EndBadGovernance: Falana Criticizes Prosecution of Protesters Against 1999 Constitution

LAGOS—Human rights advocate and senior lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, has condemned the Federal Government’s decision to prosecute Nigerians, including minors, involved in the #EndBadGovernance protests, calling it an embarrassment to the nation. In a recent statement, Falana argued that Nigerians’ rights to protest are upheld by Sections 39 and 40 of the Constitution, as well as Articles 9 and 10 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act of 2004. He criticized President Bola Tinubu for permitting police actions that charged protesters, including minors, with treason, and warned that such measures would not prevent Nigerians from demanding good governance. According to Falana: “Despite charges being filed against numerous protesters in various state capitals, the Nigeria Police Force proceeded to arraign 130 protesters—including 29 minors—on multiple counts, including treason and incitement to mutiny, alleging that they encouraged the military to remove President Bola Tinubu. These charges were brought before the Federal High Court in Abuja.” Falana pointed out that while Section 2(4) of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2022 clarifies that peaceful protests or demonstrations are not acts of terrorism, the police nevertheless obtained an ex parte order to detain these protesters for 60 days on suspicion of terrorism. However, the detainees were held for 92 days before being formally charged in court. Among them, the 29 minors suffered from malnutrition and dehydration during their arraignment, with four collapsing from hunger and exhaustion due to overcrowding in the courtroom. Addressing the issue of minors’ prosecution, Falana noted: “In 2001, Nigeria ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and implemented the Child’s Rights Act in 2003, which all 36 states have since adopted. Under this law, minors under 18 cannot be prosecuted in Federal or State High Courts but only in Family Courts.” Falana countered the Attorney-General’s claim that charging the minors in Federal Court was appropriate due to its jurisdiction over treason-related cases. Falana clarified that even if there were grounds to suspect treason, the minors should have been arraigned in Family Court under Section 149 of the Child’s Rights Act. Instead, they were detained alongside hardened criminals in an anti-robbery facility and later charged with treason in Federal Court, in what Falana called an “illegal arraignment.” Falana argued that the government’s intention was to use this case to intimidate Nigerians from protesting poor living conditions. He stated, “The attempt to discourage public dissent through charges of terrorism, treason, and related offenses has backfired. Rather than resorting to extreme charges that expose Nigeria to international criticism, the government should direct law enforcement to support protesters’ rights by providing necessary security to ensure peaceful, lawful demonstrations.”

About the Author

Bishop Insight

Editor

View All Posts