WILL THE FUEL SUBSIDY DEBATE SHAPE NIGERIA’S 2027 GENERAL ELECTION?
Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Africa Democratic Congress and former Vice President, recently declared that he would, temporarily at least, restore the fuel subsidy removed by the Tinubu administration if elected in the 2027 election. This declaration has floated up the discussion around the removal of the fuel subsidy; the first set of warriors to wage their swords against Atiku are the defenders of the Tinubu government. Of course, Tinubu was the target of Atiku’s blow of words or perhaps ‘blow of lies’.
By Adaramoye Michael Lenin
Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, and former running mate to Atiku Abubakar in 2019, has joined the discussion. This time, Obi finds himself on the opposite side of Atiku. Obi emphatically argued for the removal of the subsidy, pledging to retain the current regime of subsidy removal, while adding that what has been missing is the judicious use of the funds saved from the removal of the fuel subsidy.
Aliko Dangote, Africa’s richest man and owner of Dangote Refinery (the largest private refinery in Africa), has also joined the discussion, clearly warning against restoration of fuel subsidy. Dangote Refinery, in its prospectus for its planned Initial Public Offering (IPO) objected to the restoration of fuel subsidy. ‘Any reintroduction of fuel subsidies, price controls or other forms of intervention in the downstream petroleum sector could affect domestic pricing dynamics… which may, in turn, affect refining margins on products sold within Nigeria’, the statement mentioned. For Mr Dangote, this discussion is tied to profit and the protection of his empire of profit, and not the living condition of the mass majority, which has deteriorated since the removal of fuel subsidy. Dangote fears that a restoration of fuel subsidy could arm his rivals the old goons who were the former big players of Nigeria’s fuel and had built their ‘profit empire’ on importation of petroleum products.
There are now different shades to this discussion around the fuel subsidy from the three leading pro-capitalist candidates. But this is not a debate that should be left to members of the capitalist ruling class alone. The working masses, the main victims of the removal of the fuel subsidy, must not stay quiet, especially with a general election around the corner. Therefore, it becomes important to ask: will this discussion on the fuel subsidy shape the 2027 presidential election?
THE REAL ISSUES AROUND THE FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL
Since May 29, 2023, when Tinubu declared the removal of the fuel subsidy, he has devastated the living standards of the vast majority, something which aggravated a year later into a mass protest in 2024. This is because the effect of the removal of the fuel subsidy was instantly felt by the working masses. Within 24 hours, the cost of fuel rose by about 300%! No one has ever seen an inauspicious start to an administration this grave. To further compound the attack the naira was also devalued. Consequently, the price of different foods and necessities began to soar; the cost of transportation rose too. Within a year, inflation rose from 22.4% on May 29, 2023, to 33.2% in March, 2024, while food inflation stood at 40%. According to the World Bank, poverty rose from 56% in 2023 to 61% in 2024 and climbed to 63% in 2025. The devastating effect of the removal goes beyond what statistics can accurately capture.
In the months preceding Tinubu’s declaration of the removal of the subsidy, Nigerians were told it was unsustainable to continue the regime of fuel subsidy. Suddenly, the subsidy on fuel became the new demon of many pro-capitalist commentators. This cut across almost all divides of the ruling class, especially the three major pro-capitalist political parties – All Progressives Congress (APC), Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party, then led by Peter Obi, running in that election. There was a general agreement among different sections of the ruling class. Even after the 2023 election, and the rising anger of Nigerians over the economic hardship caused by the neoliberal policies of the Tinubu government, Atiku and Obi maintained their stance on the removal of the subsidy as well as the naira devaluation. For Obi, the hardship invoked by the removal of the subsidy was only because of the way it was arbitrarily removed by Tinubu, and that the government had not put in place measures to absorb the shock from the removal of the fuel subsidy. The Tinubu government was, of course, staunch in its defence of the policy, reiterating that the saved funds would be spent on social services and development.
The labour centres – Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress did not lead any serious opposition to the anti-masses policies. Rather they chose to demand palliatives and won a new minimum wage which was eroded immediately by the inflation and high cost of living compounded by the policies they had refused to fight. Again and again, the capitalist class boldly exclaim that there is no alternative to the removal of subsidies. And on July 31, 2023, Tinubu summed up the position of himself and his peers by saying: “I wish there were another way. But there is not!”
IS THERE TRULY NO ALTERNATIVE TO FUEL SUBSIDY REMOVAL?
Atiku, despite his turnaround to declare a new war of rhetoric against the removal of fuel subsidy, has not put forward any bold alternative. The attack dogs of the Tinubu Government have also accused him of being ‘unrealistic’, forcing it once again into the ears of Nigerians that fuel subsidy removal was inevitable. In fact, days after his declaration, Atiku had come out to ‘clarify’ that his model of subsidy restoration is different from the ‘old’ regime of subsidy. Atiku has now said he is advocating for a ‘production-based subsidy’. But what is this ‘production-based subsidy ‘? To save the stress, this is merely Atiku reassuring his capitalist peers, especially Dangote, that he has not divorced from the programmes of capitalism and the exploitation of the working masses. Also, this is a reassurance to the imperialist scriptwriters of policies that he is capable of safeguarding capitalism in Nigeria.
Atiku’s talk of a ‘production-based’ subsidy, according to him, is to arm Dangote (the major local ‘producer’) with more state funds to sell fuel cheaper to end consumers. He decried the old fuel subsidy as merely supporting fuel importation. This is a good lure for Dangote as it means not only reigniting his existing feud with the former key players whose empires were built on importing refined products, but also using state resources to edge him out of this feud and exert a monopoly. Atiku has expressed his commitment to not affecting the profit of Dangote and the capitalist class. Again, Atiku chose the profit of the few over the welfare of the mass majority. This is the same agenda of Tinubu, something which Peter Obi had always ecstatically given a nod to.
It is no surprise that Atiku could not even pretend for long; he has been a major defender of capitalism in Nigeria, both in theory and practice. As vice-president to Olusegun Obasanjo between 1999 and 2007, he was head of the National Economic Council (NEC) and National Council on Privatisation (NCP). During this period, over 100 public enterprises were sold. It was a rampage! For instance, NITEL and M-TEL, Nigeria’s first primary telecommunications company and its mobile arm, were sold off. Nigerian Airways was liquidated, and its terminal and airway slots were sold off; the shipping ports were also concessioned to private profiteers. State-owned hotels and estates were sold to cronies. The heavy industries and steel mills were not spared from this. It was busy years of ‘market days’ for different members of the ruling class. Till today, the nation has not recovered from this economic dislocation.
Clearly, despite his criticisms of Tinubu’s policies, Atiku cannot be trusted to defend the interests of the working class. His body and soul remain sworn to the defence of the viciousness of capitalism in Nigeria. This is why his initial declaration to restore fuel subsidy was, correctly, regarded as mere political gimmicks to take advantage of the widespread anger against the policies of the Tinubu government. Without a bold and clear fighting platform of the working masses and a mass political party of the working people, pro-capitalist politicians and right-populists will try to take advantage of the anger of the working masses and their willingness to fight back and reject pro-capitalist politicians and their parties.
It is a stark lie to say there is no alternative to the removal of the fuel subsidy. All of the justifications given for the removal of the fuel subsidy by Tinubu have been shattered to pieces. For instance, corruption in the oil sector has not ceased. A recent example is the allegation of 54 billion naira fraud against Tinubu’s Chief of Staff, Mr Gbajabiamila; this money was alleged to have been fraudulently cornered from the Nigeria Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC). There are still numerous allegations of financial corruption and irregularities against Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).
Also, the promise that the funds saved from the subsidies would be directed to social services and infrastructure is absolute deceit. No major improvement has been witnessed in the country’s education and health sectors. In fact, the cost of accessing these services has gone up astronomically since 2023. While there have been major road constructions, like the Lagos-Calabar coastal highway, these are merely big projects meant to siphon funds. This explains why many of these projects were done at bloated prices. The Lagos-Calabar coastal road, the most controversial of these projects, costs N7.5bn per kilometre. It was initially rumoured to be N8bn per kilometre. The contract was awarded, controversially, to Tinubu’s longtime friend and business partner, Gilbert Chagoury.
There is no accurate figure for the amount that has been saved from the subsidies. The government had said that about N15.8 trillion was saved from fuel subsidy removal and devaluation of the Naira between June 2023 and December 2025. This was shared among the three tiers of government, with the state government receiving the lion’s share. However, new borrowing and the impact of the Naira devaluation have moved debt from N87.38 trillion in June 2023 past N149.4 trillion, and possibly towards N155 trillion – N182 trillion, according to the Debt Management Office. This is a new feat of gloominess achieved only within 3 years!
Fuel subsidy removal has not led to any major infrastructural growth, nor has it uplifted public social services, yet debts keep climbing. It is only the top government functionaries and the capitalist ruling elite who have been smiling to the banks since 2023; it has been sorrow and horror for the working masses.
SOWORE: WHAT IS HIS POSITION?
Omoyele Sowore , the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), and civil rights activist, has never been missing from this debate; he is, by all metrics of measurement, a distinct voice among all presidential candidates. In the 2023 election, Sowore was the loudest voice against the removal of fuel subsidies among the presidential contestants. And his recent comments and contribution to this discussion are in a similar direction. He has insisted that the poor citizens deserve to be subsidised and vowed to restore the subsidy.
Sowore’s initial reaction was to Atiku’s declaration of a plan to remove the subsidy, was more of a jab at Atiku personally, rather than a clear and bold alternative. For instance, Sowore mentioned that Atiku had arrived late to the position on subsidy, which he had held on to many years ago. While this is true, its defect lies in attempting to simply compare Sowore’s position with Atiku’s deceptive gimmick rather than go into the fundamentals of what change is needed.
However, in a recent interview on Arise News TV, Sowore has taken the discussion further by declaring that he would make Nigeria’s four refineries functional. This is a bold and radical programme, but it misses the point on what form and direction the refineries would take. Would it be fully publicly owned or co-owned with private profiteers? Also, the question of management of these four refineries has so far been missing. While the manifesto of AAC raises the nationalisation of the oil and gas sector and the role of the workers and community people in being part of the decision-making in the sector to prevent corruption and looting, Sowore has not made this very integral input in his comments and contribution to this discussion.
Socialists argue that the problem with the oil and gas sector, as with every other sector, is not merely corruption but the workings of a capitalist economy, which takes on a much rotten form in a neo-colonial country like Nigeria. While emergency measures like price controls can be imposed, and must be democratically managed to stop looting, the discussion regarding a fundamental solution cannot be had without posing the need for a socialist transformation of society. This means clearly raising the need to reconstruct society based on socialism, a society where resources and talents are used to improve life rather than the private profits of a few. For socialists, this means the oil and gas sector must be fully nationalised and placed under the management of the working class. As part of a national energy plan for oil, gas and solar power the existing refineries must be made functional and new ones be built to meet the capacity to serve domestic needs and exports.
This must be simultaneously done with the nationalisation of other key sectors of the economy, including banking, and placing them under the control of the working masses. On the basis of a democratically agreed economic plan prices would be set at affordable levels through cross subsidies between different economic sectors. Genuine democratic management would be key to prevent both misallocation and looting of resources, income and expenditure. We call on the leadership of the Nigeria Labour Congress and the Trade Union Congress to mobilise the working people and youth to fight for this program.
The 2027 presidential election, unlike the last one, has opened the debates around programme. This offers an opportunity for the socialist alternative to be raised and to prepare the working class for a struggles and mass movements that may break out after the election. None of the leading pro-capitalists, and even their juniors in the less popular ones, has any programme on fuel subsidy which aligns with the aspiration of the working masses, nor do they have any solution to the crises bedevilling the country. Whichever direction the 2027 election takes, the army of the working class must be prepared for struggle against pro-capitalist and anti-people policies and a struggle to dethrone capitalism in Nigeria.