Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, has criticised the decision of the Lagos State Government to reintroduce the monthly environmental sanitation exercise that restricts movement for three hours on the last Saturday of every month.

 

 

Falana described the policy as a “sad reminder” of what he called one of the primitive practices inherited from Nigeria’s defunct military regimes.

 

In a statement issued on Sunday while reacting to the move, the Senior Advocate of Nigeria argued that the planned reintroduction of the sanitation exercise could not be justified, particularly in view of the state’s environmental budget.

 

 

He noted that the 2026 Appropriation Law of Lagos State allocated about N236 billion to environmental matters, including urban waste management and sanitation, stressing that lawmakers had approved the funds to improve waste management systems across the state.

 

According to him, rather than devoting time and resources to enforcing restrictions on residents’ movement, the government should prioritise the recruitment of more sanitation workers and the acquisition of modern equipment such as mechanical sweepers for heavy debris and vacuum sweepers to handle dust and litter.

 

Falana also reminded the state government of the legal precedent established in the case of Faith Okafor v Lagos State Government, which he said declared movement restrictions during environmental sanitation hours illegal and unconstitutional.

 

He explained that the case involved a woman, Faith Okafor, who was arrested on May 25, 2013, for allegedly violating a restriction of movement imposed during the monthly sanitation exercise between 7 a.m. and 10 a.m.

 

Okafor was reportedly taken into custody alongside several others and arraigned before a special offences court, where she pleaded guilty and was fined N2,000 for wandering and loitering during the sanitation period.

 

After paying the fine, she approached the High Court of Lagos State to challenge the action, arguing that her fundamental rights to dignity, personal liberty and freedom of movement had been violated. However, the High Court dismissed her application.

 

Unsatisfied with the ruling, she appealed the judgment at the Court of Appeal.

 

The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, later ruled in her favour, holding that restricting movement during environmental sanitation hours lacked legal backing and violated constitutional rights.

 

The court further held that a directive issued by a state governor does not amount to law and therefore cannot be used to justify the arrest, prosecution or conviction of citizens.

 

In a concurring opinion, Justice Biobell Abraham Georgewill warned against allowing executive directives to override the rule of law.

 

“It is my view that democracy thrives more on obeying and promoting the rule of law rather than the whims and caprices of the leaders against the lead,” the judge said.

 

He added that prosecuting a citizen for an offence not prescribed in any written law, but merely based on a governor’s directive, could create a dangerous precedent capable of granting public office holders “infinite, absolute and autocratic powers” contrary to constitutional provisions.

 

Falana therefore urged the Lagos State Government not to proceed with the planned reintroduction of the monthly sanitation exercise, arguing that doing so would amount to disregarding the judgment of the appellate court.