Abstract :
Between 1999 and 2007, a popular Labour-led movement led a pro-poor struggle
to resist the fuel price hike policy of the Nigerian government. Waged in the context
of the poverty in which nearly 70 per cent of Nigerians lived, the operation of
powerful incentives to raise fuel prices, and Labour’s extraordinary socio-political
leverage, these struggles triggered much government frustration. One of the strategies
adopted by the government to legitimize its attempt to repress the movement
was to resort to the courts. This article analyses, from a socio-legal perspective, the
key cases relating to the validity of the government’s attempts to repress the
struggles. The article concludes that, although both pro- and anti-movement trends
can be observed in the jurisprudence, the anti-movement tendency having so far
prevailed in terms of formal legal precedent, the pro-movement (ie pro-poor)
decisions have, as a result of their massive popular legitimacy, actually functioned
as the “living law.”