By Ahmad Shuaibu Isa
In the streets of Abuja, voices were raised in peace,
For Palestine’s oppressed, their cries would not cease.
But in the silence of guns, hope was torn apart,
As the Nigerian Army’s violence crushed every heart.
A tragedy unfolds, where justice should start.
Based on these actions, it is not unreasonable to view the attack through the lenses of both State Repression and Human Rights Theories. The latter highlights the state’s use of violence and suppression to maintain control over its citizens, stifling opposition and dissent. In this case, the Nigerian government’s response to peaceful pro-Palestinian protests and its overall failure to protect the rights of its citizens reflects authoritarian tendencies, where the state enforces conformity through force, rather than respecting democratic principles like freedom of speech and assembly.
Furthermore, the violation of fundamental human rights through the suppression of peaceful protests, coupled with the state’s inability to address domestic security issues or protect its citizens, is evident. The focus on justice, human dignity, and the importance of holding the government accountable align with human rights advocacy in political theory.
In recent years, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become a flashpoint for global political debate, with protests erupting worldwide, including numerous pro-Palestinian demonstrations. This issue, long marked by tension, has polarized many, and in this climate, some individuals may find themselves uncomfortable or even opposed to the support for Palestine. However, in a democratic society, freedom of speech remains a fundamental right. Whether in support of Palestine, Israel, or any other cause, individuals are entitled to express their views openly, as long as they do so peacefully.
If one feels strongly in support of Israel, the ideal response is not to resort to violence or state power to suppress the opposing view, as seen in various countries. Instead, they should feel empowered to express their opinions publicly and peacefully, through demonstrations or constructive discourse. This is the very essence of democracy — the freedom to peacefully assemble and share one’s perspective without fear of retribution.
However, this ideal democratic principle was starkly contradicted in Nigeria, where the peaceful pro-Palestinian protests in Abuja on March 28, 2025, were met with brutal suppression by the Nigerian Army.
The protesters, including many followers of Sheikh Zakzaky, gathered to peacefully condemn the killings of Palestinians by Israel. This act of free assembly was met with violence, leading to multiple deaths and injuries.
Such actions raise serious questions about the government’s commitment to protecting the constitutional rights of its citizens. The crackdown on peaceful protesters highlights a troubling disregard for human rights, signalling a broader pattern of suppressing legitimate dissent. Worse still, it underscores the Nigerian government’s disturbing failure to address the real security threats within the country, such as rampant banditry and the Boko Haram insurgency.
This disturbing trend of violence is not isolated. In Edo State, the brutal killing of 16 hunters underscores the growing problem of violence in Nigeria, which remains unchecked. The government’s lack of meaningful responsibility towards these issues—along with the recurrent killings of truck drivers in the South—further underscores the ineffectiveness of the leadership. Despite protests from the National Union of Road Transport Workers, who highlighted the deaths of over 20 drivers in 2024 alone, the government’s failure to provide adequate protection for its citizens remains a significant concern. Moreover, rather than taking decisive action, the government reportedly pressured the drivers to continue working in dangerous conditions, while also resorting to harassment of those who dared to protest.
This situation raises an important question: Why is the Nigerian government so quick to suppress peaceful protests but so slow to take decisive action against the violence that continues to plague its citizens? The president, despite often engaging in political rhetoric, has failed to address these urgent issues of public safety, leaving the Nigerian people vulnerable to further harm.
Conclusion
The violence against peaceful protesters, such as the pro-Palestinian supporters in Abuja, and the ongoing bloodshed across Nigeria, reflects a disturbing pattern of government inaction and human rights abuses. As Nigerians continue to face these systemic issues, it is vital for the government to prioritise the safety and rights of its people over foreign interests and political manoeuvring. The fundamental right to free expression—whether in support of Palestine, or any other cause—must be upheld, and those responsible for violence against peaceful demonstrators must be held accountable. Only through transparency, justice, and a commitment to protecting human rights can Nigeria hope to break the cycle of violence and create a safer, more peaceful society for all.
Ahmad Shuaibu Isa