ADC Criticises Tinubu Reforms, Says Market Forces Are Punishing Nigerians

The fuel subsidy debate in Nigeria has returned sharply to the centre of national politics after Bolaji Abdullahi, National Publicity Secretary of the African Democratic Congress, argued that removing fuel subsidy across the board is no better than applying it indiscriminately to all citizens. His position, delivered as part of the opposition party’s broader criticism of President Bola Tinubu’s economic reforms, reflects a growing argument in Nigeria’s public space: that while blanket subsidy regimes are wasteful and distortionary, full deregulation without effective protection for low-income households can be socially devastating. 

Abdullahi’s remarks came amid an exchange between the ADC and the ruling All Progressives Congress over the economic direction of the country. In that exchange, the ADC said hardship, rising poverty and worsening living costs showed that the government’s reforms were not delivering relief to ordinary Nigerians. Abdullahi’s argument was not a straightforward defence of the old subsidy model. Instead, he framed both extremes as policy failures: universal subsidy, because it benefits rich and poor alike and encourages abuse; and universal removal, because it exposes millions of vulnerable Nigerians to market forces in a country with weak safety nets and entrenched poverty. 

The political force of that argument lies in Nigeria’s current economic reality. Official statistics show inflation has fallen significantly from its 2024 peak, with the National Bureau of Statistics putting headline inflation at 15.38 percent in March 2026 after 15.06 percent in February. Yet the same data also show that petrol remains expensive by Nigerian standards, with average Premium Motor Spirit prices above ₦1,051 per litre on the NBS portal. That means the formal easing of inflation has not erased the daily burden faced by households whose income has not kept pace with transport, food and energy costs. 

International institutions have also continued to warn about rising hardship. The World Bank said in its April 2026 Macro Poverty Outlook that an additional 10 million Nigerians were estimated to have fallen into extreme poverty in 2025, pushing the share of the population living below the international poverty line to 50.9 percent, up from 47.7 percent in 2024. The Bank noted that inflation had slowed by February 2026, but warned that pressures were likely to persist because of higher oil import costs linked to conflict in the Middle East. That combination, slower inflation but deeper poverty, helps explain why subsidy policy remains politically explosive. 

The background to the controversy stretches back to May 2023, when Tinubu announced at his inauguration that the petrol subsidy was gone. The move was hailed by many economists and international lenders as overdue. For years, subsidy payments had consumed huge public resources, distorted the downstream petroleum market and created opportunities for fraud and smuggling. Yet the reform also immediately fed into higher pump prices and, in a country where fuel powers transport, generators and much of small business activity, rippled quickly through the wider economy.

Even after the headline removal, the subsidy question never fully disappeared. Reuters reported in October 2024 that NNPC had raised petrol prices again as it moved away from a costly support regime, while acknowledging that partial subsidy had effectively resurfaced after inflation worsened and the cost-of-living crisis deepened. At that point, NNPC stations in Lagos were selling petrol close to ₦1,000 per litre, and in Abuja above ₦1,030. The episode reinforced the sense that Nigeria had not cleanly resolved the contradiction between market pricing and political pressure to cushion consumers. 

That contradiction has become even more visible in 2026. Reuters reported on April 14 that the federal government plans to cut import duties on food, vehicles and industrial inputs from July 1 in an effort to reduce living costs. Finance Minister Wale Edun also said the government would seek support at the IMF-World Bank Spring Meetings as higher fuel costs, worsened by the Iran war, complicated reform efforts. According to that report, petrol prices had jumped more than 50 percent to around ₦1,330 per litre since the conflict began, while diesel rose above ₦1,550, squeezing transport operators, manufacturers and small businesses. 

This is the context in which Abdullahi’s intervention lands. His argument echoes a position increasingly heard from labour groups, civil society voices and some policy analysts: that the real issue is not whether subsidy exists in the abstract, but who benefits, who pays, and whether government has the administrative credibility to compensate the poor after prices are liberalised. The ADC has argued for targeted support rather than universal subsidy, saying poor Nigerians should not bear the punishment for abuses largely driven by wealthier consumers, smugglers and entrenched rent-seeking networks.

That does not settle the policy debate. Economists who support subsidy removal continue to argue that universal fuel subsidies are regressive, because richer households typically consume more fuel and therefore capture a greater share of the benefit. They also argue that the fiscal space freed by subsidy removal can be redirected into transport systems, healthcare, education and direct social transfers. The IMF has long maintained that removing subsidy can create room to protect poorer households, but only if governments follow through with credible, targeted support. Nigeria’s difficulty has been that public trust in such follow-through remains thin. 

For many Nigerians, the debate is therefore less ideological than practical. Cheap petrol without reform proved expensive for the treasury and vulnerable to corruption. Full market pricing without reliable protection has proved punishing for households already living close to the edge. Abdullahi’s statement has gained traction because it captures that middle frustration: many citizens do not want a return to the old opaque subsidy system, but neither do they believe the market alone can shield them from hardship.

As Nigeria moves deeper into a reform era marked by inflation shocks, poverty pressure and political competition ahead of future elections, the fuel subsidy question is likely to remain a test of both economic judgement and state legitimacy. The central issue is no longer simply whether subsidy should exist, but whether the government can design a system that protects the poor without reopening the fiscal drain and abuse that made the old regime so contentious in the first place.

📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews