LAGOS, Nigeria 

The Lagos High Court has issued a restriction on the proposed August 1 nationwide protest, confining participants to Gani Fawehinmi Freedom Park in Ojota and Peace Park in Ketu. Justice Emmanuel Ogundare presided over the decision following a preemptive ex parte application filed by the state’s Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Lawal Pedro, SAN.

The application was aimed at maintaining public safety and preventing potential loss of lives and property during the protests. Co-defendants listed include Adamma Ukpabi and Tosin Harsogba (Active Citizens Group); Comrade Juwon Sanyaolu and Hassan Soweto (Take it Back Movement); Persons unknown; and the Lagos State Commissioner of Police.

Mr. Pedro argued that, given the various interests for and against the protest, it was crucial to protect the state’s critical infrastructure and prevent a repeat of the 2020 EndSARS protests. He emphasized that the police force lacks sufficient manpower to secure the proposed widespread protest locations.

He further expressed concerns about the potential for hoodlums to hijack the protests, leading to lawlessness and destruction under the guise of public dissent against alleged poor governance.

In his statement, Pedro said, “Recognizing the citizens’ right to protest, the Lagos State Government has designated Gani Fawehinmi Freedom Park and Peace Park as the only lawful locations for such activities. Protests in all local government areas and public highways over ten days would amount to economic sabotage.”

Justice Ogundare, after considering the arguments, granted all the reliefs sought by the application. He ordered that the protests be confined to the designated parks from August 1 to 10, 2024, between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. to ensure public order and safety.

Additionally, the court directed the Commissioner of Police to provide necessary security and traffic management support at the approved locations. The order also mandates the publication of the court’s decision in a national daily to notify all involved parties.

This decision underscores the state’s commitment to balancing the right to protest with the need to protect public order and safety.