(A NewsLeader Editorial, Monday, October 12, 2026)
"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.".....Desmond Tutu, late Archbishop of South Africa on moral responsibility and human rights.
It is a truism and proven over time that Nigerians are very poor students of how to stand up for their rights and for what is right, for the desired change to come their way. There are exceptions, no doubt!
This evident situation is one of the greatest tragedies of the Nigerian condition. It is not merely the persistence of bad governance, economic hardship, corruption, insecurity and institutional failure, it is the growing tendency among sections of the population to endure these problems as though they were inevitable, unquestionable and beyond human intervention.
From the violation of fundamental human rights to the abuse of public office, from the humiliation of ordinary citizens by public officials to the deliberate erosion of societal values, Nigerians too often appear to tolerate what citizens of a properly functioning country or democracy should challenge.
Why should a people endowed with constitutional rights, enormous human and material resources, intellectual capacity and a vibrant population repeatedly submit to circumstances that diminish their dignity? And why do some citizens defend political leaders who impoverish them, excuse institutions that mistreat them and remain silent when others suffer injustice, only to complain privately when the same injustice eventually reaches their doorsteps?
This is the disturbing culture of docility that Nigerian NewsLeader considers worthy of urgent national reflection. As citizens, we
must, however, distinguish docility from patience, peacefulness and respect for constituted authority. A responsible citizen does not have to be perpetually confrontational. But neither should civility become an excuse for surrendering one's rights. Patriotism is not blind loyalty to a government, political party, ethnic group or religious leader. True patriotism requires the courage to challenge wrongdoing and insist that those entrusted with public authority serve the people.
Nigeria's democracy cannot thrive on public silence. The constitution of Nigeria provides a foundation for citizens to defend their dignity and hold public institutions accountable. Chapter IV guarantees fundamental rights, including the rights to life, personal liberty, dignity of the human person, fair hearing, privacy, freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association. Section 14(2)(a) further declares that sovereignty belongs to the people, from whom government derives its powers and authority. These provisions establish a fundamental democratic principle that a government is not the owner of the people; it is an institution created to serve them.
Yet, the experience of many Nigerians suggests a troubling distance between constitutional promises and everyday reality. Citizens complain of extortion, arbitrary treatment, unlawful detention, police brutality, poor public services and official impunity. Workers struggle for adequate wages, communities protest neglect, and families bear the consequences of failing healthcare and education systems.
The international democracy watchdog Freedom House, in its Freedom in the World 2026 assessment, continued to classify Nigeria as "Partly Free", awarding the country 44 out of 100 points. Its assessment identifies persistent concerns involving corruption, security-related abuses, electoral irregularities and restrictions affecting civil liberties. This does not mean Nigerians are incapable of defending their rights, rather, it underscores the difficult environment in which accountability must be pursued.
The protests against police brutality under the #EndSARS movement in 2020 and the nationwide #EndBadGovernance demonstrations in 2024 demonstrated that Nigerians are not inherently docile. They can organise, mobilise and articulate grievances. However, reports of deaths, arrests and intimidation during these protests also illustrate the risks citizens may face when challenging authority. The challenge, therefore, is not simply to ask why Nigerians fail to resist injustice. It is also to understand why sustained collective action is so difficult and why governments and institutions sometimes make the exercise of civic rights dangerous.
A casual survey of the Nigerian attitude in circumstance of their fundamental rights shows a psychology of helplessness.
Psychology offers useful insights into this predicament. An American psychologist, Martin Seligman, popularized the concept of learned helplessness, developed through research with his collaborators. It describes a condition in which repeated experiences of uncontrollable adversity can lead individuals to believe that their actions will make little difference, even when opportunities for change later become available.
Applied cautiously to Nigeria, this concept helps explain why citizens who have repeatedly witnessed failed protests, broken political promises, unsuccessful complaints or seemingly compromised institutions may eventually conclude that resistance is pointless. A person who reports police misconduct without obtaining justice may hesitate to report the next offence. So also is a community that has petitioned successive governments without receiving assistance may stop believing that public engagement matters. Voters who repeatedly encounter electoral malpractice may become cynical about the ballot box. This is not a diagnosis of the Nigerian population. It is a useful framework for understanding how persistent disappointment can weaken civic confidence.
Economic insecurity reinforces the problem. Citizens struggling to feed their families, pay school fees, obtain medical treatment or secure employment may lack the time, resources and security needed to challenge powerful institutions. A person whose livelihood depends on a politically connected employer may fear losing everything by speaking out. Fear, exhaustion and the desire for immediate survival can therefore produce silence where resistance might otherwise be expected.
But helplessness is learned. Under the right circumstances, civic confidence can also be rebuilt. Citizens need visible examples showing that petitions, lawful protests, litigation, investigative journalism, organised labour and community action can produce results.
Culture and religion has oftentimes become excuses for submission. Nigeria's rich cultural and religious traditions contain values that can strengthen society, including compassion, justice, communal responsibility, honesty and respect for human dignity. The problem arises when selected teachings or customs are used to discourage legitimate questions and shield wrongdoing.
In some settings, questioning an elder, traditional ruler, religious leader or political benefactor is treated as disrespect. Young people may be told to remain silent because those in authority supposedly know better. Women and children may be expected to endure abuse to preserve family honour. Workers may fear challenging powerful superiors because doing so could be interpreted as ingratitude. Religious language can similarly be misused to encourage passive acceptance of suffering. Some citizens are urged to pray rather than demand accountability, as though faith and responsible civic action were incompatible.
They are not.
Prayer should not replace competent governance, just as patience should not become permission for oppression. Religious leaders who preach righteousness must be prepared to condemn corruption, abuse, injustice and the misuse of public resources, regardless of the perpetrators' political or religious affiliations. Equally, traditional institutions should recognise that cultural authority carries responsibilities. Respect must be earned through fairness and service, not demanded as immunity from scrutiny. Our culture should teach citizens how to challenge wrongdoing without abandoning courtesy, community solidarity or respect for legitimate authority.
Ethnicity, patronage and the politics of silence often encourage mass docility in Nigeria to oppression and injustice. Another major obstacle is the tendency to defend misconduct when the perpetrator belongs to one's ethnic group, political party, religious community or personal network. A public official accused of wrongdoing may receive enthusiastic support from people who would condemn identical conduct if committed by a political opponent. Citizens who suffer poor governance may nevertheless defend their leaders because they fear that criticism will benefit another ethnic group or political faction. This is a dangerous misunderstanding of patriotism.
When political loyalty becomes more important than public accountability, leaders learn that they can neglect their responsibilities without losing their most devoted supporters. When citizens celebrate appointments and financial favours received by their representatives but ignore the condition of schools, hospitals, roads and public institutions, collective welfare is sacrificed to individual patronage. The result is a system in which politicians increasingly answer to influential sponsors and loyal political constituencies rather than the entire population.
The Nigerian people must overcome the belief that criticising one's leader is an act of betrayal. A responsible supporter should be among the first to demand explanations when a leader fails. Democracy requires citizens who can distinguish personal loyalty from public responsibility.
In other lands where fundamental rights are vigorously fought for and upheld, Nigerians need to learn basic lessons. Such experiences elsewhere demonstrate that citizens can influence institutions when they organise around clear demands and sustain pressure through lawful means.
In South Korea, for instance, mass candlelight demonstrations in 2016 and 2017 helped build pressure for the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye. The country's National Assembly voted to impeach her, and the Constitutional Court upheld the impeachment in March 2017. The episode illustrated the power of sustained public mobilisation working alongside constitutional institutions.
In Philippines, in 1986, the mass uprising by angry Philippos against their tyrannical former President, Ferdinand Marcos, led to his forceful overthrow through the people's power. The popular march to the Malacanan Presidential palace to oust President Marcos was led by the Catholic Archbishop of Manila, Cardinal Sin. His Eminence, Cardinal Sin, mobilised, fellow priests, school children, civil rights bodies and the opposition group whose party leader and Presidential candidate, Benino Aquino, was politically too popular enough to defeat the incumbent Marcos in the election.
Marcos government plotted Aquino's death after granting him a state pardon to return home and challenge him at the poll. He was shot dead in cold blood at the tarmac at the Manila International airport while alighting from the aircraft that brought him to his country. The angry opposition party eventually drafted Aquino's wife, Corazon Aquino who stepped into her husband's political shoes and trounced Marcos in a presidential election he had doctored through the help of the Police and Armed Forces Chiefs, Fabian Ver and Fidel Ramos. Eventually, the people's power won, and Marcos and his wife, Imelda were driven into exile in Honolulu, Southern France, where he stayed and later died and was brought back to Philippines for burial.
In India, the Right to Information movement, strengthened by grassroots activism, helped build momentum for the Right to Information Act of 2005. The law gave citizens a formal mechanism to seek information from public authorities and investigate questions concerning government decisions and spending.
These examples do not suggest that either country has eliminated corruption, abuse or institutional failure. Nor should Nigeria copy foreign experiences without considering its own circumstances. They demonstrate, however, that organised citizens can help establish mechanisms through which power becomes more accountable. The lesson is that outrage alone is insufficient. Citizens must transform anger into organised, persistent and clearly defined demands.
HOW NIGERIANS CAN BEGIN TO RECLAIM THEIR POWER
Nigerian citizens must first embrace civic education. This must become a national priority. Citizens should understand their constitutional rights, the responsibilities of elected representatives, the functions of public institutions and the lawful procedures for seeking redress. Rights that citizens do not understand are rights they may struggle to defend.
Second, Nigerians must rebuild collective action. Community associations, professional bodies, trade unions, student organisations, market associations, religious institutions and civil society groups should unite around specific public interest issues. Demands for functioning hospitals, safer communities, transparent budgets, fair wages and accountable policing are more effective when supported by broad coalitions than when pursued by isolated individuals.
Third, citizens must use the courts and established accountability mechanisms. The National Human Rights Commission, legal aid services, public complaints channels and relevant regulatory bodies can provide avenues for redress. Lawyers and professional associations should expand access to legal assistance, particularly for low-income citizens whose rights have been violated.
Fourth, the media must play a key role here. They must continue to investigate wrongdoing, explain citizens' rights and monitor whether official promises are fulfilled. Journalism should not merely report protests. it should follow petitions, court cases, public expenditure and institutional investigations to their conclusions.
Fifth, Nigerians must take elections more seriously. Voters should assess candidates on competence, integrity, policy and performance rather than ethnic sentiment, religious affiliation, financial inducements or personal gifts. Vote buying must be rejected because the money offered for a ballot is often insignificant compared with the cost of years of poor governance.
Finally, citizens must defend one another. Silence becomes particularly dangerous when injustice affects people considered politically inconvenient, socially marginalised or personally unfamiliar. The defence of rights must not depend on whether the victim belongs to one's community.
The responsibility does not rest with citizens alone. Governments must create conditions in which people can question authority without fear of intimidation, arbitrary arrest or violence. The government must make the citizens safe. Federal and state authorities should strengthen the independence and accessibility of oversight institutions, investigate credible allegations of misconduct and ensure that security agencies operate within the law. Peaceful protests must be protected, while any necessary restrictions must be lawful, proportionate and subject to appropriate scrutiny.
Public institutions should establish transparent complaint procedures, publish accessible performance information and respond promptly to petitions. Whistle-blowers and journalists exposing wrongdoing require effective protection. Schools should teach constitutional literacy, critical thinking, civic responsibility and peaceful dispute resolution from an early age. Political leaders must also stop treating criticism as hostility. A government confident in its legitimacy should welcome scrutiny as an opportunity to improve its performance.
Nigeria cannot build a just society if citizens surrender their rights through fear, apathy, misplaced loyalty or the mistaken belief that nothing can change. The time to awaken is now! The country can the country progress if those who speak up are left isolated, exposed to retaliation or burdened with the entire cost of defending the public interest.
We must reject both reckless confrontation and passive submission. The responsible alternative is informed citizenship, peaceful resistance to injustice, strategic collective action and persistent use of constitutional and legal remedies.
The ordinary Nigerian must understand that public office is not a royal throne, a government uniform is not a licence to humiliate citizens, and religious or traditional authority is not permission to abuse power.
Our leaders must equally understand that silence does not necessarily mean satisfaction, and endurance should never be mistaken for consent.
As Nigeria approaches another crucial electoral cycle in 2027, citizens have an opportunity to reconsider the relationship between themselves and those who govern them. The question is whether they will continue to reward failure or begin demanding measurable performance, transparency and respect for their rights.
A patriotic citizen is not one who applauds every government action or one who insists that the country become better, fairer and more accountable. Until Nigerians learn to stand together against injustice, those who benefit from their silence will have little incentive to change. The future of our democracy depends not only on the quality of our leaders, but also on the courage, knowledge and collective determination of the citizens they serve. NNL.
