Why Did a Nigerian Court Stop Resident Doctors’ Planned Nationwide Strike—Is the Tinubu Government Using Legal Power to Silence Protests Over Salaries, Welfare, and Broken Agreements?
Is the Nigerian government turning to the courts to prevent another healthcare shutdown—and what does it mean for doctors’ rights to protest? The National Industrial Court in Abuja has issued an interim injunction restraining the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD) and its members from embarking on any form of industrial action across the country.
The order, delivered by Justice Emmanuel Danjuma Subilim, followed an ex parte application filed by the Federal Government through the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN). The court barred resident doctors from calling, organizing, directing, or participating in strikes, work stoppages, go-slows, picketing, or any other actions capable of disrupting healthcare services nationwide.
In addition, the court prohibited NARD from taking any steps preparatory to industrial action with effect from January 12, 2026, ruling that the injunction would remain in force pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice, scheduled for January 21, 2026.
The ruling comes just days after the association threatened a nationwide strike over unresolved grievances related to welfare, salaries, and working conditions. NARD accused the Bola Tinubu-led administration of failing to honor previous agreements, stating that signed memoranda had been “totally neglected, altered or half implemented,” while earlier gains had been “overtaken by events of the government’s own making.”
The association maintained that it had exhausted all avenues of dialogue, saying it had engaged respectfully, called attention to the issues, sought advice, and appealed for implementation—yet received no meaningful response. Defending its members against public criticism, NARD rejected portrayals of resident doctors as unpatriotic agitators, insisting that doctors have not committed any wrongdoing by demanding better conditions for healthcare workers who form “the backbone of service delivery in Nigeria.”
In a strongly worded statement, the group argued that its members were “experienced enough to understand that merit doesn’t fetch a lot in Nigeria” and “militant enough to agitate for our legitimate rights, including signed and agreed MoUs.”
While the government’s legal move is aimed at preventing disruptions in essential medical services, it raises pressing questions: Is the court order protecting patients—or curtailing workers’ rights to protest unfair conditions? Can judicial intervention resolve deep-rooted problems in Nigeria’s healthcare system, or will it merely postpone a larger confrontation? As the case returns to court later in January, Nigerians will be watching closely to see whether dialogue replaces confrontation—or whether tensions between the government and resident doctors escalate further.
Why Did a Nigerian Court Stop Resident Doctors’ Planned Nationwide Strike—Is the Tinubu Government Using Legal Power to Silence Protests Over Salaries, Welfare, and Broken Agreements?
Is the Nigerian government turning to the courts to prevent another healthcare shutdown—and what does it mean for doctors’ rights to protest? The National Industrial Court in Abuja has issued an interim injunction restraining the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD) and its members from embarking on any form of industrial action across the country.
The order, delivered by Justice Emmanuel Danjuma Subilim, followed an ex parte application filed by the Federal Government through the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN). The court barred resident doctors from calling, organizing, directing, or participating in strikes, work stoppages, go-slows, picketing, or any other actions capable of disrupting healthcare services nationwide.
In addition, the court prohibited NARD from taking any steps preparatory to industrial action with effect from January 12, 2026, ruling that the injunction would remain in force pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice, scheduled for January 21, 2026.
The ruling comes just days after the association threatened a nationwide strike over unresolved grievances related to welfare, salaries, and working conditions. NARD accused the Bola Tinubu-led administration of failing to honor previous agreements, stating that signed memoranda had been “totally neglected, altered or half implemented,” while earlier gains had been “overtaken by events of the government’s own making.”
The association maintained that it had exhausted all avenues of dialogue, saying it had engaged respectfully, called attention to the issues, sought advice, and appealed for implementation—yet received no meaningful response. Defending its members against public criticism, NARD rejected portrayals of resident doctors as unpatriotic agitators, insisting that doctors have not committed any wrongdoing by demanding better conditions for healthcare workers who form “the backbone of service delivery in Nigeria.”
In a strongly worded statement, the group argued that its members were “experienced enough to understand that merit doesn’t fetch a lot in Nigeria” and “militant enough to agitate for our legitimate rights, including signed and agreed MoUs.”
While the government’s legal move is aimed at preventing disruptions in essential medical services, it raises pressing questions: Is the court order protecting patients—or curtailing workers’ rights to protest unfair conditions? Can judicial intervention resolve deep-rooted problems in Nigeria’s healthcare system, or will it merely postpone a larger confrontation? As the case returns to court later in January, Nigerians will be watching closely to see whether dialogue replaces confrontation—or whether tensions between the government and resident doctors escalate further.
