Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Nigeria (Ratification: 1960)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2026, Publication: 114th ILC session (2026)

Written information provided by the Government

The Government has provided the following written information as well as copies of the National Industrial Relations Policy (NIRP) for Nigeria and the guideline on labour administration issues in outsourcing/casual/fixed-term contract/contract labour of third party employees in the hotels, hospitality, tourism and catering industry.

The Government notes the observations of the Committee of Experts with regards to the allegations made by the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) with regards to the absence of adequate dispute resolution mechanisms, interference in the collective bargaining process and failure to implement collective bargaining agreements. The Federal Government of Nigeria has put in place various legal and institutional frameworks for dispute resolution. These include:

• the Trade Disputes Act;
• the National Joint Industrial Negotiating Council:
• the Industrial Arbitration Panel;
• the National Industrial Court; and
• the Appeal Court.

These frameworks provide for negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication at all levels.

The Government does not interfere in the process of collective bargaining since the process is between the employer and the worker or workers’ organization concerned. Although the Government is not involved in the implementation of collective agreements between employer(s) and worker(s), the laws provide for the implementation of collective agreements as binding.

As requested, a copy of the National Industrial Relations Policy will be submitted to the International Labour Standards Department for onward transmission to the Committee of Experts.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention: Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Government notes the observations and comments of the Committee of Experts and will take measures to ensure that reported allegations of anti-union discrimination are investigated, and information on outcomes provided accordingly.

As requested, hard copies of the sectoral guidelines for the banking and finance, food and beverage, and hotel and personnel services sectors will be submitted to the International Labour Standards Department of the ILO for onward transmission to the Committee of Experts.

Labour Law reform. The Government notes the comments of the Committee of Experts with regards to ensuring that the Collective Labour Relations Bill conforms with the Convention.

The Government is pleased to inform the Committee that it is in the process of obtaining technical assistance from the ILO Country Office in Abuja to convene two legal drafting retreats to further the labour law reform process. It is hoped that these retreats will conclude the legal drafting process and hopefully prepare the Collective Labour Relations Bill, the Labour Standards Bill and other bills for final tripartite validation and legislative action.

Collective bargaining in practice. There are at least 130 collective agreements concluded and in force in the country. Collective bargaining agreements cover a minimum of 4.6 million workers across various sectors.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – The next case today relates to the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), by Nigeria. There are 23 speakers on the list for the discussion of this case. The Officers have therefore decided to reduce the maximum speaking time for individual delegations from five to three minutes. I now invite the Government representative of Nigeria, the Director and Head of Productivity Measurement and Labour Standards, to take the floor.

Government representative – I congratulate you on your election as Chairperson of this Committee and commend you on the great work you have done so far. We particularly thank the Committee of Experts for its keen interest in the implementation of international labour standards in Nigeria. The Federal Government of Nigeria is committed to providing good governance for its citizens, particularly as it relates to their fundamental human rights and ensuring social justice. Nigeria’s human capital remains a legitimately priced resource that the Government values highly, recognizing that it is a critical component of our wealth generation, socio-economic development and national growth strategies.

Nigeria has remained steadfast to its statutory obligations, as required of Member States of the ILO. We are, and have always been, legitimately committed to upholding the guiding principles and mandate of the ILO in our national law and practice. Nigeria prides itself as a nation that has strived to maintain a sound labour administration system and promotes and ensures the implementation of policies built in the spirit of tripartism, a system guided by social dialogue, non-discrimination, equal opportunities for all, inclusiveness, free and fair employment, freedom of association, dispute resolution mechanisms and much more. Nigeria is particularly committed to the effective implementation of Convention No. 98. The Articles of the Convention which promote protection against anti-union discrimination, protection against employer interference, promotion of collective bargaining and the establishment of machinery for voluntary negotiations strongly echo the provisions of the human rights dimensions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Nigeria notes the observations of the Committee of Experts with regard to the allegations made by the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) on the absence of adequate dispute resolution mechanisms, interference in the collective bargaining process and failure to implement collective bargaining agreements. These allegations were received with surprise, noting that the Government has put in place various legal and institutional frameworks for dispute resolution in the country. These include the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria where labour matters are listed on the exclusive list, the Trade Disputes Act, the Trade Unions Act, the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment itself, the National Joint Industrial Negotiating Council, the Industrial Arbitration Panel, the National Industrial Court and the Appeal Court. These frameworks provide good governance for negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication at all levels. Furthermore, the Committee may wish to note that Nigeria’s labour adjudication system has evolved to the point where the National Industrial Court may refer to ratified and unratified ILO instruments as persuasive authorities when applying international best practices and proceedings.

The Government wishes to refer to the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)’s observations submitted to the Committee of Experts on 11 September 2025 concerning alleged labour rights violations against trade unionists in Edo State as well as its comments on Nigeria’s application of the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190), the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and Convention No. 98. In this regard, the Government of Nigeria wishes to emphasize that social dialogue remains the primary mechanism for managing labour relations in the country. Consistent with established dispute resolution procedures, the Honourable Minister of Labour and Employment has intervened in the industrial dispute between the Edo State Government and the Edo State branch of the NLC. The Honourable Minister will continue to engage both parties with a view to facilitating an amicable resolution of the matter if the measures already taken have not yet yielded the desired outcomes. The Federal Government of Nigeria does not interfere in the collective bargaining process as this process is conducted between workers’ organizations and employers.

While the Government is not a party to the implementation of collective agreements concluded between employers and workers, the legal framework provides that such agreements are binding. The Committee is invited to note that although there may be isolated instances of non-compliance in the collective bargaining process or in the implementation of agreements, the Government remains firmly committed to maintaining a sound industrial relations climate in the country and to strengthening Nigeria’s labour administration system, in line with international best practice. In furtherance of this commitment, the Government recently adopted the National Industrial Relations Policy 2025, which was developed through extensive consultations with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The policy provides a comprehensive framework for strengthening collective bargaining, enhancing labour management cooperation, promoting the prevention and resolution of disputes and encouraging compliance with collective agreements. As requested, a copy of the National Industrial Relations Policy was submitted to the Committee, along with our written information, on 18 May 2026.

On Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention on adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, the Government notes the observations and comments of the Committee of Experts and is pleased to inform this Committee that the issues referenced in our submission to the Committee of Experts in 2025 were investigated and resolved. The Committee is invited to note that the Government, through the Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment, has continuously remained open and committed to promoting fair labour practice across all sectors in Nigeria. The Government will continue to engage with the social partners to address any concerns regarding the practical operation of collective bargaining processes and the implementation of agreements. As requested, hard copies of the sectoral guidelines for the banking and finance, food and beverage, and hotel, hospitality, tourism and catering industries are available for submission to the Committee of Experts. The Government is still developing guidelines for the power and health sectors.

This brings me to labour law reform. The Government notes the Committee of Experts’ comments regarding the need to ensure that the Collective Labour Relations Bill is fully aligned with Convention No. 98. In this regard, section 46(1) and (2) of the Bill proposes an amendment to section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act. The Government is pleased to inform the Committee that it is currently seeking technical assistance from the ILO Country Office in Abuja to convene two legal drafting retreats to further the labour law reform process. Our next meeting is going to be immediately after this International Labour Conference.

It is anticipated that these retreats will help conclude the legal drafting process and prepare the Collective Labour Relations Bill, the Labour Standards Bill and other related bills for final tripartite validation and subsequent legislative action. There are at least 130 collective agreements concluded and in force in the country between January 2025 and May 2026, spanning sectors such as oil and gas, health, education and transportation. These collective bargaining agreements cover at least 4.6 million workers across the various sectors. In conclusion, the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria reiterates its commitment to fulfilling its obligations on ratified international labour standards and ILO supervisory mechanisms, maintaining strong ties with the social partners and recognizing social dialogue as a critical tool for promoting and ensuring social justice for shared prosperity.

Worker members – Nigeria ratified Convention No. 98 more than six decades ago. Yet today workers in Nigeria continue to face serious and persistent obstacles in exercising their right to organize and bargain collectively in practice. At the outset, the Worker members note with deep concern the many violations of the Convention reported over a number of years. These include persistent cases of anti-union discrimination, interference in collective bargaining processes, failures to implement collective agreements and shortcomings in dispute resolution mechanisms. Collectively, these violations demonstrate serious and systemic obstacles to the effective exercise of freedom of association and collective bargaining rights in practice. The situation is compounded by increasing acts of violence, intimidation and threats against trade union leaders and members, including by state actors, and by a persistent climate of impunity that enables such violations to continue unchecked. The Worker members are particularly concerned that despite repeated requests from the Committee of Experts, the Government has failed to provide substantive replies to many specific allegations.

Instead, it refers generally to the adoption of a National Industrial Relations Policy in 2025. While policy development may be a positive step, policies alone are not enough. A policy cannot substitute for concrete measures ensuring that workers can organize freely, bargain collectively without interference and obtain effective protection against anti-union retaliation. The Committee of Experts rightly noted that the Government has not responded to serious allegations concerning interference in collective bargaining, failure to implement collective agreements and inadequate dispute resolution mechanisms. These are not technical shortcomings. They go to the heart of the Convention. Collective bargaining can only function where workers and their organizations can negotiate freely. Agreements are respected and disputes are resolved through fair and effective procedures. The Worker members are also deeply concerned by long-standing allegations of anti-union discrimination across key sectors of the Nigerian economy, including banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications. These allegations concern dismissals of workers seeking to join unions, dismissals of union leaders and members and acts of interference intended to weaken independent trade union activity.

The Committee of Experts recalls an essential principle: legal protections are meaningless if they are not effectively enforced. We fully agree. While Nigerian legislation formally prohibits anti-union discrimination, workers continue to report widespread violations with little evidence of investigation, accountability or remedy. Last year, the Government had informed our Committee that consultations with the social partners had taken place regarding mass dismissals linked to trade union membership and that the report would soon be submitted. Sectoral guidelines intended to address anti-union discrimination in certain industries were to be developed. However, consultations and guidelines cannot replace enforcement. Workers dismissed for joining a union need reinstatement, compensation and justice. Employers responsible for anti-union acts must face meaningful consequences. Trade unions must be able to operate free from intimidation and retaliation. To date, there appears to be little evidence that the allegations raised over the years have resulted in specific investigations or effective remedies.

We therefore strongly support the Committee of Experts’ request that the Government provide detailed information on the investigations undertaken, their outcomes and the concrete measures adopted to ensure protection against anti-union discrimination in practice. The Worker members are also concerned by continuing deficiencies in Nigerian labour legislation. We recall that the Committee of Experts has repeatedly called on the Government to guarantee full collective bargaining rights for all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, including prison service workers and workers at the Central Bank of Nigeria. In this regard, we note the Government’s indication that it is seeking ILO technical assistance to convene legal drafting retreats aimed at advancing the Collective Labour Relations Bill, the Labour Standards Bill and related legislation to its final tripartite validation. While noting these developments, we reiterate the urgent need to address these long-standing legislative gaps.

Convention No. 98 is clear. Restrictions on collective bargaining rights in the public service must remain strictly limited. The continued exclusion of workers who are not engaged in the administration of the State is incompatible with the Convention and deprives thousands of workers of fundamental rights. After years of discussion, workers in these sectors are still waiting for their rights to be fully recognized. We fully note the Government’s indication that the problematic provision contained in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act, which requires ministerial approval of collective agreements on wages, will not be carried over to the new Collective Labour Relations Bill. Such approval mechanisms undermine the voluntary nature of collective bargaining and open the door to state interference in negotiations between workers and employers. This reform must now be completed without delay. The Government must ensure that the new legislative framework fully complies with the Convention and is adopted in genuine consultation with representative workers’ and employers’ organizations.

We also note the Government’s indication that at least 130 collective agreements are currently in force, covering around 4.6 million workers. Such information is essential to assess whether collective bargaining is functioning effectively in practice. We therefore urge the Government to continue collecting and providing comprehensive data on collective agreements, the sectors covered and the workers concerned.

Beyond the legal and institutional questions, we must remember what is at stake for workers. Collective bargaining is not an abstract principle. It is the means through which workers negotiate fair wages, safe working conditions, job security and dignity at work. Where collective bargaining is weakened, inequality grows, labour conflicts intensify and democratic participation in the workplace is undermined. The Worker members therefore urge the Government of Nigeria to take immediate concrete action to give full effect to the Convention. It must ensure that allegations of anti-union discrimination and interference are properly investigated and remedied, that workers can organize and bargain collectively without fear of retaliation and that legislative reforms fully align with the Convention. It must also strengthen dispute resolution mechanisms, ensure respect for collective agreements and provide the information repeatedly requested by the Committee of Experts. The Worker members hope that this discussion will mark a turning point. Nigerian workers have waited many years for effective implementation of their rights under the Convention. They deserve more than promises, consultations and draft policies. They deserve concrete protection, genuine collective bargaining and full respect for their fundamental rights at work.

Employer members – The Employer members thank the Government of Nigeria for the information provided to this Committee. Before turning to the specific issues in this case today, the Employer members wish to reaffirm the importance of Convention No. 98, one of the ten fundamental Conventions. The Convention protects the right to organize and collectively bargain. It provides protection against anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. It also promotes free and voluntary negotiation between employers and workers. The Employer members recognize that economic development and stable industrial relations depend upon the independence of the social partners and the ability to exercise Convention rights free from undue interference. At the same time, we recall that the Convention allows for implementation in accordance with national conditions and does not prescribe a single model of labour relations, provided that its core principles are respected in both law and in practice.

The Government of Nigeria ratified the Convention in 1960. Since 1989, the Committee of Experts has previously issued 14 observations on this case, most recently in 2021, 2024 and 2025. This Committee previously commented on this case in 2018. This history indicates the existence of long-standing issues relating to the application of the Convention in law and in practice. The Committee of Experts raised three main issues in its report regarding the Government of Nigeria’s compliance with the Convention. First, the Committee of Experts addressed allegations raised by workers’ groups regarding anti-union discrimination in violation of Article 1 of Convention No. 98. In particular, the NLC and the ITUC had raised allegations in 2024 that collective bargaining rights have been severely undermined through insufficient dispute resolution mechanisms and the non-implementation of collective agreements.

The ITUC also raised allegations which first appeared in the Committee of Experts’ comments in 2021 regarding the large-scale dismissal of workers attempting to join trade unions and specific incidents of anti-union discrimination and interference in certain sectors such as the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunication sectors. These observations were repeated in the Committee of Experts’ 2024 observations. The Committee of Experts requested that the Government provide its response to these allegations in 2021 and 2024. The Government of Nigeria provided some information regarding collective bargaining rights to the Committee of Experts over the years, and most recently on 18 May 2026. The information provided most recently referenced the legal and institutional frameworks for dispute resolution. However, the Government of Nigeria has continuously failed to provide any information to the Committee of Experts with respect to the specific allegations by the workers and how the legal and institutional frameworks operate in practice. We, the Employer members, emphasize the importance of providing information requested by the Committee of Experts, as failing to do so disrupts the functioning of the supervisory system.

With respect to the information that was provided regarding anti-union discrimination, the Employer members welcome the Government of Nigeria’s consultations with social partners on the issue of dismissals of workers for attempting to join trade unions. The Employer members also welcome the development of sectoral guidelines to address anti-union discrimination and interference. The Employer members echo the comments of the Committee of Experts that such efforts to ensure protection against acts of anti-union discrimination must be applied in practice as well. No specific information was provided regarding the investigations and the outcomes of those investigations into the allegations of anti-union discrimination. The Employer members ask the Government to take further steps to provide information regarding these investigations and provide information on the results of these investigations. We also ask that the Government provide information on the outcomes of consultations and the specific sectoral guidelines. The Employer members encourage the Government to continue to consult with social partners in relation to these issues. We reiterate the importance of ensuring that collective bargaining processes operate freely, effectively and without interference.

The second issue raised by the Committee of Experts concerns the scope of the application of Convention No. 98, noting that legislation excludes certain categories of workers from organizing activities beyond the exceptions outlined in Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention. The Committee of Experts noted the information supplied by the Government of Nigeria regarding its ongoing labour law reform process in consultation with the social partners to align the new labour legislation with the requirements of Convention No. 98. The Employer members encourage the Government to continue this reform process in close consultation with the social partners and in line with the principles of tripartite dialogue. The Employer members also encourage the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the legislative framework is aligned with the requirements of the Convention.

The Employer members recognize that the Government of Nigeria is in the process of obtaining technical assistance from the Office to assist with labour law reform. We invite the Government to continue to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in that regard.

Finally, the Committee of Experts requested information from the Government on the number of collective agreements in force and number of workers covered by them. Such information would demonstrate the extent to which the Articles of Convention No. 98 apply in practice. We acknowledge that the Government of Nigeria has provided this information in its comments on 18 May 2026.

To conclude my introductory remarks, the Employer members reiterate that the provision of information to the Committee of Experts is essential for the functioning of the supervisory system. We also encourage the Government to continue its labour law reform process in consultation with the social partners to ensure that the relevant legislative provisions are brought into conformity with the Convention.

Worker member, Nigeria – I speak on behalf of the NLC, the most representative central trade union organization in Nigeria and an affiliate of the ITUC. We appear before this Committee because workers and their organizations in Nigeria continue to face persistent violations of the Convention. The violations before us are not isolated incidents. They constitute a pattern of interference, intimidation, violence and discrimination directed against workers and their organizations in contravention to the obligations imposed by the Convention.

Article 1(1) of the Convention provides that workers enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment. Article 1(2)(b) further prohibits acts designed to cause the dismissal or otherwise prejudice workers because of their participation in trade union activities. However, when trade union leaders are threatened, assaulted, intimidated, arrested or victimized for carrying out legitimate trade union activities, such actions amount to anti-union discrimination prohibited under Article 1. In November 2023, while leading a legitimate trade union mission in Imo State to secure the implementation of a duly negotiated 2021 agreement, I was violently attacked and seriously injured. The attack occurred solely because I was carrying out lawful trade union functions, which include addressing pension arrears, non-payment of income such as salaries and allowances, intimidation and harassment of workers, etc. Such impunity sends a chilling message to workers and trade union representatives throughout Nigeria and undermines the protection guaranteed under Article 1 of the Convention. Recently, trade union leaders from the NLC and the Trade Union Congress of Nigeria (TUC) in Osun State were shown gory pictures of my beaten and bleeding body by the agents of the State as what will befall them to dissuade them from embarking on their legitimate trade union action.

Article 2(1) of the Convention provides that workers’ organizations shall enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference by public authorities or employers in their establishment, functioning or administration. Article 2(2) specifically prohibits measures designed to place workers’ organizations under the control of public authorities. The situation in Edo State constitutes a direct violation of these provisions. On 5 December 2024, the Edo State Government, supported by security personnel, seized and occupied the NLC State Secretariat in Benin City. The Secretariat remains under occupation despite interventions using internal mechanisms. The forcible occupation of a trade union facility by state authorities interferes directly with the administration and functioning of a workers’ organization and violates Article 2(1) of the Convention. The interference did not stop there. The Governor publicly rejected the democratically elected leadership of the NLC in Edo State and sought to influence internal union leadership arrangements. The Convention guarantees the independence of workers’ organizations. Governments cannot choose union leaders, determine who should represent workers or interfere in internal organizational matters. Such actions are precisely the type of interference prohibited by Article 2(2), which seeks to prevent workers’ organizations from being subjected to State control.

Article 4 of the Convention requires Member States to take measures appropriate to national conditions to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation between employers’ and workers’ organizations. Instead of promoting collective bargaining and social dialogue, authorities in Edo State actively obstructed legitimate trade union activities. On 28 August 2025, security agencies and other actors prevented the inauguration of the duly constituted NLC leadership in the State. Trade union officials were pursued all over the city like common criminals, meetings were disrupted and organizational activities frustrated, compelling the inauguration to take place in a secret location for fear of their lives. Such actions are fundamentally not compatible with Article 4. Collective bargaining cannot flourish where governments deploy security forces against workers’ organizations, obstruct lawful union meetings or undermine the independence of workers’ representatives. As it is today, the NLC in Edo State is a clone of the Governor, so the Government negotiates with itself instead of the legitimate leadership of the NLC.

The situation involving the National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) presents another serious violation of the Convention. The continued imposition of government-backed leadership structures despite court decisions and established trade union processes constitutes interference in the internal administration of a workers’ organization. This violates Article 2(1) and Article 2(2) of the Convention because it places the affairs of a workers’ organization under external influence and control.

Where governments determine who leads a union rather than allowing workers to freely choose their representatives, especially when the highest appellate courts have ruled to the contrary, trade union independence ceases to exist.

These incidents are part of a broader pattern documented by the NLC and the ITUC over several years, including: (i) intimidation, harassment and physical attacks against trade union leaders; (ii) interference in internal trade union elections and leadership structures; (iii) the excessive deployment of security forces during lawful industrial actions; and (iv) restrictions on the ability of workers’ organizations to operate freely and independently.

Taken together, these practices constitute violations of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention and undermine the obligations established under Article 4 to promote genuine collective bargaining. The Committee of Experts has repeatedly requested information regarding these allegations. Yet the Government has failed to provide adequate responses or demonstrate effective remedial action. As it stands, internal mechanisms for remedial action have failed, demanding external intervention. The NLC respectfully requests this Committee to find that Nigeria is in breach of its obligations under Articles 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention. We further request the Committee to urge the Government of Nigeria to: (i) end the occupation of the NLC Secretariat in Edo State and restore full control of the premises to the Congress; (ii) cease all forms of interference in the internal affairs of trade unions and work with the legitimate leadership of the NLC in the State; (iii) respect court decisions relating to trade union leadership disputes, including those concerning the NURTW; (iv) guarantee the safety and protection of trade union leaders and members; (v) conduct independent investigations into acts of anti-union violence and intimidation; and (vi) establish a clear timetable for the labour law reforms necessary to ensure full compliance with the Convention.

The issue before this Committee is not merely one of labour relations. It concerns the fundamental right of workers to organize freely, choose their representatives independently and bargain collectively without fear, interference or violence. Those rights are guaranteed by the Convention. They must also be guaranteed in practice in Nigeria. What is happening in Nigeria is a cancer that has become malignant with pustules everywhere: in Edo, Rivers and Lagos, and it is growing. We therefore urge this Committee to use the full weight of its authority to secure compliance with the Convention and protect the rights of Nigerian workers.

Government member, Cyprus – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, as well as the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement. The European Union and its Member States are committed to the promotion, protection, respect and fulfilment of human rights, including labour rights. We promote the universal ratification and effective implementation of fundamental ILO Conventions and support the ILO in developing and promoting international labour standards and supervising their application. The European Commission has supported Nigeria’s social dialogue system via a technical assistance project under the global deal implemented by the ILO and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in 2023–24.

The European Union and its Member States have been committed development partners of Nigeria, including through the standard Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) arrangement under the European Union’s general GSP. The trade benefits granted under the standard GSP arrangement are subject to the condition that Nigeria respects core international principles enshrined in core UN and ILO Conventions, including the Convention.

We welcome the copies – provided by the Government – of the National Industrial Relations Policy for Nigeria and the guideline on labour administration issues in outsourcing/casual/fixed-term contract/contract labour of third-party employees in the hotels, hospitality, tourism and catering industry. We also welcome the information regarding the number of collective agreements in force. Yet we regret the absence of an adequate dispute resolution mechanism, the interference in the collective bargaining process and the lack of adequate implementation of collective bargaining agreements.

We acknowledge the technical assistance in the process to be provided by the ILO Country Office in Abuja to convene two legal drafting retreats to further the labour law reform process. We hope these efforts will lead to the speedy finalization of the drafting of the Collective Labour Relations Bill, the Labour Standards Bill and other bills for final tripartite validation and legislative action. We request the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the allegations referred to by the ITUC denouncing anti-union discrimination lead to specific investigations. We request information on the results of these investigations and further request the Government to provide the report on the consultations with the social partners regarding massive dismissals for trying to join trade unions, which was not shared after the 113th Session of the Conference. Regarding labour law reforms, we request the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that amendments are made to ensure the full recognition of the right to collective bargaining of all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, including prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria.

We also call on the Government to amend section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act regarding the legal obligation to submit any collective agreements on wages for ministerial approval. While recognizing the importance of a comprehensive legal framework to protect trade union rights, we also wish to recall that the existence of legal provisions prohibiting anti-union discrimination is not enough if they are not accompanied by effective application in practice. The European Union and its Member States encourage further exchanges between the Government and the ILO with a view to implementing the recommendations of the Committee of Experts and to engaging meaningfully with the social partners.

Government member, South Africa – South Africa thanks the Committee of Experts for its detailed report on the application of the Convention in Nigeria. We also thank the Government of Nigeria for its response. The Committee of Experts’ comments highlight a number of areas that may benefit from further attention, including allegations of interference in collective bargaining and failure to implement agreements, reports of large-scale dismissals and discrimination across different sectors, outstanding legislative issues, including section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act on approval of wage agreements and the exclusion of certain public sector workers from full bargaining rights. We note Nigeria’s adoption of the 2025 National Industrial Relations Policy and the development of sectoral guidelines.

These are seen as steps in the right direction. At the same time, as the Committee recalls from the 2012 General Survey, legal provisions alone may not be sufficient. Practical measures including effective and timely procedures and concrete investigations would help strengthen implementation. South Africa encourages the Government of Nigeria to continue its engagement with the ILO and the Committee. In that context, it could be helpful for Nigeria to respond to the specific points raised by the NLC and the ITUC and to provide the information requested by the Committee.

Sharing the 2025 National Industrial Relations Policy and sectoral guidelines with the Office will also allow the Committee to assess their alignment with the Convention. Engaging ILO technical assistance to advance work on the new Collective Labour Relations Bill and Labour Standards Bill may be a useful way forward. In conclusion, South Africa believes that continued cooperation with the ILO supervisory system can serve as a constructive basis for reform. Through strengthened social dialogue, Nigeria may be able to bring its law and practice further in line with the Convention.

Worker member, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – I speak on behalf of the workers of the United Kingdom, and the Commonwealth Trade Union Group supports this statement. Noting the prohibition in the Convention of acts of interference against workers’ organizations and that the effective realization of the right to organize and bargain collectively requires the good faith implementation of law and practice to prevent them, it is concerning to report gross systematic interference in the independence of unions by the Government of Nigeria itself. In 2024, just as he was at the Abuja Airport to fly to the United Kingdom to take part in the British Trades Union Congress (TUC)’s annual congress in Brighton, NLC president Joe Ajaero was arrested. For several hours no one knew what had become of him.

Eventually released, it seemed that Mr Ajaero had been arrested without a warrant and held long enough to make his visit to the TUC impossible. The TUC president issued a strong statement of condemnation from the platform of the congress, saying Mr Ajaero’s unlawful arrest is a gross violation of fundamental trade union freedoms, especially as he was on his way to speak to us about the vital right of trade unions to seek solidarity. Replying via national media, the Government of Nigeria attacked the TUC statement, calling it a false claim and saying that with regards to Mr Ajaero, no one is above the law, even though no charges were ever brought against Joe on the multiple offences alleged by the Government. If they wished to prevent him from sharing examples of Government interference with a wider audience, then, as we discuss these matters here today, it could be said to have backfired. Let us look at some now.

In December 2024, the Government of Edo State invaded trade union offices, ejected the workers, locked it and has since withheld the keys. In the same State, the Governor refused to work with the elected NLC Chairperson, removed him from power and replaced him with a government-approved and unelected leader, forcing the union to dissolve its leadership structures to avoid co-option. Similarly, in Imo, the State Government attempted to appoint an alternative State-approved NLC leadership and attempted to replace the legitimate union leaders; condemnation by the country’s tripartite National Labour Advisory Council has had no effect. In Abia, the State Government attempted to replace the leadership of the NURTW, and in four other states the Government banned that union from operating, in defiance of the Trade Unions Act and the Constitution. It was ironic that the Government of Nigeria chose to say that no one is above the law, because the State itself is operating in breach of its own national laws and in defiance of international law by failing to comply with the Convention.

Rather than aggressively rejecting legitimate criticism, we hope the Government will reflect on the need to respect the independence and democratic integrity of unions and their leadership and, by doing so, create the conditions where collective bargaining and the right to organize can be fully realized.

Government member, Zambia – The Zambian Government thanks the Government of the Republic of Nigeria for its detailed response and welcomes the information provided regarding the measures undertaken to strengthen the application of the Convention. We positively note the existence of established dispute resolution institutions, the continued practice of collective bargaining across key sectors and the ongoing labour law reform process being undertaken in collaboration with the ILO and the social partners. We further commend Nigeria’s commitment to tripartite dialogue, the development of sector-specific industrial relations guidelines and efforts to align national registration with international labour standards. These initiatives demonstrate a constructive approach towards strengthening industrial relations and promoting decent work.

Zambia encourages Nigeria to continue its engagement with the ILO supervisory mechanisms and its social partners to address the remaining observations of the Committee of Experts. We are confident that with the support of the ILO, the ongoing reforms will further enhance the effective implementation of the Convention. We therefore encourage the Committee to take note of the progress achieved and to continue supporting Nigeria’s efforts through constructive dialogue and technical assistance.

Worker member, Ghana – We are deeply concerned by the observations of the Committee of Experts relating to intimidation, harassment, interference in trade union affairs, attacks on trade union offices and threats against trade union leaders and members in Nigeria. We are particularly troubled by the assault and intimidation of the President of the NLC, comrade Joe Ajaero. This development should concern all of us. Such actions undermine not only individual trade union leaders but also the institutions of social dialogue and collective representation that are fundamental to democratic labour relations.

Trade unions are not enemies of the State. Trade unions are democratic institutions that give workers a collective voice and contribute to national development, social stability and economic progress. When trade union leaders are intimidated, when workers are harassed for exercising their rights and when governments interfere in the internal affairs of workers’ organizations, the victims are not only trade unions. Democracy itself is weakened. Social dialogue is undermined.

Trust between the social partners is eroded. The challenges of unemployment, informality, inequality, climate change, technological transformation and growing social pressures require stronger social dialogue, not weaker social dialogue; stronger trade unions and not weaker trade unions; and great respect for freedom of association, not restrictions on workers’ rights. In Ghana, our situation is not perfect. However, our experience demonstrates that sustainable industrial peace is best achieved through dialogue, mutual respect and strong labour institutions rather than confrontation and intimidation.

Over the years, successive governments have organized labour as a legitimate partner in national development. At the highest level of governance, the President of the Republic regularly joins workers during these meetings and engages directly with organized labour on matters of international importance. This is not merely symbolic. It reflects a national commitment to social dialogue and respect for workers’ voices. Such engagement has contributed significantly to industrial peace, strengthened trust among the social partners and demonstrated that meaningful dialogue remains the most effective pathway for resolving differences and advancing national development.

The lesson is clear. Respect for freedom of association and collective bargaining is not a threat to development. It is a prerequisite for development. We therefore urge the Government of Nigeria to take all necessary measures to investigate the allegations raised by the Committee of Experts, guarantee the safety and independence of trade union leaders and members, refrain from interference in trade union affairs and fully uphold its obligations under Convention No. 87 and the Convention. We stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters in Nigeria and reaffirm that workers everywhere must be free to organize, bargain collectively and defend their interests without fear, intimidation or violence.

Government member, Ghana – It is critical to reaffirm the importance of the Convention as one of the fundamental Conventions underpinning decent work, social cohesion and social justice in the world of work. The Government of the Republic of Ghana has taken note of the information provided by the Government of the Republic of Nigeria to the Committee of Experts regarding the matter of the right to organize and collective bargaining as espoused in the Convention. The Government of Nigeria has honestly indicated the occurrence of isolated breaches of these rights by employers in the country. It has also informed this Committee of ongoing legislative reforms and its commitment to ensuring a serene industrial relations environment through an improved labour administration.

In the light of this, we applaud the legislative strides it is making to give meaning to the rights provided under the Convention and the assurance of non-interference in the processes between workers and employers regarding these rights. While we commend the Government for its efforts, we entreat you to continue to engage meaningfully with its social partners to resolve all inherent challenges together to avoid future recurrence.

The Government of Ghana urges the Government of the Republic of Nigeria to seek the necessary technical assistance from the ILO to ensure these rights are integrated into the tripartite validation of the outstanding draft bills and facilitate their early passage by the appropriate competent authority. We urge the Committee to consider the efforts of the Government of the Republic of Nigeria to reform in its conclusions.

Worker member, Zimbabwe – This case concerns more than labour relations. It concerns the integrity of the Convention itself. For many years, the Committee of Experts has emphasized that the promotion of voluntary collective bargaining is one of the central objectives of the Convention. The Committee has repeatedly recalled that negotiations must be conducted in good faith, that workers’ organizations must be free from interference and that collective agreements freely concluded must be respected and implemented.

The Committee’s jurisprudence in this regard is unequivocal. In its General Survey on collective bargaining and in its long-standing interpretation of Article 4 of the Convention, the Committee of Experts has consistently stated that collective bargaining must be conducted in good faith and agreements reached through such bargaining must be respected. The Committee has emphasized that there would be little reason for workers to engage in collective bargaining if the agreements reached could simply be ignored by employers or public authorities. It is precisely this principle that is being violated by Nigeria. At the federal level, the Government has not fully implemented the wage award negotiated with organized labour.

The payment of negotiated peculiar allowances for federal workers remains incomplete. The agreements concluded between the Federal Government and the NLC and TUC on 2 June 2023 and 5 October 2023 have not been fully honoured. At state level, the consequential adjustments arising from the national minimum wage remain outstanding in Edo State. In Kaduna State, workers continue to face challenges regarding the full implementation of the national minimum wage. Collective bargaining cannot exist only on paper.

When governments negotiate agreements with representatives of workers’ organizations and then fail to implement them, collective bargaining is transformed into an empty ritual. The Committee of Experts has repeatedly maintained that the objective of Article 4 of the Convention is not merely to facilitate meetings between parties but to promote genuine collective bargaining leading to meaningful agreements that are respected in practice. The failure to implement negotiated agreements is therefore not a minor administrative matter. It strikes at the heart of the Convention. Yet the challenges in Nigeria go beyond non-implementation.

The Committee of Experts has examined Nigeria under the Convention on numerous occasions, including observations adopted in 2018, 2021, 2024 and 2025. The persistence of these issues demonstrates a troubling pattern rather than isolated incidents. The workers of Nigeria have negotiated in good faith. They have honoured their obligations. They have demonstrated patience. It is now time for the Government of Nigeria to do the same.

Interpretation from Arabic:Government member, Tunisia - The delegation of Tunisia commends the Government of Nigeria and thanks it for all the information provided regarding the application of the Convention. We have taken note of the progress made in establishing a legislative framework for effective, lasting labour dispute resolution, as well as the development of guidelines. We also welcome the reforms being pursued to improve the alignment of legislation with the Convention. We commend these efforts, as well as the collaboration between Nigeria and the ILO. My delegation would also like to commend Nigeria’s commitment and efforts to respect international labour standards, while taking note of this Committee’s observations and those of the Committee of Experts.

Worker member, Kenya – I speak on behalf of African trade unions and Public Services International. We join in the concerns expressed regarding Nigeria’s compliance with the Convention. At the heart of this case lies a simple but fundamental question: can collective bargaining function effectively when engagements are delayed, disregarded or subjected to excessive administrative control? For workers in Nigeria’s public services, this is not a theoretical question. It is a daily reality. Collective bargaining is built on good faith, yet public sector unions frequently face prolonged delays before negotiations even begin. Bargaining processes are too long, often reactive rather than institutionalized, forcing workers to mobilize repeatedly simply to secure dialogue on matters affecting their livelihood and working conditions. Even more concerning is what happens after agreements are reached. Workers in health, in education and other public services have repeatedly experienced situations where negotiated outcomes are not implemented within the agreed timelines.

This creates a cycle of frustrations, a cycle of industrial unrest and a cycle of avoidable disruptions of public services. The Committee of Experts has noted allegations concerning interference in collective bargaining processes and the failure to implement collective agreements. These concerns go to the very essence of the Convention. The Committee has also rightly called for labour reforms, including the removal of provisions that subject collective bargaining outcomes to ministerial approval. Such powers are incompatible with the principles of free and voluntary collective bargaining. Collective agreements should be negotiated by parties, not subjected to political discretion.

We are also particularly concerned about the continued exclusion of certain categories of public sector workers from full collective bargaining rights. Public servants who are not engaged in the administration should enjoy the protection guaranteed under the Convention. Collective bargaining cannot thrive where agreements are treated as optional, where implementation depends on political convenience or where workers must resort repeatedly to industrial action to secure what is right and what they have rightfully negotiated. We call on the Government of Nigeria today to stop using the “no work, no pay” policy as a tool of intimidation against workers. This policy, which emanates from section 42(1)(a) of the Trade Disputes Act, has been misused and has been abused to silence lawful industrial action and to criminalize the legitimate struggle for fairness, struggle for dignity and struggle for the fulfilment of agreements. We therefore urge the Government of Nigeria to engage in genuine good faith bargaining, to fully implement negotiated agreements, to complete labour reforms without further delay, to remove all remaining obstacles to free and voluntary collective bargaining and to ensure all public sector workers covered by the Convention can effectively exercise their rights. Respect for collective bargaining is not only a worker’s right; it is a prerequisite for stable public service and social dialogue and lasting industrial peace.

Government member, Libya – The State of Libya is honoured to express its deep appreciation to the Committee of Experts for the preparation of its report and affirms its support for the responses and objective clarifications provided by the Federal Republic of Nigeria which reflect a clear and sincere commitment to the principles of the Convention, and a genuine dedication to fostering a work environment based on dialogue and mutual respect. We have carefully reviewed the comprehensive institutional framework presented by Nigeria for the settlement of labour disputes, which includes negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and judicial processes through well-established institutions that play a pivotal role in ensuring fair and effective dispute resolution. We also welcome Nigeria’s confirmation that collective bargaining is fully exercised between workers and employers and that the role of the Government remains limited to providing the legislative and regulatory environment that guarantees the independence of the social partners, an essential principle of decent work. We further commend the practical measures taken by the Nigerian Government to protect workers from anti-union discrimination and strengthen the capacities of labour inspectors, the sectoral guidelines developed in key industries, as well as the ongoing work in other sectors.

We also note that the legislative reforms under way in cooperation with the ILO include updating labour relations, law and labour standards within a broad tripartite consultation framework. In conclusion, the State of Libya reaffirms its support for the efforts of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and encourages the continuation of constructive dialogue with the supervisory bodies of the ILO. The State of Libya also calls upon the esteemed Committee to take into account the progress achieved and to value the practical steps undertaken by the Nigerian Republic to strengthen trade union rights and collective bargaining.

Worker member, South Africa – I take the floor on behalf of the Federation of Unions of South Africa to highlight the plight of public sector workers in Nigeria who continue to be denied their fundamental rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining. These categories of workers are found in immigration services, correctional services, customs services, minting and printing services, the Central Bank of Nigeria, defence forces, police and other public sectors not engaged in state administration. Convention No. 98 is a fundamental international labour standard that protects workers from anti-union discrimination and promotes voluntary collective bargaining between employers and employees. The Nigerian Government is violating the rights of these groups of public service workers, discriminating against them for joining and forming trade unions and engaging in collective bargaining. These workers are dedicated professionals who must enjoy their rights like any other group of workers recognized by the laws of Nigeria.

The Convention affirms the right of all workers to join and form trade unions without distinction. Collective bargaining is not just a legal obligation, but a fundamental necessity to ensure fair wages, better working conditions and job security. The failure to enjoy fundamental rights has a negative impact on services delivered to the entire Nigerian population who rely on Government services. Public trust in Government institutions may also be affected. In my country, South Africa, the Constitution and the Labour Relations Act allow workers to join and participate in trade unions of their choice without fear of discrimination or victimization. This right is extended to members of the police force, correctional services and defence forces. These workers have their trade unions: the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union and the South African National Defence Union. Collective bargaining takes place mainly through the Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council, which brings together Government representatives and trade unions. Several major public service unions play a key role in representing employees. These include the National Education, Health and Allied Workers’ Union, which represents workers in health, education and other public services, and the Public Servants Association, one of the largest unions representing public servants, just to mention a few. These unions negotiate on behalf of their members and help ensure that workers’ rights and interests are protected. I call upon the Government of Nigeria to emulate South Africa’s anti-discrimination laws in ensuring that they offer all public servants the right to organize, the right to join and form a trade union, including trade union federations. We affirm our commitment to standing against discrimination in all forms within the public service. It is our collective responsibility to advocate for the rights of every worker, ensuring that they can join in unity, strength and solidarity.

The Committee of Experts’ report has been calling on the Government to undertake reforms which have remained an unending promise. Strong public service unions and effective collective bargaining contribute significantly to workplace democracy, social justice and improved public service delivery. I urge the Government of Nigeria to uphold the principles of democracy and equality, essential for a just society.

Government member, Morocco – Allow me, at the beginning of this intervention, to commend the work undertaken by the Committee of Experts in the exercise of its mandate. We also thank the Government of Nigeria for the detailed information and the clarification provided to this Committee, as well as for the spirit of cooperation which it has demonstrated during its dialogue with the ILO supervisory mechanisms in follow up to the observations made.

We followed the statement made by the Nigerian delegation attentively, and we welcome the efforts made to further strengthen the alignment of the country’s legislation and national practice with international labour standards. We also note the strengthening of the legal and institutional arsenal with the aim of promoting social dialogue, preventing and resolving labour disputes and promoting the effective exercise of the right to organize and collective bargaining. In that regard, the negotiation, mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication mechanisms established, as well as the tripartite consultation conducted with the support of the ILO, bear witness to Nigeria’s commitment to the principles enshrined in Convention No. 98, including freedom of association, collective bargaining, the institutionalization of social dialogue and the promotion of a social climate that enables decent work. The results communicated illustrate the specific and effective nature of collective bargaining in Nigeria, with more than 130 collective agreements in force in strategic sectors covering close to 4.6 million workers, confirming this mechanism’s vital role in regulating labour relations and maintaining social peace.

With regard to the progress recorded, Morocco encourages the continuation of the efforts undertaken with the support of constructive dialogue with the ILO and technical cooperation, in order to further consolidate gains in the area of collective bargaining, social dialogue and the protection of trade union rights, in accordance with Convention No. 98.

Worker member, Democratic Republic of the Congo – The workers of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as well as the Worker members, denounce the case of Nigeria with deep concern. Our message is simple: freedom of association cannot exist while the public authorities interfere in the affairs of trade unions, impose leaders upon workers and use the security forces and the judiciary to stifle trade union activity.

Nigeria ratified Conventions Nos 87 and 98 more than 60 years ago. Nevertheless, the Committee of Experts continues to note serious allegations of harassment, intimidation, arrests, police violence and interference in the life of trade unions. In 2025 the Committee of Experts noted allegations relating to the occupation of the NLC headquarters in Edo State, the eviction of democratically elected leaders, the intimidation of trade union leaders and the use of the security forces to prevent trade union activity. Let us call a spade a spade: this is not a simple administrative dispute, but an attempt to take control of workers’ organizations with the sole aim of stifling freedom of association and job action.

In Edo State, the elected trade union structures were allegedly replaced by structures supported by the public authorities which were allegedly afforded the necessary resources to torpedo the legitimate trade unions, while the workers’ legitimate representatives were cast aside. Similar allegations have also been made in Lagos and Rivers State. When the same phenomenon appears in several states in the Federation, it is no longer an isolated incident; on the contrary, it is a concerning pattern of political interference in trade union autonomy.

The right to organize means that workers choose their representatives freely. Governors, the police and political actors do not choose trade union leaders. A trade union controlled by the Government is not a trade union. Collective bargaining led by imposed structures is not collective bargaining. And social dialogue without independent workers’ organizations is nothing more than an illusion.

We therefore call on the Government of Nigeria to investigate all allegations of violence and interference, re-establish legitimately elected trade union structures, bring an end to the use of the security forces against legal trade union activity and ensure conformity with Conventions Nos 87 and 98 in order to guarantee the effective enjoyment of trade union rights. This Committee must send a clear message: democracy cannot be selective. A State that claims to respect democracy must guarantee workers the full freedom to elect trade union representatives at all levels.

Worker member, Eswatini – We wish to underscore the critical importance of the ongoing and proposed legislative reforms in Nigeria as a necessary and urgent step towards full compliance with the application arising under the Convention. The Committee of Experts’ observations highlight several areas within the Trade Unions Act and related legislation that require amendment. These include a restrictive threshold for union formation, limitations on the registration of new unions, excessive ministerial discretion in revoking union registration and broad exclusions of certain categories of workers from the right to organize. Additionally, constraints on the right to strike, including arbitration over the expansive definition of essential services and penal sanctions, raise serious concerns regarding the effective exercise of trade union rights. From our perspective, these reforms are not merely technical legal adjustments. They go to the very heart of freedom of association.

Convention No. 98 guarantees workers and employers the right to organize and collectively bargain and to establish and form organizations of their own choosing without prior authorization. Any legislative framework that imposes undue barriers, whether through numerical thresholds or restrictions on industrial action, risks undermining this fundamental principle. We particularly note the ongoing effort to consolidate these reforms within the proposed Collective Labour Relations Bill. This presents a valuable opportunity for Nigeria to align its domestic legal framework with international labour standards.

Ensuring that workers, including those in previously excluded sectors, can freely organize, that unions can operate without interference and that the right to strike is respected in law and in practice, will significantly strengthen industrial relations and democratic governance. Furthermore, reforms addressing freedom of association and the right to organize and collectively bargain in export processing zones and ensuring genuine trade union pluralism are essential in adapting labour law to contemporary economic realities. We firmly believe that meaningful social dialogue coupled with legislative reforms is indispensable in fostering respect for fundamental rights at work. We therefore encourage the Government of Nigeria to expedite these reforms in consultation with the social partners and to avail itself of the technical assistance offered by the ILO. In furtherance of this, we urge the Nigerian Government to stop the continuous delay in sending these bills to the legislature for enactment into law. We consider seven years’ delay after its conclusion as inexplicable and a continued hindrance to the operation of Convention No. 98. Such steps will not only advance compliance with Convention No. 98, but will also contribute to a more just, inclusive, sustainable and stable labour environment.

Observer, Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI) – The Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI) thanks the Government of Nigeria for its report and welcomes this discussion. The BWI wishes to emphasize that the effective protection of workers against anti-union discrimination and interference lies at the very heart of the Convention. Workers must be able to freely join and participate in trade unions without fear of retaliation, dismissal, intimidation or any other forms of prejudice. In this regard, we note with concern the issues raised over a number of years concerning anti-union discrimination and interference in several sectors of the economy. Dismissals of workers seeking to join trade unions, actions targeting trade union leaders and members and obstacles to exercise trade union rights continue to raise serious questions regarding the practical application of the Convention.

We are particularly concerned that workers still face barriers when attempting to organize and join trade unions of their own choosing. Freedom of association and collective bargaining cannot be exercised where workers are discouraged, intimidated or prevented from joining independent trade unions. Equally concerning are situations in which employers seek to influence or control workers’ representations through employer-dominated organizations or so-called “yellow unions”, which undermine genuine collective bargaining and weaken workers’ ability to defend their interests independently. We therefore encourage the Government to ensure that all anti-union discrimination, interference and dismissals related to trade union memberships or activities are subject to prompt, independent and effective investigations. Where violations are established, appropriate remedies should be available, including reinstatement, compensation and sanctions that are sufficiently dissuasive to prevent future violations.

The BWI also wishes to underline the importance of effective and timely dispute resolution mechanisms. Delayed procedures can deny workers meaningful protection and undermine confidence in labour relations institutions. Justice delayed is often justice denied. Workers who lose their employment because of trade union activities require rapid access to impartial procedures capable of providing timely remedy. In conclusion, the BWI calls on the Government to take concrete actions to combat anti-union discrimination and interference, prevent dismissals linked to trade union activity and ensure that workers can freely join an organization of their own choosing, strengthening dispute resolution mechanisms to guarantee an environment in which collective bargaining can take place freely and effectively.

Observer, IndustriALL Global Union – I speak on behalf of IndustriALL Global Union, which brings together unions in 130 countries representing workers in the mining, energy and manufacturing sectors. Nigeria presents one of the most serious and persistent challenges to freedom of association and collective bargaining on the continent. Although the country ratified the Convention in 1960, the gap between its international commitments and the reality on the ground continues to widen. The situation affects all major sectors, including energy, manufacturing, transport and services. Across the country, authorities at all levels bypass collective bargaining through wage commissions. Instead of negotiating with unions, they impose wage awards for political purposes. This excludes workers entirely from the process, leaving unions sidelined in decisions that shape wages, working conditions and the scope of bargaining.

The private sector also presents serious challenges. Companies continue to deny workers the right to join unions, to bargain collectively and to enjoy basic rights at work. For example, in a refinery in Lagos hundreds of workers were dismissed after attempting to organize. Following intervention by the NLC and industrial affiliates, the company signed an agreement allowing unionization. However, within one week, soldiers were deployed to intimidate workers and prevent them from joining unions. IndustriALL Global Union observes and highlights the following violations of fundamental rights in Nigeria under Convention No. 98: anti-union discrimination and retaliation, employer interference in union affairs, restrictions on collective bargaining, excessive use of security forces during labour disputes, legal and administrative barriers and a failure to enforce protections. IndustriALL also supports the key points raised by the ITUC submission regarding the Government of Nigeria’s failure to respond to concerns raised by the Committee of Experts and other ILO supervisory bodies.

This Committee must express serious concern and conclude that the Government of Nigeria takes concrete and time-bound measures to remedy these serious violations.

Government representative – Nigeria wishes to thank all delegations that have made interventions in this matter. Comments by both Workers’ and Employers’ groups are duly noted. Nigeria views the observations of the supervisory bodies and several delegations as valuable tools for continuous improvement, rather than merely compliance exercises. All workers in Nigeria are, in law and practice, allowed to join unions and are not prevented from exercising this right.

The Government of Nigeria reiterates that social dialogue remains the primary mechanism for managing labour relations in the country and does not interfere in trade union matters. Therefore, the Government would continue to engage meaningfully in line with the provisions of Convention No. 98, which was adopted by this august body because freedom of association alone was not enough. Workers needed protection from retaliation, independence from employer control and a legal framework that made collective bargaining real rather than symbolic. However, while the Government improves processes in line with our established dispute resolution procedures, on the issue of Edo State which was mentioned in the course of our deliberations, the Honourable Minister of Labour and Employment intervened in the dispute between the Edo State Government and the Edo State branch of the NLC as expected. To demonstrate the Government’s willingness and compliance with the provisions of Convention No. 98, the Government established a high-powered investigative Committee comprising the NLC members to Edo State.

Both parties, the NLC and the State Government, agreed to work together to find a lasting solution. Let me reiterate that the Government of Nigeria is willing to continue engaging with all parties to explore new ways to facilitate an amicable resolution of matters raised if the conciliatory measures taken have yet to yield desired results. Permit me to respond briefly regarding the NURTW, raised again by the NLC leadership. The Honourable Minister of Labour and Employment has also intervened to resolve this dispute. At one point, the parties in this dispute left the mediation and conciliation processes and proceeded to adjudication.

Following adjudication, conciliation was resumed, with several court judgments presented. The Government found it necessary at this point to forward these judgments to the Ministry of Justice for interpretation. This demonstrates genuine actions on the part of the Government to resolve the issues in dispute objectively. We therefore assure this Committee that this matter is being handled and will be resolved in accordance with our dispute resolution processes. Nigeria acknowledges the Committee of Experts’ observation that legal protections must be supported by effective implementation mechanisms.

Accordingly, efforts are under way to strengthen labour administration and inspection services to improve monitoring, investigation and enforcement concerning allegations of anti-union discrimination. Nigeria is presently undertaking one of the most comprehensive reviews of its labour legislation since independence. The objective is to modernize the legal framework governing labour relations and ensure greater conformity with ratified international labour standards. The review process has been conducted through extensive tripartite consultations involving the Government, employers, workers and technical experts, with support from the Office. Several legislative instruments have been developed, including the proposed collective labour relations legislation and the labour standards legislation among others.

The Government therefore notes the workers’ comments concerning collective bargaining rights for certain categories of public sector workers and wishes to assure this Committee that these matters continue to receive careful consideration within the ongoing reform process. We also note the Committee of Experts’ comments concerning section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act. In this regard, Nigeria welcomes the Committee of Experts’ recognition that the ministerial approval requirement currently contained in section 19 is not being retained in the proposed Collective Labour Relations Bill. This represents an important step towards further strengthening the autonomy of collective bargaining processes in line with the Convention. The Government remains committed to constructive engagement with the social partners and the Office to explore available technical assistance and ensure that the final legislative framework is fully informed by international labour standards and national realities.

I will conclude by emphasizing that our Government remains fully committed to genuine collective bargaining, promoting freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and decent work. We recognize that challenges remain, as they do in many countries. However, significant progress has been achieved through institutional reforms, policy development, legislative modernization and sustained engagement with the social partners. We may not be where we want to be yet, but we are certainly not where we were. Nigeria, therefore, welcomes continued collaboration with the ILO and reiterates its readiness to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office, particularly in the areas of labour law reform, strengthening collective bargaining institutions, labour inspection, data management and mechanisms for preventing anti-union discrimination.

Employer members – The Employer members would like to thank the speakers who have taken the floor today. We again want to thank the Government of Nigeria for the information that it has provided and for its engagement. Before I start with my concluding remarks, I want to note that the intervention from the Worker of Eswatini referred to the right to strike. We wish to remind the speakers that we are here to address the Government’s application of Convention No. 98 in law and in practice.

We reiterate the importance of ensuring compliance with Convention No. 98 in both law and practice, including effective protection against anti-union discrimination, the promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining and a legislative framework that supports the independence of the social partners. In light of today’s discussion, the Employer members recommend that the Government of Nigeria take the following steps: (i) provide specific information on the allegations of interference in collective bargaining, inadequate dispute resolution mechanisms and the non-implementation of collective agreements as they apply in practice; (ii) provide information regarding the investigations into the allegations of anti-union discrimination first raised in the Committee of Experts’ observations in 2021 and the outcomes of these investigations; (iii) provide information on steps to deepen tripartism and social dialogue and also ensure the functioning of the National Labour Advisory Council, the supreme supervisory body for social dialogue and tripartism in Nigeria; and (iv) continue its labour law reform process in consultation with the social partners to ensure that the relevant legislative provisions are brought into conformity with the Convention and to continue to avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in relation to the labour law reform.

Worker members – The Worker members thank the Government of Nigeria for the information it has provided to this Committee, as well as all the delegates who took the floor during the discussion. We have listened carefully to the interventions made, and note the Government’s references to ongoing labour reform, the adoption of the National Industrial Relations Policy and the development of sectoral guidelines intended to address anti-union discrimination. We also take note of the stated willingness to continue engaging with the ILO and the social partners. At the same time, this discussion has confirmed that serious concerns regarding the application of the Convention remain unresolved.

Many of the issues raised by the Committee of Experts have been before this Committee for several years, including allegations of anti-union discrimination, dismissals linked to trade union activity, interference in collective bargaining processes, failure to implement collective agreements and restrictions affecting the collective bargaining rights of certain categories of public sector workers. The Worker members also remain deeply concerned by reports of violence, intimidation and threats against trade union leaders and members, including allegations involving state actors as well as by the persistence of a climate of impunity. Such acts create fear, undermine the exercise of trade union rights and are fundamentally incompatible with the effective application of the Convention. The Government bears responsibility for ensuring a safe and enabling environment in which workers and their organizations can exercise their rights freely and without fear. This requires not only the prompt investigation and prosecution of acts of violence and intimidation, but also the effective protection of civil liberties and fundamental rights that are indispensable for the exercise of freedom of association and collective bargaining.

The Worker members wish to stress that workers in Nigeria cannot continue waiting indefinitely for concrete progress. Repeated assurances, ongoing consultations and references to future reforms are not sufficient if violations persist in practice and if workers continue to face retaliation for exercising their fundamental rights. Convention No. 98 requires more than formal commitments. It requires effective protection in law and in practice. We therefore expect the Government to take concrete and measurable actions without delay. In particular, We urge the Government to: (i) ensure that all allegations of anti-union discrimination and interference are promptly and effectively investigated and to ensure access to effective remedies and sanctions where violations are established; (ii) provide detailed information on the outcome of investigations undertaken, including in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunication sectors; (iii) ensure a safe and enabling environment in which workers and their organizations can exercise their rights freely, including the right to organize and bargain collectively without fear of intimidation, violence or retaliation; (iv) complete without delay the ongoing labour law reform process to bring national legislation into full conformity with the Convention. This includes ensuring the full recognition of collective bargaining rights for all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State and eliminating legislative provisions that allow undue interference in collective bargaining; and (v) regularly collect and provide reliable statistical information on collective agreements concluded and enforced, and sectors and workers covered by these agreements.

As a final note, the Worker members acknowledge the Government’s stated openness to receiving support. We recall that the issues discussed today have been pending for years. Expectations are clear. Nigerian workers are entitled to effective protection against anti-union discrimination, genuine collective bargaining free from interference and full respect for their rights and for Convention No. 98. Therefore, we invite the Government to accept a direct contacts mission.

Chairperson – We conclude the discussion of this case. I thank the Government representative of Nigeria and all the speakers who took part in the discussion for their participation.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the oral and written information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern the long-standing nature of the issues raised regarding anti-union discrimination and interference in the right to collective bargaining, as well as the delay in completing the ongoing labour law reform.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requested the Government to take effective and time-bound measures to:

• promote free and voluntary collective bargaining and provide information on such measures;
• ensure that all allegations of anti-union discrimination, interference and actions that undermine collective bargaining rights are promptly and effectively investigated, and ensure access to effective remedies and dissuasive sanctions where violations are established;
• provide information on the outcome of investigations undertaken, including in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications sectors, and on measures taken to address concerns relating to interference and implementation of collective agreements and inadequate dispute resolution mechanisms;
• ensure a safe and enabling environment in which workers and their organizations can exercise their rights freely, including the right to organize and bargain collectively without fear of intimidation, violence or retaliation;
• continue, without any further delay, the ongoing labour law reform process, in consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations, to bring national legislation into conformity with the Convention, including by ensuring the recognition of collective bargaining rights for all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, including prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria, and by removing provisions allowing undue interference in collective bargaining;
• provide reliable statistical information on collective agreements concluded and in force and the number of workers covered by such agreements.

The Committee invited the Government to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance and to report to the Committee of Experts on the measures taken to implement these recommendations by 1 September 2026.

Government representative – The Federal Government of Nigeria has received the past conclusions on Nigeria’s individual case on the Convention with a sense of responsibility and has noted all the observations and recommended action points. Nigeria appreciates the constructive discussions that our case has generated and sentiments expressed by governments and social partners.

We reiterate our commitment to the full and effective application of the Convention, particularly as it relates to strengthening existing legal and institutional frameworks and bridging identified gaps in law and practice, creating an environment for free and fair trade unionism, the promotion of voluntary negotiations and dispute resolution mechanisms and encouraging collective bargaining devoid of employer interference, in both the public and private sectors, as well as the effective and timely implementation of collective bargaining agreements.

In the spirit of upholding the principles of tripartism, Nigeria has been consistent in maintaining and sustaining social dialogue institutions as well as encouraging strong engagement with its social partners at all levels. We recognize that social dialogue remains key in maintaining a sound and healthy industrial relations climate and ensuring social justice for all.

The Nigerian Government has resolved to take the following concrete steps in direct response to effectively implement the recommendations received following our discussions:

• make efforts to hold regular meetings of the National Labour Advisory Council;
• expedite the process of our labour law review, particularly with regard to the Collective Labour Relations Bill and Labour Standards Bill;
• continue to create an enabling environment for the effective implementation of the Convention;
• avail ourselves of technical assistance from the ILO and report on any additional information as requested by the Committee by 1 September 2026.

Once again, on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria, I thank the Committee for its interest in Nigeria’s application of Convention No. 98.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2018, Publication: 107th ILC session (2018)



A Government representative indicated that the Government was fully committed to meet its obligations under the Convention. The allegations relating to anti-union discrimination and impediment to collective bargaining were unfounded. Employers and workers had the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing in full freedom. The right to freedom of association and to organize derived from the Constitution and the Trade Unions Act. Such Act made the recognition of registered trade unions obligatory for employers whenever workers expressed their interest to join a trade union. The only categories of workers excluded from unionization were those engaged in essential services such as the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Prison Services and the Central Bank of Nigeria. Those exclusions were due to national interests and security reasons. However, the Joint Consultative Committees established in those institutions protected the interests of the workers, who were often afforded better working conditions than those engaged in other sectors of the public service. On the issue of impediment to collective bargaining, trade unions or workers’ representatives had the right to bargain collectively with their employers for the purpose of setting terms and conditions of work without any interference whatsoever by the Government. Moreover, the issue of prohibiting an employer from granting a general wage increase without the approval of the Minister as stipulated in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act, would be brought to the attention of the Tripartite Technical Committee which was currently reviewing labour legislation. Yet, it was important to affirm that in practice, there were no restrictions whatsoever as to general or percentage increases in wages by an employer. The national minimum wage was stipulated by law and the social partners needed to reach a consensus with the tripartite plus body before a minimum national wage could be fixed. The statutory requirement of depositing collective agreements with the Federal Ministry of Labour was purely for record purposes and for monitoring their implementation. In relation to export processing zones (EPZs), trade unions were now fully operating and involved in the resolution of disputes. Trade unions operating in the EPZs included the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, the Civil Service Technical and Recreational Services Employees (AUPCTRE), the National Union of Food, Beverage, and Tobacco Employees (NUFBTE), the National Union of Hotels and Personal Services Workers (NUHPSW), the National Union of Civil Engineering, Construction, Furniture and Wood Workers (NUCECFWW), the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (PENGASSAN) and the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG).

The Employer members addressed the following issues raised by the Committee of Experts in 2010, 2012 and 2017: the denial of the right to organize to certain categories of employees and anti-union discrimination; the requirement for collective agreements to be approved by the Minister of Labour; and the handling of employer–employee disputes by the authorities. According to the Committee of Experts, acts of anti-union discrimination included the use of blacklists against trade union officers; transfers, relocation, demotion, withdrawal of benefits, restrictions of all kinds, non-renewal of contracts and dismissals. At the national level, the definition of essential services in the Trade Disputes Act included the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, any corporate body licensed to carry out banking business under the Banking Act, postal service, sound broadcasting, maintaining ports, harbours, docks or aerodromes, transportation of persons, goods or livestock by road, rail, sea or river, road cleaning, and refuse collection. The Employer members recalled that the Committee of Experts had observed that certain categories of workers were denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore were deprived of the right to collective bargaining. It had also considered that essential services included “those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population”. Nigeria had listed a number of services as essential services, considering their importance to national security and stability. The Employer members did not agree that the definition of essential services was broad as observed by the Committee of Experts. The list was in response to the national needs of Nigeria and therefore in compliance with Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention. However, taking into account the concerns raised by the trade unions regarding these exceptions, the Government had elaborated the Collective Labour Relations Bill which had expressly removed the exceptions. The Employer members expressed their satisfaction at the tripartite process that had led to the development and validation of the Bill and looked forward to its submission to Parliament for enactment.

Concerning the registration of collective agreements with the Ministry of Labour, the Employer members had always considered that the sections of the Wages Boards and Industrial Council Act and the Trade Disputes Act, which made it an offence for an employer to generally adjust wages upwards without the approval of the Minister, were irrelevant, had never been enforced and should therefore be repealed. They disagreed with the Committee of Experts’ view that private sector collective bargaining rights were restricted by the requirement of the Government’s approval of any collective agreements on wages. Sectorial unions and the respective employers’ organizations in the private sector freely negotiated and entered into collective agreements every two years. The agreements were then filed with the Ministry of Labour whose main role was to assist in the event there was a need for mediation. Finally, the Employer members indicated that, under the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones, the functions of the EPZ Authority included the resolution of disputes between employers and employees in consultation with the Federal Ministry of Employment, Labour and Productivity. The Authority’s role was to facilitate and serve as observer through collective bargaining between sectorial unions and the respective employers. This was in line with the consultative nature of its functions under the Decree. Therefore, the rights of workers to organize and bargain collectively had been preserved. In conclusion, the Employer members considered that the Convention had been adhered to, but Nigeria had, in a consultative manner, put in place mechanisms to better implement its provisions. The Collective Labour Relations Bill responded to concerns raised by the trade unions regarding the exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively and unions, such as the Technical and Recreational Services Employees, had started organizing their members within the EPZs. They therefore encouraged the Government to expedite the processes of enactment.

The Worker members considered that the right to organize and bargain collectively had witnessed a steady and systematic erosion. For a number of years, the Committee of Experts had been pointing to serious violations of the Convention and had been asking the Government to bring its laws and practice into line with the Convention and to report on all progress made in this regard. However, the last time the Government had submitted its report was in 2012. Since then, it had ignored the Committee of Experts’ requests and disregarded its reporting obligations. This was a case of serious failure to report and was to be regretted. The very essence of the ILO supervisory system was in the dialogue with the constituents. This system was based on the information on the application of the Conventions provided by governments. The failure to submit reports undermined the supervisory system and the very functioning of the ILO. The Worker members called on the Government to live up to its reporting obligations as a matter of urgency. The Convention was interwoven with the realization of other fundamental rights at work and it was unfortunate that many new violations had occurred in the country since 2012. Those without the right to organize were also denied the right to bargain collectively. Anti-union dismissals, transfers, relocations, demotions, non-renewal of contracts of employment, pressure and harassment and withdrawal of benefits or non-payment of remuneration had been taking place in the public and private sectors alike. In January 2018, 21,000 primary school teachers had been dismissed by the Kaduna State Government for having protested against the introduction of a competency test administered without due consultations and aimed at unilaterally reducing the number of teachers on the payroll of the State. Kaduna State had also failed to implement the collective bargaining agreements. When the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) had expressed its solidarity with the affected teachers it had received public threats of sanction from the State Government. The Governor of the State had prohibited trade union activities. In this respect, it should be emphasized that the Convention applied to public sector workers and only the rights of those involved in the defence and security forces and those directly engaged in the administration of the State could be restricted. The Convention did not exclude persons employed by the Government, workers in public enterprises or autonomous public institutions, nor teachers. Furthermore, the denial of the rights to organize and bargain collectively, and lack of protection of trade unionists from violence and hostility may have very serious consequences. It could result in violent murders of trade unionists. The Worker members recalled the assassination of Abdulmumuni Yakubu, the branch chairperson of the Non-Academic Staff Union of Kogi State (NASU) at his home by an unknown gunman in November 2017. This murder had occurred at the height of negotiations with the Kogi State Government and strike actions over prolonged non-payment of wages. Kogi State had effectively banned the academic and non-academic staff unions in the tertiary institutions. They further recalled the assassination of Mr Alhaji Saula Saka, the Lagos Zonal Chairman of the National Union of Road Transport Workers in 2010. Both cases remained unresolved and reflected the dangerous situation trade union leaders were confronting and the absence of security and protection in the performance of their activities. The Government must arrest and prosecute the perpetrators and stop the growing and brazing impunity. In the private sector, the situation was equally serious. According to the Association of Senior Staff of Bank and Financial Institutions, 337 workers had been dismissed in June 2015 for having tried to join a union. About 700 workers of another company had been dismissed in Lagos in September 2015 for the same reason. The situation was no different for workers in the telecommunications sector. In some cases they had to denounce their intention of unionization as a condition of employment.

The Wages Boards and Industrial Council Act was particularly alarming as it provided that every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour for approval or disapproval as to its binding nature. It also made it an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister. In practice, the effect of this was that national minimum wage negotiations were used as a pretext to frustrate, prevent, delay and, in some cases, deny, voluntary collective bargaining over wages. This was not in compliance with the Convention, which required member States to ensure that collective bargaining was implemented through a voluntary mechanism. Furthermore, the Convention applied to workers in EPZs. However, sections 3(1) and 4(e) of the Decree on Export Processing Zones ran counter to the right to organize and the right to collective bargaining. Its section 4(e) provided that “employer–employee” disputes were not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by an authority managing the zone. Section 3(1) also made it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions by making it almost impossible for workers’ representatives to gain free access to such zones. The Worker members believed that this situation of violation, anti-union discrimination, interference and lack of protection for trade unionists existed because of the gaps in the labour legislation and the very weak labour administrative mechanisms. Section 11 of the Trade Unions Act denied the personnel of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company, the Prison Services, Nigeria Telecommunications and the Central Bank of Nigeria the right to organize and thus, to collective bargaining. They expressed their concern at section 7(9) of the Trade Unions Act, which empowered the responsible Minister to revoke the certificate of registration of trade unions without a judicial process or clearly outlined administrative procedures and guarantees. Section 8 of the Act automatically imposed trade union membership on federal government teachers without their consent. They further regretted that section 3(1) and (2) of the Act required a very high threshold of a minimum of 50 workers to establish a trade union at the enterprise level and restricted the formation and registration of other unions in sectors where one union already existed. They noted with concern that sections 30 and 42 of the Act imposed restrictions on the right to collective action and provided for imprisonment for non-recognized strikes and for compulsory arbitration with an overly broad definition of essential services. Sections 39 and 40 granted the registrar of trade unions the power to supervise union accounts at any time. Furthermore, the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which had been drafted with the support of the ILO and the involvement of the social partners and which had been pending for a decade or so, had been unilaterally amended by the Government ignoring the views of the social partners. The Worker members, like the Committee of Experts, requested that the Bill be brought into full conformity with the Convention and further urged that the Bill be adopted without unnecessary delay. The situation of the near breakdown in collective bargaining was systemic and was the outcome of the existing legislation and the way the governance institutions functioned in Nigeria. It was therefore urgent for the Government to take a holistic review of its labour legislation to ensure that it was amended to reflect international labour standards and to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining. The labour administration mechanisms and institutions, including the police and other law enforcement agencies, needed to receive training in order to effectively inspect and supervise compliance with international labour standards to avoid any abuses and prevent impunity. Many of the serious violations of the Convention could have been prevented if the Government had followed the recommendations of the Committee of Experts. The Worker members urged the Government to comply with its obligations and restore, in full consultation with the social partners and in cooperation with the ILO, the right to organize and to bargain collectively in the country.

The Worker member of Nigeria stated that Nigeria operated a federal system with 36 states with their own governments, a Federal Government Territory and a central Government. Issues of labour relations were in the Exclusive List of the Nigerian Constitution with federal government supervision and oversight. While infractions of the Convention existed in the private sector, most of those in the public sector were perpetrated by State Governments. In 2017, the Government of Kaduna State had dismissed 38,000 workers, of which 21,000 teachers, about 5,000 local government council staff and over 8,000 from ministries, departments, agencies, as well as those in the tertiary institutions under the guise of a vague reform. Dismissals had been carried out without any respect or consideration for the established rules, notably the provisions in the existing public sector collective bargaining procedures. The NLC had officially reported this violation to the Ministry of Labour, with no tangible outcome to date from the intervention proposed by the Ministry, while the situation continued to deteriorate. The disregard for collective bargaining laws and practices was such that the Nigeria Union of Teachers had challenged the dismissal in court, had obtained a restraining order to hold the dismissal until the substantive lawsuit was decided, but nonetheless the court order had been disregarded by the State Government. The Kaduna State Government had also violated section 16(A) of the Trade Unions Act, which made it mandatory for employers to deduct and remit union members’ dues to trade unions, not only by withholding seven months deductions to all the unions, but also by issuing a circular to stop deduction completely. All the affected trade unions had filed legal complaints against such actions of the State Government. In Kogi State, the Government was refusing to abide by the collective agreement concerning the payment and protection of wages. Workers and pensioners were owed over seven months’ salary and pension benefits, in spite of repeated genuine efforts by the federal Government to ameliorate the problem through the granting, three times, of a financial bailout to all affected States. In July 2017, instead of negotiating with the teaching and non-teaching staff in the tertiary institutions, the Kogi State Government had proscribed and confiscated the assets of the affected unions, in violation of article 40 of the Nigerian Constitution. The NLC had officially reported such infractions to the Ministry of Labour, who had in turn invited the Kogi State Government to a mediation meeting which the latter did not attend. In November 2017, Abdulmumuni Yakubu Branch Chairman of the NASU had been violently murdered during the period his union was in a hard and difficult negotiation with the Kogi State Government. The non-respect for the provisions of the Convention had impacted on people, households and their communities, as the State Government had failed to honour collective bargaining agreements, especially on salaries and wages. He recalled that interference in collective bargaining in the private sector had been a cause of worry to the Committee of Experts since 2009, but there were still benchmarks for wages, since the Government’s approval was required for any collective agreement before it became implementable, allegedly to ensure that there would be no “undue economic disruption”. This contradicted Article 4 of the Convention. It was reported that the National Minimum Wage Bill would not be finalized by September 2018, contrary to the agreement with the social partners. The Minister was thus unilaterally determining the negotiation outcome, in infraction of the Convention. Discussions on the Collective Labour Relations Bill were ongoing for over ten years. The process had been very slow and delayed, which raised concerns as to the Government’s intention. Against the advice of the Committee of Experts to bring labour laws into conformity with the Convention, the Government had been using the process to weaken and destroy trade unions. Indeed, the new version of the Collective Labour Relations Bill foresaw that if after two years of commencement of its application, the NLC had not amended its constitution to conform to it, the latter would stand proscribed. Such Bill was not a product of consultation, as it was largely different from the one the unions had made inputs to, and would have surreptitiously been passed into law, but for their vigilance and Parliament’s due diligence. He concluded by asking the Committee to call on the Government to allow for genuine and good faith engineering of the intended labour law reforms and to ensure that the Government worked genuinely with the high-level mission that had been proposed on several occasions.

The Government member of Zimbabwe welcomed the information submitted by the Government, in particular in relation to the current review of the legislation on collective bargaining. It was encouraging that trade unions were now allowed to fully operate in the EPZs and were involved in the dispute resolution mechanisms. That was also a sign of progress and the result of an effort to meet the social partners’ needs. All social partners were urged to show the same commitment in complying with the Convention. The ILO’s technical support to the Government and its social partners was necessary to strengthen their tripartite structures.

An observer representing Public Services International (PSI) pointed out that section 11 of the Trade Disputes Act prohibited workers in a number of sectors and state-run companies to organize and thus deprived them of the right to bargain collectively. Moreover, the right of firefighters to organize was also denied pursuant to the Trade Unions (Prohibition) (Federal Fire Service) Order. In 2013, under the Universal Periodic Review, at its 17th Session, the Humans Right Council had also recommended to the Government to amend the Trade Unions Act in order to guarantee freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right of collective bargaining. Workers in the public sector, including in such critical sectors as health services, across more than half of the 36 States were currently owed monthly salaries for a period of between three and 18 months. While the Government had announced in October 2017 its intention to make another tranche of bailout funds available to address the situation, it appeared that the funds had not been yet secured. The lack of an appropriate system of social dialogue had made this problem even worse and the situation had led to unrest and protests in many sectors in those States. The Committee should request the Government to fully involve the unions in the legislative reform and to ensure that the bailout funds, once released, were fully disbursed for the payment of outstanding salaries to public sector workers, with no part thereof being diverted or otherwise appropriated by the State Governments.

The Government member of Algeria expressed his support for the Government of Nigeria and encouraged it to continue its efforts to fulfil its obligations under the Convention. The Government was mindful of its obligations and had taken all the necessary measures to meet them, both in law and in practice. For example, the protection of workers’ rights in essential services was guaranteed through mixed consultative committees. The information provided on collective bargaining allowed the Committee to maintain a link with the real situation. Indeed, it was essential that the Committee took into consideration the socio-economic environment of States in its evaluation of their performance with a view to respecting national sovereignty.

The Worker member of Eswatini (formerly known as Swaziland), speaking also on behalf of trade unions in the Southern African Trade Union Coordinating Council (SATUCC), recalled the ILO definition of essential services. The Trade Disputes Act classified employees in the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the Prisons Services and the Central Bank of Nigeria as persons providing essential services who could not enjoy the right to organize. That list was familiar as it was similar to the list of essential services in the South African region. The basis for services to be qualified as essential was unclear. The list referred not only to services related to the safety and security of people, but also to workers engaged in currency printing and in fiscal and monetary management. Workers in charge of essential services made sacrifices for the economy and their communities. Their rights should not be stifled. Experience proved that when workers had an organized platform to express their grievances, industrial disharmony was substantially reduced. In October 2017, in Kaduna State and in January 2018 in Delta State, personnel of the police force had peacefully protested for the non-payment of two months’ of salary. If the personnel were allowed to organize, they certainly would have made use of their organization to negotiate and resolve the issue. To allow those workers to organize themselves into unions of their free choice was a right unambiguously provided for by the Convention. The Government should avail itself of ILO technical assistance to comprehensively reform the Trade Disputes Act with the genuine and full consultation and participation of the social partners.

The Government member of Libya supported the statement made by the Government of Nigeria and considered that Nigeria was in compliance with the Convention. The Constitution guaranteed the right to freedom of association without interference whatsoever by the Government. The willingness of the Government to ensure compliance with the Convention was also proved by the bills brought before Parliament. It was important to support the efforts made by the Government in collaboration with the social partners and it was hoped that the Committee would consider those efforts when adopting its conclusions.

The Worker member of Mali expressed his solidarity with the population of Nigeria and referred to the challenge of insecurity arising from the presence of criminal and extremist forces in Nigeria, as in Mali. The fact that workers and trade union leaders in Nigeria were attacked, intimidated, dismissed and even killed on account of their trade union activities was a source of serious concern, as was the fact that there had been no conclusive investigations or arrests, prosecutions initiated or penalties imposed in those cases. Such was the case for the murder in 2010 of Alhaji Saula Saka, president of the local branch of the National Union of Road Transport Workers in Lagos, and that of Mallam Abdulmumuni Yakubu, President of the NASU, who had been killed at the end of 2017 at a time when his union was engaged in difficult negotiations with the Kogi State Government. It was unacceptable that those two murders had not been solved and that those responsible had not been brought to justice. Such impunity had consequences. Firstly, intimidation, harassment, threats and murder were some of the tools used by the other social partners to interact with workers and their leaders. Those practices had the aim of intimidating trade unionists, dispersing them and undermining their determination to assert the human rights and other civil liberties necessary for their organization and their engagement in collective bargaining. Secondly, the impunity surrounding those despicable acts had become the rule and was an obstacle to any sense of responsibility or equity. Consequently, it must be tackled. In conclusion, the Government should be urged to take dissuasive measures to end the attacks on workers and trade union leaders and to rapidly commence the appropriate investigations and initiate prosecutions regarding the cases of murder. Lastly, it was important to establish a favourable climate, free from intimidation, in which trade union organizations could constructively engage in social dialogue.

The Government member of Cameroon expressed her support for the Government of Nigeria and thanked it for the information provided to the Committee. Measures had been implemented to ensure a better application of the Convention, notably through the preparation of draft laws that were submitted to Parliament. The Government should be encouraged to continue along that path, with the necessary technical cooperation from the Office.

The Worker member of Ghana pointed out that the case was being discussed by the Committee not to shame the Government but rather in order to obtain additional information on the alleged violations of the Convention with a view to seek better implementation thereof. The reported infractions included threats, arrests, beatings and detention used as strategies to discourage and frighten workers and trade union leaders from organizing and pursuing collective bargaining. In April 2015, Aminu Kolawole, the chairperson of the Air Transport Services Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (ATSSSAN) and Lawson Imotto, the secretary, together with Chukwu Jude and Kingsley Ejiogu, the chairperson and the secretary of the National Union of Air Transport Employees (NUATE), were dismissed for organizing workers and demanding that the management enter into negotiation with the union. Lawson Imotto was arrested and taken to an unknown destination. In September 2015, over 700 workers were dismissed in one swoop in south-west Nigeria for having wanted to exercise their right to freedom of association. The workers had only found out about their dismissal when they had returned to work and found the gate locked with a notice of employment termination. The company in question had prevented workers from unionizing even after the intervention by the Ministry of Labour. The tactic of dismissing trade union leaders was a direct way of undermining the right to organize: “deal with the leader, and the members will flee”. The cases of four leaders, Akeem Ambali, the chairperson of the NLC in Ogun State (south-west Nigeria) and three other officers, Dare Ilekoya, Nola Balogun and Eniola Atiku, who in April 2017 had been suspended along with 15 others for demanding that the State Government respect the agreement it had reached with the union on salary payment, was another case in point. While 15 of the 19 suspended workers had been reinstated, the leaders remained suspended indefinitely. Mr Joseph Ogunyemi, former chairperson of an automobile union, had demanded that working conditions be regulated through collective bargaining and had suffered a similar fate. The speaker called on the Committee to urge the Government to accept an ILO high-level mission to improve and advance Nigeria’s industrial relations practice.

The Worker member of Norway, speaking on behalf of trade unions in the Nordic countries, recalled that since 2010, several serious allegations of violation of the Convention had been observed, including restrictions on the right to organize and the right to bargain collectively. The Trade Disputes Act denied the right to organize to certain categories of workers. The Decree on Export Processing Zones made it almost impossible for workers to form or join trade unions as these did not have free access to the EPZs, which operated as “protected territories”. It appeared that article 40 of the Nigerian Constitution, which gave the right to freely assemble, associate and to form trade unions and other associations was not operational. As a result, a large number of workers were deprived of the right to collective bargaining. Every agreement on wages needed to be registered and approved by the Ministry of Labour. This did not contribute to free collective bargaining. She fully supported the recommendations of the Committee of Experts and urged the Government to ensure that the legislation be amended so as to ensure that workers could bargain collectively, and to step up social dialogue with workers and employers instead of limiting fundamental workers’ rights.

An observer representing IndustriALL Global Union expressed concern at the reported anti-union activities of international oil companies operating in Nigeria which were preventing tens of thousands of contract workers from joining a union and defending their rights. The fragmentation of contracts to frustrate unionizing efforts was common and the practice of casualization and precarious working conditions were entrenched in the Nigerian oil industry. Workers were obliged to sign a pre-engagement commitment not to become a union member. This made precarious workers dread association with the union. The companies refused to implement rulings of Industrial Arbitration Panels whenever they ruled against them and severed ties with a contracting company if the latter had unionized workers. Denied collective bargaining powers, contract workers endured poverty wages, dire health and safety conditions, and absence of job security and labour rights. This had led to social deprivation and an upsurge in crime. The repressive anti-labour activities of oil and gas companies had accentuated the social upheavals in the Niger Delta region, resulting in revolts in the form of organized attacks on installations, hostage taking and community insurgence. She called on the Government to ensure that all workers at international oil companies had the right to organize.

The Government representative took note of the discussions and reiterated the Government’s full commitment to the application of the Convention. As stated by the Worker member of Nigeria, the country operated a very complex social and economic structure, with a Federal State and 36 State Governments. She clarified that the infringements under examination had been made by State Governments and not by the federal Government and that the latter had no control whatsoever over the autonomous State Governments. The federal Government had the constitutional responsibility to administer labour issues. When infractions by a State Government were brought to its attention, the federal Government did not fail to invite the parties to solve the issues. That had also occurred in relation to the case of Kogi State mentioned above. It was important to note that the transactions related to the case had lasted approximately seven months and the State Governor had engaged with the social partners but no agreement had been reached. The Ministry of Labour was still engaging with the Kogi State Governor to find a solution. With regard to the decision of the State Governor of Kaduna State to terminate 21,000 teachers in public primary schools, it was important to clarify that many of those teachers had been appointed fraudulently and were not qualified for their work. Before reaching that decision, the State Governor had engaged with the national union of teachers for a period for two years to solve the issue. That dismissal had been the result of an investigation and only teachers that had fraudulent documents had been dismissed. She requested the Committee to take that information into account when preparing the conclusions. In relation to salaries, most cases of non-payment of wages affected State Governments, therefore the federal Government was not involved. On the contrary, the federal Government had released 1.8 trillion naira to State Governments for solving the issue of wage arrears. However, some State Governments had not prioritized that issue. The federal Government had therefore engaged with the social partners concerned to ensure that resources were used for the purpose for which they were allocated. With regard to the assassination of trade union leaders, the speaker indicated that the statements made during the present discussion were unfounded. The issue of security was prominent in Nigeria and episodes of murders did not only concern trade unionists. Investigations were being carried out and the cases were before national courts awaiting decisions. The Government committed to provide further information on the outcome once the decisions became available. With regard to the Collective Labour Relations and other Bills, there had been progress but, based on the comments of the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, the Government had recalled the bills to improve their content and bring them into conformity with international labour standards. It was also important to underline that the Government had carried out consultations with the social partners concerned with a view to reform legislation and ensure its conformity with international labour standards and with the Convention in particular.

The Worker members, while welcoming the Government’s stated intention to comply with the obligations under the Convention, expressed disappointment at the attitude of denial that serious problems with regard to trade union rights existed in the country. Noting the Government’s explanation on the separation of powers between the federal and State Governments, they recalled that when a member State ratified a Convention, it was the responsibility of the federal Government to ensure compliance therewith. The Worker members expressed their serious and grave concerns about the gradual and systematic erosion of collective bargaining rights in Nigeria as well as the failure of the Government to submit its reports in response to the observations of the Committee of Experts. They further regretted that legal gaps and disregard for collective bargaining rights had resulted in systematic and repeated anti-union discrimination. The Worker members expressed concern at the harassment, intimidation and anti-union discrimination of workers who had expressed the desire to join a union and to bargain collectively in the private sector, including in the telecommunications, and oil and gas sectors. They were equally concerned about the denial of the right to organize to some public sector workers, including those employed in the EPZs, customs, and the Central Bank of Nigeria. To address the growing impunity, the Government should investigate the killings of trade unionists, arrest and prosecute the perpetrators. The Government must reform the labour governance mechanisms to ensure effective supervision and regular inspections backed by an efficient labour market information system for monitoring and evaluating compliance with the Convention. The Government should also build the capacity of labour inspectors and administrators, the police and law enforcement authorities and provide them with adequate resources and training to deliver on their mandate. The Government must, in consultation with the social partners, amend relevant laws, including the Trade Unions Act, the Wages Board and Industrial Council Act, the Decree on Export Processing Zones and the Collective Labour Relations Bill. In order to effectively address these concerns and engage in the necessary reforms, the Worker members urged the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission and avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Employer members considered that the Government was acting in good faith and had responded with clear arguments to the numerous allegations made against it. However their view was that it was inappropriate to comment on cases that had not been concluded before competent courts in Nigeria. It was their view that in this regard the Government had satisfied the request to have the matters investigated. The respective cases had already been submitted to the competent courts and were awaiting decisions. It was important to underline that Nigeria operated in a complex government system and that the Convention left it to national law to determine which categories of employees could be excluded from its application. Consultations were still taking place on the adoption of the Collective Labour Relations Bill. The Government should be encouraged to fast track the process and to avail itself of ILO technical assistance with a view to addressing the issues raised. In relation to EPZs, taking note of the fact that certain employers did not have unions in place, the Government needed to support those employers to promote unionization in those areas, without effecting their rights under Convention No. 87 on freedom of association and the protection of the right to organize.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral statements made by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee deeply regretted the Government’s failure to submit its report to the Committee of Experts since 2012.

Taking into account the Government’s submissions and the discussion that followed, the Committee urged the Government to:

- bring relevant legislation, including the Trade Union Act, Trade Dispute Act, Wages Board and Industrial Council Act, the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones and the Collective Labour Relations Bill in line with the Convention;

- conduct effective investigations and carry out prosecutions with respect to all allegations of anti-union violence and discrimination; and

- put adequate and effective enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure that the principles and rights protected by the Convention are effectively applied in practice.

The Committee repeats the Committee of Experts invitation to the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission in order to tackle the pending issues and report progress to the Committee of Experts before its November 2018 meeting.

Another Government representative indicated that all the comments of the Committee members had been duly noted, as had the conclusions reached by the Committee. He pledged, once again, his country’s full commitment to respect all the articles of the Convention, and to ensure that all levels of Government fully complied with the Convention’s obligations. However, that would involve engaging the social partners in a time-consuming process of constructive dialogue. Social dialogue and consensus-building, which were essential to an enabling industrial relations environment, required the patience and cooperation of all. He therefore appealed to the Committee for more time to allow the process to continue, with the expectation that full compliance would be achieved. His Government further solicited technical assistance from the ILO to strengthen its capacity to drive and deliver the process of engagement with the social partners. He expressed confidence that, with perseverance and cooperation, the process would mature and flourish as an example to be followed. He also expressed the view that the proposed direct contacts mission was premature, in light of the proactive steps taken by his Government and the social partners. He assured the Committee that the report to the next ILC session in 2019 would reflect full or substantial compliance, both in law and in practice, with all the observations of the Committee of Experts, and reaffirmed his Government’s commitment to comply with the provisions of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

The Committee notes the observations made by the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), received on 1 September 2025, the content of which is examined in its comment on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). It also notes the general observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 2 September, and the ITUC-Africa, received on 11 September 2025.

The Committee notes that the Government contests the previous observations made by the NLC in 2023 and 2024 that collective bargaining rights are being undermined in the country and refers to the adoption of the 2025 National Industrial Relations Policy. However, the Committee also notes that the Government does not respond to the specific allegations made by the NLC, such as the absence of adequate dispute resolution mechanisms, interference in the collective bargaining process and the failure to implement collective bargaining agreements. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide its comments on the allegations made by the NLC, as well as information on the measures taken to promote free and voluntary collective bargaining. It also requests the Government to submit a copy of the 2025 National Industrial Relations Policy.

Articles 1 to 2 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee notes with regret that the Government has still not provided the requested information on any specific investigations carried out as regards the ITUC’s previous allegations made over a number of years concerning large-scale dismissals of workers attempting to join trade unions, as well as of union leaders and members, and incidences of anti-union discrimination and interference in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications sectors.

The Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government to the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference (Conference Committee) in June 2025 that consultations with the social partners had taken place regarding massive dismissals for trying to join trade unions, and that the report on these consultations would soon be submitted. It notes from the same source that sectoral guidelines to address anti-union discrimination and interference for the banking and finance, food and beverage, and oil and gas sectors had been developed and that sectoral guidelines for the power, health, education and hospitality sectors would soon be concluded. While the Committee welcomes these measures, it also recalls that the existence of legal provisions prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination is not enough if they are not accompanied by effective and rapid procedures to ensure their application in practice (2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, para. 190). It therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary actions to ensure that the allegations of anti-union discrimination referred to by the ITUC give rise to specific investigations and requests the Government to provide information on the results thereof. It also requests the Government to submit the report on the consultations referred to above and provide a copy of the above-mentioned sectoral guidelines.

Labour law reform. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the reform of the labour legislation undertaken in consultation with the social partners. It recalls that it requested the Government to take the necessary measures to:

• ensure the full recognition of the right to collective bargaining of all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, including prison services, and the Central Bank of Nigeria; and
• amend section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act regarding the requirement to submit any collective agreements on wages for ministerial approval.

The Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in June 2025 that all labour laws had been reviewed and were undergoing legal drafting at the Ministry of Justice. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous explanations concerning the exclusion of the above-mentioned categories of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State, which the Committee had previously noted but had not considered sufficient in relation to the application of the Convention. However, the Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the regulations in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act will not be included in the new Collective Labour Relations Bill. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that appropriate amendments are made to the above-mentioned provisions so as to bring them into conformity with the Convention, and toprovide information on any developments in relation to the ongoing labour reform, including the adoption of the new Collective Labour Relations Act, the Labour Standards Act and any other relevant texts. In this respect, it once again reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, indicating the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by them.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

The Committee takes note of the observations made by the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), received on 30 August 2024, and the observations made by the International Trade Union Federation (ITUF), received on 17 September 2024, alleging the violation of collective bargaining rights. In this respect, the NLC alleges that collective bargaining rights are being severely undermined by restrictive legislation, inadequate dispute resolution mechanisms, and interference in the collective bargaining process, and that agreements reached through collective bargaining are not implemented. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on any investigations, and the results thereof, into allegations of anti-union discrimination and interference in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications sectors, as referred to in successive communications from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). The Committee notes that the Government reports that it is working on sectorial guidelines to address anti-union discrimination and interference. Observing that in its 2021 observations under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the ITUC denounces massive dismissals for trying to join trade unions, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary actions to ensure that the allegations of anti-union discrimination referred to by the ITUC in its previous observations give rise to specific investigations. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results thereof as well as on the progress made towards the adoption of the abovementioned sectorial guidelines.

The Committee also requested the Government to send its comments on allegations of Education International (EI) and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) denouncing the promotion of a non-registered union in the education sector by various state governments, which would appear to constitute attempted interference. The Committee notes that the Government limits itself to indicating that the Academic Staff Union of Secondary School has not been registered at the federal level. The Committee recalls that the intervention by an employer - either public or private - to promote the establishment of a parallel trade union constitutes an act of interference by the employer in the functioning of a workers’ association, which is prohibited under Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that Article 2 of the Convention is complied with in the education sector, both at the State and federal levels.

Scope of application of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under the provisions of the legislation certain categories of workers (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) were denied the right to organize and were deprived of the right to collective bargaining. It noted that some of these categories involve public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State and requested the Government to provide information on the results of its consultations within the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC) and any follow-up action taken, particularly with regard to recognition of the right to collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous explanation that these exclusions are made on the grounds of the national interest and national security. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the NLAC has been inaugurated and that the issue raised will be discussed at subsequent meetings. The Committee recalls that, according to Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention, only members of the armed forces and the police, as well as public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the guarantees set out in the Convention. Regretting the lack of progress regarding this issue, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the full recognition of the right to collective bargaining of all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, and to provide information on its consultations within the NLAC and on the practical results achieved in this regard.

Article 4. Free and voluntary negotiation. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide explanations regarding the legal obligation to submit any collective agreements on wages to government approval, and noted the Government’s indication that in practice there is no restriction with regard to wage increases adopted by an employer but that this obligation, which appears in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act, would be brought to the attention of the tripartite technical committee which was reviewing the labour legislation. The Committee notes with regret that the Government does not provide any information on this matter in its report. The Committee once again requests the Government to take concrete steps to amend section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act in order to ensure full observance of the principle of voluntary collective negotiations in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s intention to ensure that the reform of the labour legislation undertaken in consultation with the social partners was in conformity with international labour standards and trusted that the new Collective Labour Relations Act and any other texts adopted in the context of the reform of the Labour Law would be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indication that the social partners will soon hold a meeting to validate the Labour Bills before forwarding them to the National Assembly for legislative action. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments in relation to the reform of the labour legislation and recalls that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on any investigations, and the results thereof, into allegations of anti-union discrimination and interference in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications sectors, as referred to in successive communications from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). The Committee notes that the Government reports that it is working on sectorial guidelines to address anti-union discrimination and interference. Observing that in its 2021 observations under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the ITUC denounces massive dismissals for trying to join trade unions, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary actions to ensure that the allegations of anti-union discrimination referred to by the ITUC in its previous observations give rise to specific investigations. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results thereof as well as on the progress made towards the adoption of the abovementioned sectorial guidelines.

The Committee also requested the Government to send its comments on allegations of Education International (EI) and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) denouncing the promotion of a non-registered union in the education sector by various state governments, which would appear to constitute attempted interference. The Committee notes that the Government limits itself to indicating that the Academic Staff Union of Secondary School has not been registered at the federal level. The Committee recalls that the intervention by an employer - either public or private - to promote the establishment of a parallel trade union constitutes an act of interference by the employer in the functioning of a workers’ association, which is prohibited under Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that Article 2 of the Convention is complied with in the education sector, both at the State and federal levels.

Scope of application of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under the provisions of the legislation certain categories of workers (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) were denied the right to organize and were deprived of the right to collective bargaining. It noted that some of these categories involve public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State and requested the Government to provide information on the results of its consultations within the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC) and any follow-up action taken, particularly with regard to recognition of the right to collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous explanation that these exclusions are made on the grounds of the national interest and national security. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the NLAC has been inaugurated and that the issue raised will be discussed at subsequent meetings. The Committee recalls that, according to Articles 5 and 6 of the Convention, only members of the armed forces and the police, as well as public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the guarantees set out in the Convention. Regretting the lack of progress regarding this issue, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the full recognition of the right to collective bargaining of all public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, and to provide information on its consultations within the NLAC and on the practical results achieved in this regard.

Article 4. Free and voluntary negotiation. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide explanations regarding the legal obligation to submit any collective agreements on wages to government approval, and noted the Government’s indication that in practice there is no restriction with regard to wage increases adopted by an employer but that this obligation, which appears in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act, would be brought to the attention of the tripartite technical committee which was reviewing the labour legislation. The Committee notes with regret that the Government does not provide any information on this matter in its report. The Committee once again requests the Government to take concrete steps to amend section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act in order to ensure full observance of the principle of voluntary collective negotiations in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s intention to ensure that the reform of the labour legislation undertaken in consultation with the social partners was in conformity with international labour standards and trusted that the new Collective Labour Relations Act and any other texts adopted in the context of the reform of the Labour Law would be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indication that the social partners will soon hold a meeting to validate the Labour Bills before forwarding them to the National Assembly for legislative action. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments in relation to the reform of the labour legislation and recalls that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 107th Session, May–June 2018)

The Committee notes the discussion which took place in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference (hereinafter, the Conference Committee) in June 2018 concerning the application of the Convention by Nigeria. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee, in its conclusions, urged the Government to: (i) bring relevant legislation, including the Trade Unions Act, Trade Disputes Act, Wages Board and Industrial Council Act, the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones and the Collective Labour Relations Bill into line with the Convention; (ii) conduct effective investigations and carry out prosecutions with respect to all allegations of anti-union violence and discrimination; and (iii) put adequate and effective enforcement mechanisms in place to ensure that the principles and rights protected by the Convention are effectively applied in practice. Lastly, the Conference Committee repeated the Committee of Experts’ invitation to the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission which was to report during the current year on progress made. Observing that the direct contacts mission has not yet taken place, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will accept it in the near future so that the mission can observe the measures taken and the progress achieved regarding the issues raised in relation to the application of the Convention.

The Committee recalls that it has been referring for many years to observations received from international trade union organizations, in particular the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and Education International (EI), and from a national union (the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT)), describing acts of anti-union discrimination, interference and obstruction with regard to collective bargaining, without the Government having sent its comments in this regard. The Committee notes the statement made by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in June 2018, indicating that the country operates a complex social and economic structure, with a federal State and 36 autonomous state governments, and whenever infringements committed by state governments are brought to the attention of the federal Government, the latter, which has responsibility for administering labour issues, makes sure to invite the parties to resolve the issues. For example, with regard to the allegation of the mass dismissal of anti-union nature, in the education sector in the state of Kaduna, the Government indicates that the challenged decision was taken further to a two-year dialogue with the national teaching union to settle the problem of the fraudulent appointment of unqualified staff in primary schools. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any investigations, and the results thereof, into the allegations of anti-union discrimination and interference in the banking, education, electricity, petroleum, gas and telecommunications sectors, as referred to in successive communications from the ITUC. The Committee also requests the Government to send its comments on the allegations of EI and the NUT denouncing the promotion of a non-registered union in the education sector by various state governments, which would appear to constitute attempted interference.

Scope of application of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that under the provisions of the legislation certain categories of workers (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) are denied the right to organize and are deprived of the right to collective bargaining. The Government indicates that these exclusions are made on the grounds of the national interest and national security and that the joint advisory committees established in these institutions take care of the interests of the workers, who often enjoy better conditions of work than those employed in other sections of the public sector. Lastly, the Government points out that the proposal to remove the prohibition on the right of these categories of workers to organize will be referred to the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC), which is due to meet in the course of the year. The Committee emphasizes that the exclusion of the abovementioned categories from the right to organize raises issues of compatibility with the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and that it will consider this matter when it next examines the application of Convention No. 87 by Nigeria. Noting that some of the abovementioned categories involve public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results of the consultations within the NLAC and any follow-up action taken, particularly with regard to recognition of the right to collective bargaining.

Article 4. Free and voluntary negotiation. The Committee recalls that, further to allegations made by ITUC, it asked the Government to provide explanations regarding the legal obligation to submit any collective agreements on wages to government approval. The Committee recalled that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiation. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that the legal obligation to file collective agreements with the Federal Ministry of Labour only exists for the purposes of registration and verification of their implementation. Moreover, while indicating that in practice there is no restriction with regard to wage increases, in terms of figures or percentages, adopted by an employer, the Government indicates that the question of the prohibition on an employer to grant a general wage increase without ministerial approval, which appears in section 19 of the Trade Disputes Act, will be brought to the attention of the tripartite technical committee which is currently reviewing the labour legislation. The Committee notes the explanations provided by the Government and recalls that the legal provisions establishing the obligation to submit collective agreements for prior approval by the authorities are only compatible with the Convention when they are confined to stipulating that approval may be refused if the agreement has a procedural flaw or does not conform to the minimum standards laid down by general labour legislation (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 201). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken to ensure that the law is aligned with the practice as mentioned and gives full effect to the principle of voluntary collective negotiations in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.

Noting the Government’s statement that it intends to ensure that the reform of the labour legislation in progress which it is undertaking in consultation with the social partners is in conformity with international labour standards, the Committee trusts that the new Collective Labour Relations Act and any other texts adopted in the context of the reform of the Labour Law will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send copies of the aforementioned texts when they have been adopted.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes the new observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2017, relating to legislative issues and referring to a high number of allegations of anti-union discrimination and of impediments to collective bargaining. The Committee recalls that, since 2010, it has received many observations from trade union organizations containing serious allegations of violations of the Convention in practice and notes with regret that the Government still has not sent its comments. Noting with concern, in particular, the persistence of many and serious allegations of acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that the events reported since 2010, through the various comments of the ITUC, Education International (IE) and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT), have been or are being investigated by the public authorities. The Committee urges the Government to send information in this respect.

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments, initially made in 2012.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that certain comments submitted by international trade union organizations concerned in particular the fact that: (1) according to the Trade Disputes Act, certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts and to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (3) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (4) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for workers’ representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs).

The Committee had noted that the Government had indicated that: with respect to point (1), the Collective Relations Bill has taken care of the mentioned exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively; and as regards points (3) and (4), unionization has commenced, for example, the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, and Technical and Recreational Services Employees has started organizing its members within the EPZs. The Committee takes note of this information.

Concerning point (2), the Committee had previously noted a similar more recent allegation of the ITUC (2009) that private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval for any collective agreements on wages. The Committee notes that the Government had indicated in its report that this practice seeks to ensure that there is no undue economic disruption in a particular industry as there is usually a benchmark agreed to by the relevant employers and trade unions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiations. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the relevant provisions are amended to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining.

The Committee had noted the Government’s statement that the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which has been elaborated with the technical assistance of the ILO, is still before the National Assembly and will be forwarded when passed. The Committee expects that the Collective Labour Relations Act will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Lastly, the Committee once again invites the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues.

The Committee expects that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 31 August 2016 concerning legislative matters and an important number of alleged cases of anti-union discrimination and obstruction to collective bargaining. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

The Committee notes the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2014 and 2015. It requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

The Committee notes that the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July 2012, as well as its comments submitted in 2010 and 2011, refer to specific acts of antiunion discrimination including dismissals, transfers and non-union contract clauses in the banking sector, oil and gas sector and education services; anti-union harassment and interference on the part of the employer in the oil and gas and electricity sectors; and anti-union interference on the part of government authorities in the health and education sectors. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by Education International and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) on 31 August 2012, referring to the lack of any collective bargaining structure for teachers, non-compliance with the collective agreement concluded between the NUT and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, and acts of antiunion interference through the promotion by the various state governments of an unregistered union, the Academic Staff Union of Secondary Schools. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments above, and invites the Government to submit the issues raised in these comments to a forum of tripartite dialogue and report on its outcome.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that certain comments submitted by international trade union organizations concerned in particular the fact that: (1) according to the Trade Disputes Act, certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts and to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (3) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (4) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs).

The Committee had noted that the Government had indicated that: with respect to point (1), the Collective Relations Bill has taken care of the mentioned exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively; and as regards points (3) and (4), unionization has commenced, for example, the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, and Technical and Recreational Services Employees has started organizing its members within the EPZ. The Committee takes note of this information.

Concerning point (2), the Committee had previously noted a similar more recent allegation of the ITUC (2009) that private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval for any collective agreements on wages. The Committee notes that the Government had indicated in its report that this practice seeks to ensure that there is no undue economic disruption in a particular industry as there is usually a benchmark agreed to by the relevant employers and trade unions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiations.  The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the relevant provisions are amended to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining.

The Committee had noted the Government’s statement that the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which has been elaborated with the technical assistance of the ILO, is still before the National Assembly and will be forwarded when passed. The Committee expects that the Collective Labour Relations Act will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Lastly, the Committee once again invites the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2015 concerning an important number of alleged cases of anti-union discrimination and obstruction to collective bargaining in the oil industry. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

The Committee takes note of the observations provided by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication received on 1 September 2014. It requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

The Committee notes that the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July 2012, as well as its comments submitted in 2010 and 2011, refer to specific acts of antiunion discrimination including dismissals, transfers and non-union contract clauses in the banking sector, oil and gas sector and education services; anti-union harassment and interference on the part of the employer in the oil and gas and electricity sectors; and anti-union interference on the part of government authorities in the health and education sectors. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by Education International and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) on 31 August 2012, referring to the lack of any collective bargaining structure for teachers, non-compliance with the collective agreement concluded between the NUT and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, and acts of antiunion interference through the promotion by the various state governments of an unregistered union, the Academic Staff Union of Secondary Schools. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments above, and invites the Government to submit the issues raised in these comments to a forum of tripartite dialogue and report on its outcome.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that certain comments submitted by international trade union organizations concerned in particular the fact that: (1) according to the Trade Disputes Act, certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts and to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (3) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (4) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs).

The Committee had noted that the Government had indicated that: with respect to point (1), the Collective Relations Bill has taken care of the mentioned exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively; and as regards points (3) and (4), unionization has commenced, e.g. the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, and Technical and Recreational Services Employees has started organizing its members within the EPZ. The Committee takes note of this information.

Concerning point (2), the Committee had previously noted a similar more recent allegation of the ITUC (2009) that private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval for any collective agreements on wages. The Committee notes that the Government had indicated in its report that this practice seeks to ensure that there is no undue economic disruption in a particular industry as there is usually a benchmark agreed to by the relevant employers and trade unions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiations. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the relevant provisions are amended to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining.

The Committee had noted the Government’s statement that the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which has been elaborated with the technical assistance of the ILO, is still before the National Assembly and will be forwarded when passed. The Committee expects that the Collective Labour Relations Act will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Lastly, the Committee once again invites the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee takes note of the observations provided by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication received on 1 September 2014. It requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

The Committee notes that the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July 2012, as well as its comments submitted in 2010 and 2011, refer to specific acts of antiunion discrimination including dismissals, transfers and non-union contract clauses in the banking sector, oil and gas sector and education services; anti-union harassment and interference on the part of the employer in the oil and gas and electricity sectors; and anti-union interference on the part of government authorities in the health and education sectors. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by Education International and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) on 31 August 2012, referring to the lack of any collective bargaining structure for teachers, non-compliance with the collective agreement concluded between the NUT and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, and acts of antiunion interference through the promotion by the various state governments of an unregistered union, the Academic Staff Union of Secondary Schools. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments above, and invites the Government to submit the issues raised in these comments to a forum of tripartite dialogue and report on its outcome.

In its previous observations, the Committee noted that certain comments submitted by international trade union organizations concerned in particular the fact that: (1) according to the Trade Disputes Act, certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts and to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (3) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (4) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs).

The Committee had noted that the Government indicates that: with respect to point (1), the Collective Relations Bill has taken care of the mentioned exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively; and as regards points (3) and (4), unionization has commenced, e.g. the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, and Technical and Recreational Services Employees has started organizing its members within the EPZ. The Committee takes note of this information.

Concerning point (2), the Committee had previously noted a similar more recent allegation of the ITUC (2009) that private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval for any collective agreements on wages. The Committee notes that the Government had indicated in its report that this practice seeks to ensure that there is no undue economic disruption in a particular industry as there is usually a benchmark agreed to by the relevant employers and trade unions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiations. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the relevant provisions are amended to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining.

The Committee had noted the Government’s statement that the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which has been elaborated with the technical assistance of the ILO, is still before the National Assembly and will be forwarded when passed. The Committee expects that the Collective Labour Relations Act will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Lastly, the Committee once again invites the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes that the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July 2012, as well as its comments submitted in 2010 and 2011, refer to specific acts of antiunion discrimination including dismissals, transfers and non-union contract clauses in the banking sector, oil and gas sector and education services; anti-union harassment and interference on the part of the employer in the oil and gas and electricity sectors; and anti-union interference on the part of government authorities in the health and education sectors. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by Education International and the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) on 31 August 2012, referring to the lack of any collective bargaining structure for teachers, non-compliance with the collective agreement concluded between the NUT and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, and acts of antiunion interference through the promotion by the various state governments of an unregistered union, the Academic Staff Union of Secondary Schools. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments above, and invites the Government to submit the issues raised in these comments to a forum of tripartite dialogue and report on its outcome.

In its previous observations, the Committee noted that certain comments submitted by international trade union organizations concerned in particular the fact that: (1) according to the Trade Disputes Act, certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited, the prison services and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts and to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs).

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: with respect to point (1), the Collective Relations Bill has taken care of the mentioned exemptions from the rights to organize and bargain collectively; as regards point (2), both skilled and unskilled workers are protected in practice against anti-union discrimination; and concerning points (4) and (5), unionization has commenced, e.g. the Amalgamated Union of Public Corporations, Civil Service, and Technical and Recreational Services Employees has started organizing its members within the EPZ. The Committee takes note of this information and refers to its comments made under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Concerning point (3), the Committee had previously noted a similar more recent allegation of the ITUC (2009) that private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval for any collective agreements on wages. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that this practice seeks to ensure that there is no undue economic disruption in a particular industry as there is usually a benchmark agreed to by the relevant employers and trade unions. In this regard, the Committee recalls that legal provisions which make collective agreements subject to the approval of the Ministry of Labour for reasons of economic policy, so that employers’ and workers’ organizations are not able to fix wages freely, are not in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention respecting the promotion and full development of machinery for voluntary collective negotiations. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the relevant provisions are amended to give effect to the principle of free collective bargaining.

The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that the Collective Labour Relations Bill, which has been elaborated with the technical assistance of the ILO, is still before the National Assembly and will be forwarded when passed. The Committee expects that the Collective Labour Relations Act will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. It requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Lastly, the Committee once again invites the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 4 August 2011 on the application of the Convention, referring in particular to specific acts of anti-union discrimination, in particular dismissals, in the oil sector and in the education services and of anti-union interference on the part of Government authorities in the health and education sectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon, as well as on the comments submitted by the ITUC in 2010 which referred to anti-union practices in the oil sector and in financial institutions, including non-union contract clauses.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee noted the comments on the application of the Convention made by the ITUC in a communication dated 26 August 2009. The ITUC states that in the private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval: collective agreements on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Councils Act. The ITUC also refers to acts of anti-union discrimination, including threats of dismissal made to trade unionists in several companies in the banking sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations respecting these matters.

The Committee noted the comments submitted by the ITUC in a communication dated 29 August 2008, concerning refusals to negotiate with trade unions, acts of interference by employers, anti-union practices against workers’ representatives, including dismissals. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon and to reply to the matters raised by the Committee’s previous comment.

Bill on collective labour relations. The Committee noted the Government’s statement, according to which the National Assembly has not yet passed the bill on collective labour relations. The Committee recalls that ILO technical assistance has been provided to the authorities and hopes that the future legislation will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) (now ITUC) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments, which concerned in particular the fact that: (1) certain categories of workers are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company Limited, the prison service and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts according to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee requests the Government to send its reply on these comments.

Concerning the abovementioned point (1), the Committee observed that the Committee on Freedom of Association had underlined that the functions exercised by employees of customs and excise, immigration, prisons and preventive services should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize on the basis of Article 9 of Convention No. 87 (see 343rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 1027). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 11 of the Trade Union Act (1973) so that these categories of workers are granted the right to organize and to bargain collectively, as well as for all public employees not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee underlines the seriousness of the matters previously raised.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

The Committee requests the Government to accept an ILO mission in order to tackle the pending issues. In the meantime, the Committee urges the Government to conduct an independent investigation into the allegations made by the ITUC in the previous years and to provide information on its outcome.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee noted the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 26 August 2009. The ITUC states that in the private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval: collective agreements on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Councils Act. The ITUC also refers to acts of anti-union discrimination, including threats of dismissal made to trade unionists in several companies in the banking sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations respecting these matters.

The Committee noted the comments submitted by the ITUC in a communication dated 29 August 2008, concerning refusals to negotiate with trade unions, acts of interference by employers, anti-union practices against workers’ representatives, including dismissals. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon and to reply to the matters raised by the Committee’s previous comment.

Bill on collective labour relations. The Committee noted the Government’s statement, according to which the National Assembly has not yet passed the bill on collective labour relations. The Committee recalls that ILO technical assistance has been provided to the authorities and hopes that the future legislation will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) (now International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments. The comments concerned in particular the fact that: (1) certain categories of worker are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company Limited, the prison service and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts according to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee requests the Government to send its reply on these comments.

Concerning the abovementioned point (1), the Committee observed that the Committee on Freedom of Association had underlined that the functions exercised by employees of customs and excise, immigration, prisons and preventive services should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize on the basis of Article 9 of Convention No. 87 (see 343rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 1027). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 11 of the Trade Union Act (1973) so that these categories of workers are granted the right to organize and to bargain collectively, as well as for all public employees not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee underlines the seriousness of the matters previously raised and requests the Government to take measures as a matter of urgency to ensure full respect for the rights enshrined in the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide its comments concerning the 2010 observations of the ITUC.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the comments on the application of the Convention made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 26 August 2009. The ITUC states that in the private sector collective bargaining rights are restricted by the requirement of government approval: collective agreements on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Councils Act. The ITUC also refers to acts of anti-union discrimination, including threats of dismissal made to trade unionists in several companies in the banking sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations respecting these matters.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008, concerning refusals to negotiate with trade unions, acts of interference by employers, anti-union practices against workers’ representatives, including dismissals. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon and to reply to the matters raised by the Committee’s previous comment.

Bill on collective labour relations. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, according to which the National Assembly has not yet passed the bill on collective labour relations. The Committee recalls that ILO technical assistance has been provided to the authorities and hopes that the future legislation will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments made by the OATUU in a communication dated 20 August 2004, as well as the ICFTU, in communications dated 31 August 2005 and 10 August 2006. The comments concern in particular the fact that: (1) certain categories of worker are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company Limited, the prison service and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts according to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) section 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) section 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee requests the Government to send its reply on these comments.

Concerning the abovementioned point (1), the Committee observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association has underlined that the functions exercised by employees of customs and excise, immigration, prisons and preventive services should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize on the basis of Article 9 of Convention No. 87 (see 343rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 1027). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 11 of the Trade Union Act (1973) so that these categories of workers are granted the right to organize and to bargain collectively, as well as for all public employees not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee underlines the seriousness of the matters previously raised and requests the Government to take measures as a matter of urgency to ensure full respect for the rights enshrined in the Convention.  

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008, concerning refusals to negotiate with trade unions, acts of interference by employers, anti-union practices against workers’ representatives, including dismissals. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon and to reply to the matters raised by the Committee’s previous comment which it repeats as follows.

Trade Union (Amendment) Act. In its previous observations, the Committee had commented upon on a section of Decree No. 1 of 1999 which conditioned the provision of check-off facilities upon the insertion of “no strike” and “no lock-out” clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements. The Committee notes with satisfaction that this provision has been abrogated by the Trade Union (Amendment) Act of 2005. The Committee notes with interest that this new legislation provides that a “membership of a trade union by employees shall be voluntary and no employee shall be forced to join any trade union or be victimized for refusing to join or remain a member”.

Bill on collective labour relations. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, according to which the National Assembly has not yet passed the bill on collective labour relations. The Committee recalls that ILO technical assistance has been provided to the authorities and hopes that the future legislation will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

Comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments made by the OATUU in a communication dated 20 August 2004, as well as the ICFTU in communications dated 31 August 2005 and 10 August 2006. The comments concern in particular the fact that: (1) certain categories of worker are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company Limited, the Prison Service and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts according to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) article 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer–employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) article 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee requests the Government to send its reply on these comments.

Concerning the abovementioned point (1), the Committee observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association has underlined that the functions exercised by employees of customs and excise, immigration, prisons and preventive services should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize on the basis of Article 9 of Convention No. 87 (see 343rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 1027). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 11 of the Trade Union Act (1973) so that these categories of workers are granted the right to organize and to bargain collectively, as well as for all public employees not engaged in the administration of the State.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

1. Trade Union (Amendment) Act. In its previous observations, the Committee had commented upon on a section of Decree No. 1 of 1999 which conditioned the provision of check-off facilities upon the insertion of “no strike” and “no lock-out” clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements. The Committee notes with satisfaction that this provision has been abrogated by the Trade Union (Amendment) Act of 2005. The Committee notes with interest that this new legislation provides that a “membership of a trade union by employees shall be voluntary and no employee shall be forced to join any trade union or be victimized for refusing to join or remain a member”.

2. Bill on collective labour relations. The Committee notes the Government’s statement according to which the National Assembly has not yet passed the bill on collective labour relations. The Committee recalls that the ILO technical assistance has been provided to the authorities and hopes that the future legislation will be in full conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send the new law once adopted.

3. Comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments made by the OATUU in a communication dated 20 August 2004 as well as the ICFTU in communications dated 31 August 2005 and 10 August 2006. The comments concern in particular the fact that: (1) certain categories of worker are denied the right to organize (such as employees of the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Nigerian Security Printing and Mining Company, the Prison Service and the Central Bank of Nigeria) and therefore are deprived of the right to collective bargaining; (2) only unskilled workers are protected by the Labour Act against anti-union discrimination by their employer; (3) every agreement on wages must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, which decides whether the agreement becomes binding according to the Wages Board and Industrial Council Acts according to the Trade Dispute Act (it is an offence for an employer to grant a general or percentage increase in wages without the approval of the Minister); (4) article 4(e) of the 1992 Decree on Export Processing Zones states that “employer-employee” disputes are not matters to be handled by trade unions but rather by the authorities managing these zones; and (5) article 3(1) of the same Decree makes it very difficult for workers to form or join trade unions as it is almost impossible for worker representatives to gain free access to the export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee requests the Government to send its reply on these comments.

Concerning the abovementioned point (1), the Committee observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association has underlined that the functions exercised by employees of customs and excise, immigration, prisons, and preventive services should not justify their exclusion from the right to organize on the basis of Article 9 of Convention No. 87 (see 343rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, paragraph 1027). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 11 of the Trade Union Act (1973) so that these categories of workers are granted the right to organize and to bargain collectively, as well as for all public employees not engaged in the administration of the State.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the comments on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in a communication of 31 August 2005 and requests the Government to send its observations thereon.

The Committee will examine the questions raised in its 2004 direct request (see direct request 2004, 75th Session) under the regular reporting cycle in 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the report submitted by the Government. It also notes the comments made by the Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) in a communication dated 20 August 2004 concerning the Bill to amend the Trade Unions Act. It requests the Government to send its observation thereon.

In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999, a legislative provision conditioning check-off payments on the inclusion of "no strike" and "no lockout" clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements, amounted to undue interference by the authorities with regard to the right of workers’ organizations and employers and their organizations to negotiate freely without government interference, in violation of Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee noted the Government’s statement to the effect that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999 would be abrogated during the next review of the labour law.

The Committee notes that in its latest report the Government indicates that the labour review is still under process with ILO technical assistance and the involvement of the social partners through the National Labour Advisory Council.

While taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of the relevant legislation once adopted and hopes that it will be in full conformity with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee takes note of the report submitted by the Government.

In its earlier comments, the Committee noted that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999, a legislative provision conditioning check-off payments on the inclusion of "no strike" and "no lock-out" clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements, amounted to undue interference by the authorities with regard to the right of workers’ organizations and employers and their organizations to negotiate freely without government interference, in violation of Article 4 of the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its latest report to the effect that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999 will be abrogated during the next review of labour laws.

While taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of the relevant amendment once adopted, and to provide information on its application in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the comments made by the Nigeria Employers’ Consultative Association. It further notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in respect of Cases Nos. 1793 and 1935 (see 315th Report, adopted by the Governing Body at its 274th Session, March 1999).

The Committee notes that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999 conditions the provisions of check-off facilities with the insertion of "no strike" and "no lock-out" clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements. The Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association, considers that a legislative provision conditioning check-off payments on the inclusion of such clauses in collective agreements constitutes undue interference by the authorities in the right of workers’ organizations and of employers and their organizations to negotiate freely in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to repeal this section of Decree No. 1 so as to ensure that workers’ organizations and employers and their organizations may negotiate freely without government interference.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's report and the comments made by the Nigeria Employers' Consultative Association. It further notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in respect of Cases Nos. 1793 and 1935 (see 315th Report, adopted by the Governing Body at its 274th Session, March 1999).

The Committee notes that section 5(b) of the Trade Union (Amendment) Decree No. 1 of 1999 conditions the provisions of check-off facilities with the insertion of "no strike" and "no lock-out" clauses in relevant collective bargaining agreements. The Committee, like the Committee on Freedom of Association, considers that a legislative provision conditioning check-off payments on the inclusion of such clauses in collective agreements constitutes undue interference by the authorities in the right of workers' organizations and of employers and their organizations to negotiate freely in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to repeal this section of Decree No. 1 so as to ensure that workers' organizations and employers and their organizations may negotiate freely without government interference.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes that a Commission of Inquiry was appointed at the 272nd Session of the Governing Body (June 1998) in respect of the non-observance by Nigeria of this Convention, as well as of Convention No. 87. It notes, however, that, at the same session, the Governing Body decided that the commencement of the work of the Commission should be delayed for 60 days in order to allow a direct contacts mission to take place. The Committee takes due note of the report of this direct contacts mission which took place from 17-21 August 1998 and the report of the Officers of the Governing Body to its 273rd Session (November 1998). In particular, it notes the decision of the Governing Body to suspend the work of the Commission of Inquiry and to request the Director-General to transmit the report of the direct contacts mission to this Committee for examination at its November-December 1998 session in connection with the application by Nigeria of the relevant ratified Conventions.

The Committee notes the reference in the direct contacts mission report to the need to consider within the contemplated revision of labour legislation the provisions of Article 4 of the Convention which call for measures to be taken to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation between employers or employers' organizations and workers' organizations with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements. The Committee notes from the report of the direct contacts mission that steps have been taken in a positive direction. It requests the Government to keep it informed in future reports of any measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report on the application of the Convention.

For a number of years, the Committee has been observing that, although certain categories of workers (persons exercising executive, technical and administrative functions, agents and commercial travellers, self-employed workers and persons employed in a vessel or aircraft to which the civil laws apply) are entitled, according to the Government, to associate in occupational organisations or to join trade unions by virtue of the Trade Unions Act, they are not covered by the provisions of the Labour Decree of 1974 (No. 21), concerning the protection of workers against acts of anti-union discrimination, since section 90 of the same Decree excludes them. It also noted that the Senate Committee on Labour was to examine the situation with a view to amending the legislation on this point.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that the Senate Committee has been replaced by the National Labour Advisory Council, a tripartite body responsible for reviewing all labour laws and that the conclusions of the above Council will be forwarded as soon as the review exercise is completed.

The Committee again recalls that, under Article 1 of the Convention, it is not enough for the above-mentioned categories of workers to enjoy the right to organise; this provision of the Convention implies that specific measures, in particular legislative measures, accompanied by civil remedies and penal sanctions, must be taken to guarantee the protection of workers against any acts of anti-union discrimination, both at the recruitment stage and in the course of employment. The Committee therefore urges the Government to amend its legislation so as to ensure that the above categories of workers excluded from Decree No. 21 of 1974 are granted the protection due to them under this provision of the Convention.