A legal bid to compel the Nigerian government to repeal colonial-era vagrancy laws that criminalise homelessness, street begging, and other destitute behaviours has hit a brick wall at the ECOWAS Court of Justice.
The court on Wednesday ruled that it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the case due to the absence of named victims whose rights were demonstrably violated by the enforcement of the laws.
Although the decision has drawn sharp reactions from human rights observers, the judgement reflects a growing tension between the push for regional accountability mechanisms and the strict procedural requirements of international courts.
The three-member judicial panel, comprising Justices Ricardo Cláudio Monteiro Gonçalves (presiding), Sengu Mohamed Koroma, and Edward Amoako Asante (rapporteur), delivered the verdict in Lagos, where the ECOWAS Court had temporarily relocated to ease access for Nigerian litigants.
At the heart of the legal challenge was the Lawyers Alert Initiative for Protecting the Rights of Children, Women and the Indigent, a Nigerian civil society organisation advocating for the vulnerable.
The group argued that several sections of Nigeria’s Penal Code of 1963 and Criminal Code of 1916 particularly those defining vagrancy-related offences violate the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to which Nigeria is a signatory.
The impugned provisions include Sections 405 and 407 of the Penal Code (applicable in the northern states), and Sections 249 and 250 of the Criminal Code (enforced in the south). These laws permit the arrest of persons deemed to be loitering, wandering, or without visible means of livelihood, and in some cases, permit detention without proof of intent to commit a crime.
“Such laws provide legal cover for the arrest and detention of the homeless, street children, sex workers, and other marginalised groups, without due process,” the applicant argued in its filings.
The group had urged the court to declare the provisions unconstitutional and inconsistent with Nigeria’s treaty obligations, particularly those protecting liberty, dignity, non-discrimination, and fair trial rights.
But the regional court took a strictly procedural stance.
“While the Court has the competence to adjudicate human rights violations under Article 9(4) of the Supplementary Protocol, that competence is not triggered unless there are specific, identifiable victims of a violation,” the judgement read in part.
The court noted that the Lawyers Alert Initiative relied on general statistics and advocacy reports, without presenting affidavits, legal documents, or testimonies from persons directly affected by the laws. Its 2022–2023 human rights report, while citing incidents of police harassment and detention, did not link those incidents directly to the contested legal provisions.
“This approach would amount to an abstract review of legislation,” the panel held, adding that such matters fall under domestic judicial review rather than regional human rights litigation. It drew parallels with earlier decisions Karim Meissa Wade v. Senegal and Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative v. Nigeria where similar standards were appliedThe court dismissed the case but did not impose any costs on the applicant, in what observers say is a gesture recognising the public interest nature of the suit.
Vagrancy laws in Nigeria trace their origins to colonial legal frameworks designed to police the movement of the unemployed and marginalised. Despite independence, many of these provisions have remained intact for decades, forming the basis for routine crackdowns on street traders, hawkers, and the urban poor.
According to a 2021 thematic report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, African states were urged to repeal vagrancy laws, which the Rapporteur described as instruments of “systemic discrimination against the poor” that contravene international human rights obligations.
The report, titled Breaking the Cycle: Ending the Criminalisation of Homelessness and Poverty, called on governments to end the penalisation of life-sustaining activities in public spaces, such as sleeping, begging, and loitering, especially when driven by poverty or homelessness.
Complementing this position, a joint statement by over 30 international civil society organisations, including the International Drug Policy Consortium and the Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women, condemned the continued enforcement of vagrancy-related laws in developing countries. The statement described such legislation as “counterproductive, unjust, and incompatible with international legal standards on human rights and equality.”
Although comprehensive national data remain scarce, multiple rights groups and advocacy reports have consistently raised concern over the scale of enforcement. For instance, a 2021 summary from Human Rights Watch referenced over 5,000 arrests across several Nigerian cities under loosely defined vagrancy-related offences.
Similarly, the Nigeria Police Force’s 2022 Annual Report reportedly listed 6,741 arrests under categories such as “wandering,” “loitering,” and “no fixed address.” While the report did not specify the legal basis for each arrest, observers argue that these charges align closely with provisions in the country’s Penal and Criminal Codes commonly referred to as vagrancy laws.
The Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) of 2015 introduced significant reforms aimed at curbing arbitrary arrests and enhancing the protection of human rights within Nigeria’s criminal justice system. One of the notable provisions is the prohibition of arrests based solely on suspicion of vagrancy or lack of visible means of livelihood. Specifically, Section 10(1) of the repealed Criminal Procedure Act, which allowed such arrests, was abolished under the ACJA. This change was intended to prevent the misuse of law enforcement powers that often targeted vulnerable populations.
Despite these legislative advancements, enforcement remains inconsistent across Nigeria. A 2024 study by the CLEEN Foundation, surveying 1,658 stakeholders in the criminal justice system across eight states, revealed that only 54.5% of respondents believed the Nigeria Police Force and other policing actors complied with the ACJA’s arrest procedures. Furthermore, 18.9% indicated non-compliance, while 26.7% reported indifference. The study also highlighted issues such as inadequate infrastructure, skills deficits within the police force, and political interference as significant hindrances to effective justice delivery.
These findings underscore the challenges in fully realizing the objectives of the ACJA, particularly concerning the decriminalization of poverty-related offences like vagrancy. While the legal framework has evolved to protect the rights of the indigent, practical implementation lags, necessitating concerted efforts to ensure uniform compliance across all states and law enforcement agencies.
While the ECOWAS Court did not pronounce on the substance of the vagrancy laws, the dismissal underscores the legal hurdles rights groups face in seeking regional redress.
