The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) has criticized former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s proposal to reinstate fuel subsidies if elected president in 2027, calling it a political response to economic suffering rather than a long-term answer to Nigeria’s fiscal issues.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, NANS President Akinteye Babatunde said that returning to the old subsidy scheme without a defined structural framework would replicate the flaws that rendered the program unsustainable.
Akinteye stated that NANS’ viewpoint was not partisan but rather based on the association’s responsibility to evaluate government policies and speak out on topics of national importance.
He said, “Every sane and patriotic citizen who is conversant with our nation’s economy will agree with me that the removal of the fuel subsidy was a difficult but necessary economic reform aimed at ending an increasingly unsustainable system that consumed trillions of naira, benefited higher fuel consumers disproportionately, encouraged smuggling, and constrained the government’s ability to invest in critical sectors.”
The announcement came amid increasing political debate about the future of gasoline pricing ahead of the 2027 general elections.
If elected, Atiku has stated that he will reintroduce fuel subsidies, stating that the government should help Nigerians who are struggling with high living costs.
The previous vice president recently underlined that his position on subsidy restoration was genuine when an adviser speculated that a future administration would simply briefly reinstate the support before phasing it out. Atiku said that the aide did not accurately convey his position.
His supporters have also stated that the proposed intervention would focus on domestic manufacturing, with the goal of lowering production and transportation costs while simultaneously alleviating the burden of high living expenses.
The rekindled argument followed President Bola Tinubu’s suspension of petrol subsidies in May 2023. The move resulted in a dramatic increase in gasoline prices and increased transportation, food, and household costs, making subsidy elimination one of the most unpopular aspects of the administration’s economic reforms.
The federal government, on the other hand, has continuously defended the decision as necessary to eliminate a costly fiscal burden, decrease economic distortions, and free up capital for critical sectors.
The reform has also remained a major topic of public controversy due to the disparity between its promised long-term advantages and the immediate hardship faced by individuals and companies.
NANS agreed that the elimination of subsidies had caused major suffering for Nigerians but stated that the solution should be to ensure that resources saved by the program are appropriately spent to increase citizens’ welfare rather than returning to the previous system.
Akinteye stated that the true test of the reform was not the amount of money saved but how the government used the resources. “However, the real measure of the reform should not be the savings alone, but what the government does with those savings,” he stated.
He stated that the cash freed up by subsidy withdrawal should be directed into education, healthcare, infrastructure, agriculture, and other sectors that might improve Nigerians’ living standards.
“Clearly, we have seen the government increase state subventions and redirect resources into education, healthcare, infrastructure, and agriculture. Realistically, the Nigerian people have made a productive sacrifice that must ultimately translate into a stronger and more sustainable economy,” he said.
The NANS president stated that an outright return to subsidy without addressing the structural weaknesses of the previous arrangement would only recreate the problems that necessitated its removal.
“This is why calls or promises for the outright return of subsidy, without a clear structural framework for addressing the fundamental weaknesses that made the policy unsustainable in the first place, amount to little more than a political response to a genuine economic challenge,” Akinteye said.
He called on political aspirants seeking to govern Nigeria in 2027 to present sustainable economic policies rather than proposals focused solely on providing immediate relief.
“Every aspirant willing to rule Nigeria and not run or, perhaps, ruin her must come to national debates with clear and sustainable policies that do not just address the immediate needs or comfort of our people, but rather, policies that best shape our country and can stand the test of time,” he said.
Akinteye also asked Atiku to reconsider his views, claiming that Nigeria could not afford to return to a system that imposed a high financial load on the government while essential areas were underfunded.
“I submit, with firm conviction, that Mr. Atiku Abubakar knows himself that we cannot return to the era of paying heavily for subsidies while we languish in infrastructural underdevelopment, with many states lacking the capacity to pay workers without borrowing,” he said.
He urged political leaders to focus on policies that address the economy’s structural vulnerabilities and ensure that Nigerians’ sacrifices result in meaningful improvements to their level of living.
NANS stated that their view is not based on support for any political party or candidate but rather on Nigeria’s long-term economic interests.
The group argued that, while the suffering of subsidy elimination must be handled, undoing the reform without establishing a long-term framework might expose the country to new fiscal pressures and weaken attempts to diversify government spending.
The debate over subsidies is expected to continue leading up to the 2027 elections, with political parties and presidential candidates under increasing pressure to explain how they would balance affordable fuel prices, government revenue, domestic refining, social protection, and fiscal sustainability.
