By Nick Dazang
Acute hardships and haughtiness by leaders trigger revolutions and uprisings. Witness the French and Russian revolutions. Witness, also, the Arab Spring, the Kenyan, Bangladesh and Nigerian protests.
By any benchmark deployed, the #EndBadgovernance/Take-It-Back Movement/#10DaysofRage were a success. Rarely, in our annals, has a protest been sustained for a period of 10 days, non-stop. Seldom, too, has a protest gained such traction as to confound and flummox those in authority.
The organisers were methodical and scientific in their approach. Before commencing their protest on August 1, 2024, they had harvested the grievances of Nigerian youths across the board. And these grievances informed and drove the demands they made on the government.
The protests, additionally, demonstrated, crystal clearly, how the social media had become potent tools for mobilisation and galvanisation. More frightening is that the mobilisers accomplished their tasks seamlessly and from the comfort and protection of anonymity. For apart from their spokespersons and their lawyers who either issued statements or negotiated the process of the protests, the organisers were largely unknown and unseen. The potency of the social media and the anonymity of the organisers rattled the government beyond measure.
If the protests were a success and served to give Nigerians an avenue to vent their anger, they were hijacked by hoodlums in some jurisdictions. These hoodlums went on looting binges, prompting a number of state governments to impose curfews.
- Group urges Gov Obaseki to apologise to Oba of Benin
- EFCC warns lawyers against violating anti-money laundering laws
While the hijack of the protests by hoodlums resonated with and agreed with prior government propaganda, the government itself did not help matters. Like the #EndSARS protests, deliberate attempts were made by the government to scupper and subvert the protests. Hired thugs were used to unleash violence or to disrupt the protests. Protesters were tear-gassed. In some instances, live bullets were used. At the end of the protests, and by Amnesty International’s account, 21 persons were killed. This is not to mention the many who were maimed or who received injuries.
The President’s address to the nation compounded matters. Instead of addressing, squarely, the concerns raised by the protesters, the President proceeded to rationalise some of the policies introduced on which watch, and which exacerbated the current hardship. Thus, rather than mollify the protesters, and by extension Nigerians, the address miffed and infuriated them.
Ordinarily, and had we in place a compassionate and smart government, this would have been a golden and propitious opportunity to feel the pulse of the people. Besides, the grievances succinctly articulated by the protesters were a true reflection of our sad state of affairs. They only regurgitated and repeated what many writers and persons of good conscience had earlier written or voiced clarionly. Perhaps, with the exception of Nigeria’s billionaire class, who seem to thrive while others are a sorrowing, hundreds of millions of Nigerians are hurting.
Also, given the fact that similar protests had just taken place in Kenya and Bangladesh, and these protests were avidly followed by Nigerians, one would have expected our leaders to learn lessons from these protests and to factor them in their responses.
In Kenya, the protests served as a major turning and inflection point. After talking tough and accusing the Ford Foundation of sponsoring the riots, President William Ruto withdrew the detested Finance Bill. He apologised, profusely, and sacked all his Cabinet Secretaries and the Attorney General. For good measure, he chastised Kenyan parliamentarians for their “arrogance and show of opulence”.
In Bangladesh, where the Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina proved obdurate, the protesters ransacked her official residence, prompting her to flee to India in a military helicopter. She has since been replaced by a caretaker government, led by the Nobel Laureate, founder of the Grameen Bank and pioneer of microcredit and micro finance, Muhammad Yunus.
With the demands of the protesters unmet and unattended to, with no mea culpa given or expressions of regret, and with no reforms effected, one is inclined to speculate that we may not have seen the end of these protests. This speculation is hinged on the fact that the issues raised by the protesters subsist and are taking a turn for the worse.
The cessation of the protests may provide a respite for the government but it may not endure in the long run. The protesters had spoken eloquently and poignantly to the challenges faced by Nigerians. Moreover, anyone who intently followed the conduct of these protests would have observed that they were done with uncommon commitment, conviction and daring.
The aforesaid should suffice to compel the government and members of the political class to turn a new leaf and to address the concerns raised by the protesters. The leadership should curb its excesses and it’s sickening display of opulence and wasteful spending to accord with its preachment on belt tightening. Instead, the government has proceeded with the acquisition of an Airbus 330 at the cost of $100 million.
The twist in the tale is that the Airbus 330 is said to be one of the presidential jets seized in France, all thanks to a recent court order. It is unacceptable that a Senator should go home, at the end of each month, with N21 million while millions of Nigerians cannot afford a decent meal. This is not only insensitive, it is obscene.
Nick Dazang is a former director at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
Join Daily Trust WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.
