The famous Occupy Nigeria protests of 2012 came and went like a flash of lightning, but its impact was very significant in the history annals of Nigeria. At first, Nigerians did not join the Occupy Movement but this changed in early January 2012 when the Federal Government, through the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) announced the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy.
This action caused fuel prices to jump more than 100%, from ₦65 per liter to ₦141 per liter. Nigeria’s consumer inflation rose from 10.35% in December to 12.6% in January. Specifically, food inflation rose from 11.5% to 13.1% within that month as reported by the National Bureau of Statistics. In a country with a very high unemployment rate, a very low minimum wage, an increasingly high cost of living and no government welfare programs, removing the subsidy without a way to mitigate the economic hardship it would cause was nothing short of unconscionable.
Read Also: Why We Can’t Stage Occupy Nigeria Protest Now -Odumakin
Despite being a major crude oil producer and exporter, Nigeria relies on imports to supply its daily oil consumption due to the incapacity of its major oil refineries (which crashed due lack of maintenance and mismanagement) to meet domestic demand. The country basically exports crude and imports at a much higher price refined oil and petroleum products for local consumption. This makes fuel expensive and unaffordable for the majority of the population. Under the Goodluck Jonathan led government, it became necessary to implement a program to subsidise fuel. However, the government spent approximately $7.5 billion monthly to sponsor the subsidy program and had been running at a deficit. Over the years, there were talks of removing the subsidy, but it was always very challenging because oil is central to everyday activities of Nigerians, and because most industries like transport, agriculture, and manufacturing depend on it. It is more or less a basic necessity for households and businesses and is in high demand, especially in the absence of a reliable power supply. After much deliberation, the government made the very difficult decision of trying to remove the subsidy on oil products.
Although the protests were borne out of public outcry, it was soon hijacked by political oppositions and major critics of the then Goodluck Jonathan’s government. One might be tempted to support the government’s argument that the subsidy removal was necessary due to the financial burden it placed on the country and the risk of economic collapse. But it was impossible to sustain this argument when the brazen corruption and embezzlement in that government were brought to the fore. Alas, the government did not think to go after these funds or take concrete steps to stop the endless embezzlement that poses even greater threats to the economy. To the government, removing the subsidy was an easier course of action. To a lot of Nigerians, though, the subsidy represented the only dividend of democracy that they enjoy in the absence of adequate infrastructure and basic social amenities or benefits. Its removal was yet another way of perpetuating injustice against the people and they were not going to take it sitting down. It was definitely time to act!
The protests started on Monday, January 2, 2012, when a group of people in Lagos, the commercial capital of the country, gathered to protest the new policy. They occupied streets and major roads and marched to the State House of Assembly and on to Gani Fawehinmi Park in a mass rally that pulled over 10, 000 people. Some demonstrated at the Murtala Mohammed International Airport, while others rallied on streets holding signs condemning President Goodluck Jonathan’s actions and calling for the reinstatement of the subsidy. In the days that followed, the protest spread to most cities in the country, notably Abuja, Ibadan, Kano, Illorin, Benin, Kaduna, Makurdi, and Oshogbo. Many local and international media outlets followed the daily progression of the protest and how it unfolded. The protesters shut petrol stations and formed human barriers along motorways. Nigeria’s main trade unions also announced an indefinite strike in support of the protest.
As stated earlier, like with most national protests there are always individuals who use these protests as an avenue to either criticise or push their agendas against the government. This was what happened when the then opposition parties, APC, APGA, and others rallied their members to join the protests and push the agenda that Goodluck Jonathan and his government were very incompetent at handling the affairs of the country. Some noticeable personalities who took it upon themselves to rally media companies, celebrities, and other influential individuals to push against the Goodluck Jonathan led government included the present President of Nigeria, Rtd. General Muhammadu Buhari, APC National leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, some prominent youth leaders at that time, and the then Labour Union and Trade Union congress boss.
The protests geared on and took to a very violent perspective when hoodlums and touts also joined and started torching and destroying buildings and government amenities despite pleas by the Nigerian government for a hiatus in the protests while negotiations went on. The protesters also took the protests to another level when an unnamed group started brandishing mock coffins of President Goodluck Jonathan while carrying placards displaying ‘You will die like Gadaffi’. To date, no one knows who instigated the coffin act but investigations have shown it to be a well-organised plan orchestrated by some top officials who wanted to use emotional intimidation against Goodluck Jonathan and his family. The plan worked to some extent because some immediate members of the first family including the President’s mother, Mrs. Eunice Jonathan took the act personal and reacted very terribly to it.
This act coupled with the incessant destruction of properties in many states due to the protest made the government to convene a security council where it was agreed that military might would be necessary to disperse the protesters and quell the already strained atmosphere.
The then Chief of Army Staff and Army Lieutenant General, Azubuike Ihejirika was entrusted with the mission of dispersing the protesters, and together with a few selected high ranking security officials, he delegated that the use of Machine-gun mounted amoured tanks otherwise known as P-59 gun tanks would be used in scaring the protesters away. He stressed that the amoured tanks should be completely bare of ammunition because they would only be used to instill fear in the protesters. He also instructed that the tanks should be displayed in places like Ojota, Lagos, and Abuja which served as the heart of the protests.
When some top politicians and stakeholders like General Muhammadu Buhari got wind of the information, he quickly discontinued his activities at the protest ground and dispersed his followers warning them of impending doom should the tanks be set on them. Many viewed this as an act of cowardice on his part considering his rank in the Nigerian Army, but statements later revealed that he had gotten some unconfirmed information that Lieutenant General Azubuike Ihejirika had ordered his men to shoot at the protesters indiscriminately. Nevertheless, the armoured tanks served their purpose as the protesters took to their heels on sighting the menacing machine gun turrets of the tank. A few days later, the government managed to reach an agreement with the stakeholders, and the nationwide protests and industrial action were called off.
Buhari’s escape from the protest grounds only shows that he is in the know of how the average Nigerian government operates whenever there is a breakdown of law and order during protests. The Nigerian Government only opts for military might whenever protests and protesters have decided to pay a deaf ear to the entreaties of the government. Using the military to stop protests in Nigeria is not unconstitutional but the Nigerian Government have been known to expressly give the ‘Shoot at sight’ order to their Army officials, which means that the military is given express permission to use lethal force to disperse protesters not minding the resultant loss of life or injuries.
This should also serve as a good lesson to the current EndSARS protesters and other future protests. The Nigerian government uses military might as its last resort when every form of negotiation has broken down which is why it is better to disperse whenever there is credible information of military presence because it is always better to live to restrategise and fight for another day.
AFRICA TODAY NEWS, NEW YORK