a number of reasons. First, it is not in all universities that ASUU and other unions are on strike, especially state and private institutions. In these institutions, including those in Rivers State, workers’ entitlements are paid as at when due and enabling environment created for seamless teaching and learning. Therefore, it is wrong to direct workers in those states, including Rivers State, to embark on any solidarity strike.
Besides, the NLC in some states, particularly Rivers State, has become political partisans, and their officials constituting themselves as opposition elements to destabilise the government. Allowing NLC in Rivers State to call out workers on strike obviously amounts to arming critical opposition to undermine the government, especially at a time when all eyes are exploring winning strategies for the 2023 elections. There are ample examples of efforts of the NLC in Rivers State to destabilize the state. Now that the Chairperson of NLC in the State is also doubling as the governorship candidate of Labour party, and the same person is calling out workers in the state to embark on strike even when all the state-owned tertiary institutions are fully functional, it is obvious that this is another means to subvert the efforts of the state government at maintaining an uninterrupted academic calendar.
Besides, hoodlums have many a time hijacked supposedly peaceful strikes to advance their nefarious activities. Shops have been looted and the economy subverted. Many innocent people have also lost their lives these circumstances. There is also the likelihood that opposition politicians may hide under the cloak of labour to unleash violence on the people and jeopardize the peace that is currently prevailing in Rivers State. This is why it will be suicidal for workers in Rivers State to be used to fight government at this time.
Again, while we blame the Federal Government for the poor funding of universities, we boldly caution that it is not the mandate of ASUU, an assemblage of employees to dictate for its employers how and when to fund their own institutions. If they are not satisfied with their conditions of service, they should resign and seek better opportunities elsewhere rather than crippling the nation in order to satisfy their desires.
Nigeria cannot keep establishing universities when it has failed to maintain the existing ones. During President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration, 12 universities were established. Today, all are struggling owing to paucity of funds. Despite this challenge, eight bills are currently being debated at the National Assembly for the establishment of more universities. This is proliferation without growth. Yes, it is unacceptable but it does not require any industrial action to resolve.
The Education 2030 Framework for Action proposed two benchmarks as ‘crucial reference points’: allocate, at least, four to six per cent of GDP to education or apportion between 15 and 20 per cent of public expenditure to education. Government at all levels needs to meet these projections.
Even so, rather than enter into unworkable pacts with the unions, governments need to review the funding patterns of the universities. It is unthinkable that they alone can finance the institutions. In the United States, revenue from federal and state sources made up 34 per cent of total revenue at public colleges and universities in 2017, with other funding coming from tuition and fees, private gifts, self-supporting operations, and other sources. Nigeria can adopt this model to end the unending strikes.
The recent massacre in Yelewata, Benue State, ranks among Nigeria’s deadliest attacks of
2025. While official figures put the death toll at 59, media reports and Amnesty International estimate between 100 and 200 fatalities. This atrocity extends a decade-long pattern of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, where Beacon Security data records 1,043 deaths in Benue alone between May 2023 and May 2025.
President Tinubu’s visit on 18 June—four days after the 14 June attack—has drawn sharp criticism for its lateness. This delay echoes a history of inadequate responses, with Human Rights Watch documenting similar inaction in Plateau and Kaduna states since 2013, fuelling a culture of impunity. The attack lasted over two hours without meaningful security intervention, despite claims of swift action.
The violence bore hallmarks of genocide, with survivors recounting systematic house burnings and executions. More than 2.2 million people have been displaced in the region since 2019 due to comparable attacks. Data show Benue’s agricultural output falls by 0.21 per cent in crops and 0.31 per cent in livestock for every 1 per cent rise in violence.
Security forces continue to underperform. No arrests were made following the Easter attacks in April (56 killed) or May’s Gwer West massacre (42 killed). During his visit, Tinubu questioned publicly why no suspects had been detained four days after Yelewata, highlighting entrenched accountability failures.
The roots of the conflict are complex, with climate change pushing northern herders south and 77 per cent of Benue’s population reliant on agriculture. A Tiv community leader described the violence as “calculated land-grabbing” rather than mere clashes, with over 500 deaths recorded since 2019.
Government interventions have largely fallen short. The 2018 federal task force and 2025 Forest Guards initiative failed to curb violence. Tinubu’s newly announced committee of ex-governors and traditional rulers has been met with scepticism given the litany of past unkept promises.
The economic fallout is severe. Benue’s status as Nigeria’s “food basket” is crumbling as farms are destroyed and farmers displaced. This worsens the nation’s food crisis, with hunger surges in 2023-2024 directly linked to farming disruptions caused by insecurity.
Citizens demanding justice have been met with force; protesters faced police tear gas, and the State Assembly conceded total failure in safeguarding lives, admitting that the governor, deputy, and 32 lawmakers had all neglected their constitutional responsibilities.
The massacre has drawn international condemnation. Pope Leo XIV decried the “terrible massacre,” while the UN called for an investigation. The hashtag “200 Nigerians” trended worldwide on X, with many contrasting Nigeria’s slow response to India’s swift action following a plane crash with similar fatalities.
Nigeria’s centralised security system is clearly overwhelmed. A single police force is tasked with covering 36 states and 774 local government areas for a population exceeding 200 million. Between 2021 and 2023 alone, 29,828 killings and 15,404 kidnappings were recorded nationally. Proposals for state police, floated since January 2025, remain stalled.
Other populous nations offer alternative models. Canada’s provincial police, India’s state forces, and Indonesia’s municipal units demonstrate the effectiveness of decentralised policing. Nigeria’s centralised structure creates intelligence and response gaps, worsened by the distance—both physical and bureaucratic—from Abuja to affected communities.
The immediate aftermath is dire: 21 IDP camps in Benue are overwhelmed, and a humanitarian crisis is deepening. The State Assembly declared three days of mourning (18-20 June), but survivors lack sufficient medical aid. Tragically, many of those killed were already displaced by earlier violence.
A lasting solution requires a multi-pronged approach, including targeted security deployment, regulated grazing land, and full enforcement of Benue’s 2017 Anti-Open Grazing Law. The National Economic Council’s failure to prioritise state police in May 2025 represents a missed chance for reform.
Without decisive intervention, trends suggest conditions will worsen. More than 20,000 Nigerians have been killed and 13,000 kidnapped nationwide in 2025 alone. As Governor Hyacinth Alia stressed during Tinubu’s visit, state police may be the only viable path forward. All 36 states have submitted proposals supporting decentralisation—a crucial step towards breaking Nigeria’s vicious cycle of violence.
Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999 marked a watershed moment in the nation’s political history. After enduring nearly 16 years of successive military dictatorships, Nigerians embraced a new era of civil governance with the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo on May 29, 1999. Since then, the country has sustained a democratic system for 26 years. But, this democratic journey has been a complex mix of progress and persistent challenges.
The formal recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari acknowledged a long-standing injustice. The annulment of the 1993 presidential election, Nigeria’s freest, betrayed the democratic aspirations of millions. That it took decades to honour this date reflects the nation’s complex relationship with its democratic memory.
One of the most momentous successes of Nigeria’s democracy has been the uninterrupted civilian rule over the last two and a half decades. The country has witnessed seven general elections, with power transferring peacefully among different political parties. This is particularly notable considering that prior to 1999, no civilian government had completed a full term without military intervention. The peaceful transitions in 2007, 2015, and 2023 are testaments to Nigeria’s evolving democratic maturity.
Electoral participation, while uneven, has also reflected a level of democratic engagement. In 2003, voter turnout stood at about 69 per cent, but this figure dropped to approximately 34.75 per cent in 2023, according to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Although the declining turnout raises concerns, it also highlights the increasing expectations of the electorate, who demand credible and transparent elections.
Another area of progress is the growth of a vibrant and free press. Nigerian media has played a crucial role in holding governments accountable and fostering public discourse. Investigative journalism and civil society activism have exposed corruption and human rights abuses. The rise of social media has further expanded the democratic space, enabling young Nigerians to mobilise and advocate for change, as evidenced by the 2020 #EndSARS protests.
Judicial independence has seen mixed results. On one hand, the judiciary has occasionally demonstrated resilience, such as in landmark rulings that overturned fraudulent elections or curtailed executive excesses. On the other hand, allegations of political interference and corruption within the judiciary persist, undermining public confidence in the legal system’s impartiality.
Nigeria’s democracy has also facilitated the decentralisation of power through the federal system. State governments now wield some autonomy, allowing for experimentation in governance and service delivery. While this has led to innovative policies in some states, it has also entrenched patronage networks and uneven development across the federation.
Despite these successes, Nigeria’s democratic journey faces formidable problems. Electoral integrity remains a critical concern. Reports from election observers, including those from the European Union and ECOWAS, frequently highlight issues such as vote-buying, ballot box snatching, and violence. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and electronic transmission of results in 2023 elections showed promise, but technical glitches and alleged manipulations dampened public trust.
Corruption continues to be a pervasive issue. Nigeria ranks 145th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index, with a score of 25/100. Democratic institutions meant to check graft—such as anti-corruption agencies and the legislature—often struggle due to political interference and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Security challenges have also strained Nigeria’s democracy. Insurgency in the North East, banditry in the North West, separatist agitations in the South East, and herder-farmer conflicts across the Middle Belt have collectively resulted in thousands of deaths and displacements. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2024, Nigeria ranks as the eighth most impacted country by terrorism. The government’s difficulty in ensuring safety erodes public confidence in the state’s capacity and legitimacy.
The economy poses another critical remonstrance. Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita stands at approximately $2,400 as of 2024, with over 40 per cent of the population living below the national poverty line. High unemployment and inflation have fueled discontent and disillusionment with democratic governance, especially among youth. Without addressing economic grievances, the democratic dividend will remain elusive for many Nigerians.
Ethnic and religious divisions further complicate Nigeria’s democratic consolidation. Politicians often exploit identity politics for electoral gains, exacerbating social tensions. Although federal character principles aim to promote inclusiveness, they have also sometimes fostered a quota mentality rather than merit-based appointments.
Gender representation remains inadequate in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Women occupy less than 10 per cent of seats in the National Assembly, one of the lowest rates globally. Efforts to pass gender parity bills have faced stiff resistance, highlighting deep-seated cultural and institutional barriers to female political participation.
Civil liberties, while constitutionally guaranteed, are under threat. Crackdowns on protesters, restrictions on press freedom, and surveillance of activists reveal an authoritarian streak within the democratic framework. The controversial Twitter ban in 2021 exemplified the country’s willingness to curb digital freedoms, prompting domestic and international criticism.
The political crisis in Rivers State embodies broader democratic struggles. Attempts to control the state through undemocratic means expose weaknesses in federal institutions and the rule of law. Immediate restoration of democratic governance in Rivers State is vital to preserving Nigeria’s democratic integrity and institutional credibility.
Local governments remain under the control of state governors, depriving citizens of grassroots democracy. Last year’s Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy is promising, but state-level resistance threatens its implementation. Genuine autonomy would bring governance closer to the people and foster democratic innovation.
As we mark Democracy Day, we must honour the sacrifices of Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Femi Falana, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Pa Alfred Rewane, President Bola Tinubu, and countless others, who fought for Nigeria’s freedom. As democracy in Nigeria continues to evolve after 26 years, this day should inspire action toward its renewal. With despotism and state failure as real threats, both citizens and leaders must take responsibility—citizens by demanding more, and leaders by delivering. Excuses are no longer acceptable.