In the 1970s and 1980s, Nigeria enjoyed a robust relationship with the African National Congress (ANC), playing the role of a Big Brother, not only to other African nations, but to Black South Africa which had been subjected to inhumane conditions of Apartheid by the White National Party government since 1948, until it was brought to an end in 1994. Apartheid institutionalised racial segregation and discrimination, with the Blacks being at the bottom of the pecking order. Nigeria’s role in the struggle to ensure the end of oppressive Apartheid regime in South Africa, is well documented in the annals of history. However, in the past few years, that otherwise filial relationship has become frosty, with frequent hostilities against Nigerian citizens in South Africa. While no one is saying that Nigerians should be allowed to escape justice in any country if they have broken the law, the law must be allowed to take its course. These South African xenophobic attacks have resulted in fatalities, loss of businesses and deportations. The recent inhumane and violent treatment of Nigerians and other Africans in the hands of Black South Africans, and of Nigerians in Ghana to a lesser extent, is the subject-matter of this edition. Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, SAN; Monday Onyekachi Ubani, SAN; Mandy Demechi-Asagba; Kingsley Jesuorobo and Ibrahim Eddy Mark examine the possible immediate and remote causes of the Xenophobic craze, its potential consequences, and the Nigerian Government’s seemingly lack lustre reaction to the attack on its citizens residing in South Africa, as opposed to decisive action taken by countries such as Botswana, to protect her citizens
Introduction …… Xenophobia in South Africa: Nigerians as Victims
Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, SAN
Introduction
In the past six weeks or thereabout, Nigerians have been greeted with the news that ‘Black South Africans’ have within their country South Africa, subjected Nigerian and other African immigrants from Zimbabwe, Botswana, Tanzania and other East and South African countries to what has been correctly classified as ‘Xenophobic attacks’. These riots, as widely reported in the media, have led to killings, harassment, business destruction, and forced displacement of Nigerians and these other African migrants, prompting evacuations, diplomatic tensions, and calls for stronger protection mechanisms.
Definition of Xenophobia
At this stage, it is appropriate to define the word ‘Xenophobia’ within the current setting in South Africa, and after a review of various definitions in online and print dictionaries, this negative phenomenon can be defined as “the fear, dislike, or hatred of people perceived as foreigners, often leading to the infliction of negative measures such as discrimination, exclusion, or violence rooted in the belief that these outsiders (victims) threaten the identity, dignity, integrity and economic prosperity of their autochthonous society and environment, hence, the resort to violence and intimidation on the stranger community”.
Attacks
This is not a recent, or one-off development. South Africa has a long history of xenophobic situations (2008, 2015, 2019) championed by ethnic blacks, and with their majority black government refusing to act decisively against these economically damaging attacks.
The latest incidents (April 2026) continue this pattern, with the black South African protesters blaming unemployment and economic hardship as the source of their anger towards black foreign migrants (Mostly Nigerians of Igbo extraction), and as described above. These attacks include killings, physical assaults, looting of migrant-owned businesses, and intimidation, creating widespread fear among immigrant communities. Specifically, aside from the deaths that occurred, Nigerian-owned shops and businesses have been looted, vandalised, or forced to shut down, undermining livelihoods and creating economic instability for these migrants. Many have therefore, been forced to flee their homes, stay indoors, or temporarily close their businesses due to threats and mob actions. Nigerian missions advised citizens to remain indoors, during protests in Durban.
Nigeria’s Insufficient Reactive Response
From the foregoing narration, the victims are in most instances Nigerian citizens. It is totally irrelevant, to attach them to any particular ethnic group in the country. This is because our Government ought to act decisively and proactively, in the interest of our citizens and foreign policy. As these xenophobic riots undermine African unity, threaten regional stability, and expose deep socioeconomic tensions within South Africa. For us Nigerians and other African migrants, the situation represents a human rights crisis, a security threat, and a challenge to continental solidarity.
Nigerian Government’s Reaction
So, what has our Government done to arrest this assault on her citizens? The media has documented our response as follows:
·Nigeria’s Minister of External Affairs summoned South Africa’s Acting High Commissioner, to express “profound concern”.
·President Tinubu ordered the creation of a Crisis Notification Unit, for Nigerians in danger.
·Plans for evacuation and stronger diplomatic pressure.
·Nigerian lawmakers proposed reviewing bilateral relations, and possibly suspending business permits for South African companies.
Now, it can safely be said that Government response is largely weak, tepid and detached. It is far removed from the seriousness of the harm being inflicted on Nigerians, and their economic interests.
Botswana, a SADC State and neighbour of South Africa, whose major source of income is from the supply of electricity and potable water to the latter, immediately upon the targeting of her citizens, took decisive action and cut off the supply of electricity to South Africa, therefore, hitting the look-away host government where it hurts it the most. Other affected nations, have taken similar decisive actions. The reaction of the Nigerian Government, by consensus, is considered and adjudged, as most insipid and ineffective.
Our National Assembly, whose sole duty is to make laws for the Peace, Order and good Government of Nigeria, in a bid to jump into the fray (although it is not their constitutional duty so to do) thinks that the solution is to embark of a junketing trip to South Africa to ‘appease’ the said nation, and thereby, solve the problem through diplomatic means of dialogue, pacification and conciliation. With respect, this is a wrong approach, because the damage already caused is much more than what pacification can solve.
Historic Ties
Our relationship with South Africa, has historic ties. During the era of apartheid (between 1960-1993), Nigeria was recognised as one of the frontline States in the fight against white domination over the same blacks that are now professing xenophobia against the same nation (Nigeria) that expended vast human and financial resources, in getting them politically to the point where they are today. They recognise that they are indebted to the frontline States, and have deliberately chosen to be wicked and ungrateful. The choice therefore, of this diplomatic placebo of mollification by the National Assembly, is most inappropriate and insufficient in the circumstances.
But, we need to interrogate further, why the National Assembly has chosen the most ineffective means to resolve this problem, when the suggestions on the table by even civil societies and student groups include, but is not limited to, threat to picket South African businesses like MTN and MultiChoice. One school of thought is that our Nigerian intelligentsia and some of them are senior legislators have business interests in South African conglomerates such as MTN, DSTV etc, and are therefore, most unwilling to proceed against their own economic interest.
At any rate, the Senate that is pushing for this visit, is ill-equipped to resolve this problem. This is because the three arms of the Nigerian Government, have specialised functions to discharge. The desire by the legislature to intervene as it seeks to do, is belittling and disrespectful to the image and economic objectives of Nigeria as a country. Essentially, it breaches the concept of separation of powers, which has placed such problems at the doorstep of the executive to solve. The proposed trip therefore, is a waste of tax payers money.
More stringent measures such as economic sanctions on South African economic interests, the nationalisation of major economic concerns owned by South Africa, and the filing of criminal cases against South Africa at the International Court of justice for crimes against humanity, are the minimum steps that Nigeria ought to take immediately in a bid to solving the problem.
Conclusion
On my own part, since the year 2017, I stopped going to or even transiting anywhere in South Africa, because of their visible hatred for fellow black Africans. They love the whites, that is why Apartheid and imperialism survived for so long there. The Nigerians in South Africa, mainly Igbos, are bearing the brunt of these violent Xenophobic attacks that are systematically crippling their businesses. They have only two options, one, come back home; or two, fight for their rights within the ambit of South African and International law. I am yet to see any of the two. This behaviour is typical.
This is not the time to put individual economic gains, above humanity and the collective interest of our people. Shake the dust of that nation off your feet, and return home. ‘Ile baba kin da èru ba òmò’ as the Yoruba’s would say.
Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, SAN, Past President of the Nigerian Bar Association
Xenophobic Tensions in South Africa: A Welcome Shift from Silence to Action
Monday Onyekachi Ubani, SAN
Recent reports and circulating videos across social media platforms have continued to raise alarm over alleged attacks on black foreigners, particularly Nigerians, in South Africa. The disturbing imagery, often graphic and emotionally charged, suggests patterns of violence, destruction of property, and targeted hostility. While caution must still guide our conclusions in an era where misinformation spreads rapidly, the recurrence of such narratives cannot be dismissed lightly.
It is important to reiterate that, social media content is not always reliable. Videos may be outdated, misattributed, or taken out of context.
Xenophobic Violence in South Africa: An Old Phenomenon
Nonetheless, xenophobic violence in South Africa is not a new phenomenon. The tragic episodes of 2008, 2015, and 2019 remain part of the continent’s collective memory, and lend weight to current concerns.
Responses
What is, however, markedly different in the present situation, is the emerging response from Nigerian authorities. The Federal Government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has taken a commendable diplomatic step by summoning officials of the South African High Commission for an urgent interface. This move signals a clear departure from perceived silence, and reflects a growing recognition of the gravity of the situation.
Equally significant is the intervention of the National Assembly, which has passed a resolution condemning the reported attacks and killings in strong terms. More importantly, the proposed fact-finding visit to South Africa for an on-the-spot assessment, demonstrates a proactive and responsible legislative approach. Such steps are not only symbolic, mbut essential in ensuring that facts are established, accountability is pursued, and appropriate measures are recommended.
These actions, taken together, represent a necessary shift from silence to engagement. Governments bear the responsibility of protecting their citizens, both at home and abroad, and timely diplomatic and legislative responses are critical in moments like this. While it remains essential to verify the authenticity and current relevance of circulating reports, the precautionary principle demands that credible concerns be treated with urgency.
At the same time, it is vital to avoid the dangerous temptation of generalisation. The actions of a violent minority, must not be used to define an entire nation or its people. South Africa, like Nigeria, is a complex society with a shared history of struggle, resilience, and continental solidarity.
Africa stands at a delicate crossroads. Incidents of xenophobia, whether real, exaggerated, or misrepresented, expose underlying tensions that threaten the ideals of unity and cooperation. What is required now is not only reactive measures, but sustained efforts at fostering mutual respect, strengthening diplomatic ties, and addressing the socio-economic triggers of such hostilities.
Truth must remain our guiding principle, and where wrongdoing is established, justice must follow swiftly. Encouragingly, the recent steps taken by the Nigerian Government and the National Assembly, suggest that silence is no longer an option. What must follow is consistency, transparency, and firm commitment to the protection of African lives everywhere.
Monday Onyekachi Ubani, SAN, Legal Practitioner/Policy Analyst
Ongoing Xenophobic Attacks Against Nigerians in South Africa and Ghana: A Crisis of Law and Humanity
Mandy Demechi-Asagba
Nigerians are being killed and their businesses burnt on foreign soil. Again!
The videos from South Africa and the reports from Ghana, are not isolated “mob incidents.” They are a pattern of xenophobic violence that has now claimed Nigerian lives, and destroyed livelihoods that took years to build. Shops looted. Warehouses razed. Families displaced. The economic impact is devastating, but, the human cost is irreparable.
This must stop. And, it must stop now, through law, not silence.
This Isn’t Just Crime, it’s a Violation of International Law
When a group targets Nigerians solely because of nationality, that is xenophobia. When it results in death, arson, and destruction of property, it becomes a crime against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Both South Africa and Ghana are signatories to:
– The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights — Article 2 prohibits discrimination on the basis of national origin. Article 4 guarantees the right to life and integrity of the person.
– The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — Article 6 protects the right to life. Article 26 mandates equal protection of the law.
The duty is not only to prosecute perpetrators, after the fact. The duty is to prevent. The failure of State authorities to act promptly, to secure Nigerian-owned businesses and to publicly condemn these acts, constitutes a breach of the State’s positive obligation to protect life and property.
The Economic Consequences are Self-Destructive
Nigerians in South Africa and Ghana, are predominantly not economic burdens. They are employers, taxpayers, traders, and investors. The informal sector, retail trade, and logistics chains in both countries, rely heavily on Nigerian enterprise.
Burning a Nigerian-owned shop, does not create jobs for locals. It destroys supply chains, reduces tax revenue, and scares away foreign direct investment. No country develops, by expelling the very entrepreneurs who power its markets. The African Continental Free Trade Area cannot succeed, if Africans cannot trade safely in Africa.
The Role of Leadership: Silence is Complicity
The most dangerous element right now, is silence. When political leaders fail to speak out clearly and decisively, they create a vacuum that is filled by hate speech and mob justice.
We saw this in 2019, in South Africa. We are seeing it again, now. And, we are seeing similar patterns in parts of Ghana, where Nigerian traders face evictions and targeted attacks. The rhetoric of “they are taking our jobs” is an old, tired lie, used to deflect from domestic economic failures. It has no place in 2026 Africa.
Heads of State must speak. Police Commissioners must act. Courts must prosecute and sentence. Anything less, signals that Nigerian lives are disposable.
What Must be Done Immediately
For the Governments of South Africa and Ghana:
– Arrest and prosecute every individual captured on video, or identified in eyewitness reports. Charges must include murder, arson, malicious damage to property, and incitement to violence.
– Provide protection for Nigerian-owned businesses and communities. Deploy security forces to hotspots before, not after, attacks.
– Compensate victims for loss of life and property, under national tort law and State liability principles.
For the Nigerian Government:
– Invoke diplomatic channels through the Economic Community of West African States, and the African Union Peace and Security Council. This is not a bilateral issue anymore. It is a regional human rights crisis.
– Establish an emergency consular response team in both countries to document cases, provide legal aid, and evacuate nationals where necessary.
– Demand reparations through diplomatic negotiation, for victims whose businesses have been destroyed.
For Civil Society and AWLA:
– Document every case. Names, dates, locations, losses. We will build a dossier for the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
– Legal Aid: AWLA will offer pro bono legal support to Nigerian victims pursuing civil claims in South African and Ghanaian courts.
– Public advocacy: Use every platform to counter the false narrative, that Nigerians are the problem. The problem is impunity.
A Personal Word to Nigerians Abroad
To every Nigerian trader in Johannesburg, Accra, or Kumasi reading this: You are not alone. Your life matters. Your business matters. Your dignity is protected, under African and international law. Do not retaliate. Document. Report. Contact the Nigerian High Commission and AWLA immediately. We see you. We stand with you.
Africa Must Choose
Africa in 2026, faces a choice. Do we remain a continent where borders within Africa, are more dangerous than borders with the rest of the world? Or do we live up to the African Union’s Agenda 2063 vision of a borderless, integrated continent?
Xenophobia is not African culture. ‘Ubuntu’ in South Africa means “I am, because we are”. It does not mean “I am, because they are gone”.
The blood of Nigerians on foreign streets, stains the conscience of all of us. If we do not condemn it today, it may be the blood of a Ghanaian in Nigeria tomorrow. The cycle must end here.
Justice must not only be done. It must be seen to be done. And, it must be done now.
#StopXenophobia #ProtectNigerians #AfricanLivesMatter #JusticeForVictims
Mrs Mandy Demechi-Alagbada, President, African Women Lawyers Association (AWLA)
When Africans Turn on Africans: Xenophobia, Human Rights, and the Crisis of Continental Solidarity
An analysis of attacks directed at Black foreigners, especially Nigerians, in South Africa and Ghana
Kingsley Jesuorobo
Executive Opinion
The current hostility towards Nigerians and other Black African foreigners in South Africa, and the renewed anti-Nigerian agitation in Ghana, should not be treated merely as “immigration tension.” It is a continental rule-of-law problem. It exposes the gap between Africa’s rhetoric of Pan-Africanism and the lived reality of African mobility: Africans are promised integration, free movement, African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) opportunity, dignity, and solidarity; yet, in practice, they are often scapegoated when host States fail to deliver jobs, policing, housing, health care, and social services.
As of May 9, 2026, the more acute flashpoint remains South Africa. The Associated Press (AP) reported on May 4, 2026 that Nigeria was arranging the voluntary repatriation of 130 Nigerians after a new wave of anti-immigration protests in South Africa; Nigeria also summoned South Africa’s Acting High Commissioner, and requested investigations into two separate deaths of Nigerians involving South African security operatives. South African officials condemned xenophobic acts, and promised enforcement.
In South Africa, Operation Dudula has also been reported blocking foreigners from public health clinics, demanding identity documents, closing foreign-owned shops, and interfering with foreign children’s access to schools. A Johannesburg High Court order of November 4, 2025 interdicted harassment of foreign nationals, and interference with access to health care and schools; subsequent reporting alleged continued obstruction at some Johannesburg clinics. South Africa’s constitutional framework protects access to health care for “everyone”, and prohibits refusal of emergency medical treatment.
Ghana’s situation appears less violent, but politically dangerous. Reports in July 2025 and again in May 2026 described anti-Nigerian protests and “Nigerians must go” rhetoric in Ghana, including allegations of crime, prostitution, ritual killings, human trafficking, armed robbery, and economic dominance. Nigeria’s diplomatic response and community-level statements emphasised calm, de-escalation, and the absence of justification for collective blame.
Legal Implications
Legally, these events raise at least five issues: State protection, non-discrimination, due process in expulsion, access to public services, and accountability for private violence.
Under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Charter), South Africa and Ghana are not only expected to refrain from direct abuse; they must adopt measures to give effect to Charter rights. Article 2 guarantees rights without distinction based on race, ethnic group, colour, national or social origin, or other status. Article 3 guarantees equality before the law, and equal protection of the law. Article 4 protects life, and integrity of the person. Article 5 protects dignity, and prohibits degrading treatment. Article 6 protects liberty and security.
This means a State may enforce immigration law, but it may not permit vigilante immigration enforcement, selective denial of services, mob violence, or official indifference toward attacks on foreign Africans.
The strongest African Charter provision, is Article 12. It allows lawful restrictions on movement and residence, but it also says a legally admitted non-national may only be expelled by a lawful decision. It expressly prohibits mass expulsion of non-nationals, defined as expulsion aimed at national, racial, ethnic, or religious groups.
Slogans such as “Nigerians must go” are therefore, not merely ugly rhetoric. If translated into State policy, tolerated collective removal, or selective policing of Nigerians as a group, they would directly offend the African Charter’s anti-mass-expulsion principle.
The denial of clinics to migrants in South Africa also implicates Article 16 of the African Charter, which protects the right to the best attainable state of physical and mental health, and requires States to take measures to ensure medical attention when people are sick. It also engages Section 27 of the South African Constitution, which protects access to health care services for “everyone”, and provides that no one may be refused emergency medical treatment.
Globally, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is directly relevant. Article 5 requires States to prohibit and eliminate racial discrimination and guarantee equality before the law without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin. This includes equal treatment before tribunals, and protection by the State against violence or bodily harm, whether inflicted by officials or by any individual, group, or institution.
This is crucial, because xenophobia against Nigerians and other Black foreigners often works through nationality, ethnicity, language, accent, documentation status, and perceived foreignness, rather than crude “race” alone.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) reinforces the same principle through human dignity, life, security, due process, equality before the law, and lawful expulsion standards. Article 13 protects lawfully present aliens against expulsion, except through a decision reached in accordance with law, subject to limited national-security exceptions. The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (Migrant Workers Convention) is also instructive, because Article 7 applies without distinction based on race, colour, national or ethnic origin, nationality, or other status.
Even where a migrant is undocumented, the fundamental human rights baseline does not disappear. Irregular migration may justify lawful immigration procedures; it does not justify mob violence, denial of emergency health care, collective punishment, extortion, racial profiling, or degrading treatment.
African Integration and Treaty Implications
The attacks are also a direct challenge, to Africa’s integration project. The African Union (AU) adopted the Protocol to the Treaty Establishing the African Economic Community Relating to Free Movement of Persons, Right of Residence and Right of Establishment (AU Free Movement Protocol), on January 29, 2018. Its purpose is to implement free movement of persons, the right of residence, and the right of establishment across the continent.
Yet, the AU Free Movement Protocol remains politically weak. Available AU-linked and Africa Visa Openness reporting indicates that, as of 2025, the Protocol had 32 signatures and only four ratifications – Mali, Niger, Rwanda, and São Tomé and Príncipe – below the 15 ratifications required for entry into force.
That matters because, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) cannot succeed on goods and capital alone. The AfCFTA Agreement’s objectives include creating a single market for goods and services, facilitated by movement of persons, and contributing to the movement of capital and natural persons. Lawyers, traders, students, transporters, health workers, entertainers, software founders, seasonal workers, and small businesses must move.
In West Africa, Ghana and Nigeria have an additional regional obligation under the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) framework, especially the Protocol Relating to Free Movement of Persons, Residence and Establishment (ECOWAS Free Movement Protocol). The ECOWAS Free Movement Protocol contemplates the progressive establishment of rights of entry, residence, and establishment through three phases: abolition of visas and entry permits, right of residence, and right of establishment.
Ghana may regulate trade, residency, crime, business licensing, and immigration compliance. However, hostility framed as collective removal of Nigerians undermines ECOWAS citizenship, regional trust, and the legal promise of West African integration.
Political Implications
Politically, xenophobia is a dangerous substitute for governance. It allows politicians, vigilante groups, and populist movements to redirect anger over unemployment, crime, health-care collapse, housing shortages, inequality, and weak policing, towards foreigners.
In South Africa, Operation Dudula’s claims are tied to the argument that migrants take jobs from South Africans, in a country with severe unemployment. South Africa’s official unemployment rate was 31.4% in the fourth quarter of 2025, according to reporting based on Statistics South Africa’s Quarterly Labour Force Survey. That narrative may be politically convenient, but it weakens constitutional democracy by outsourcing State functions to mobs.
For Nigeria, the issue creates diplomatic pressure to protect citizens abroad, while avoiding retaliatory nationalism at home. Nigeria must demand accountability, consular protection, and lawful treatment of its citizens, but it must also avoid inflaming reciprocal hostility against South Africans, Ghanaians, or other Africans in Nigeria.
For South Africa, the attacks damage its moral authority as a country that received continental solidarity during apartheid. Many African countries supported the anti-apartheid struggle diplomatically, materially, and morally. Xenophobic hostility toward other Africans therefore, carries a historical betrayal: the beneficiaries of Pan-African solidarity are now seen, in some quarters, as rejecting African solidarity.
For Ghana, anti-Nigerian agitation risks reopening historical wounds. It recalls Ghana’s 1969 Aliens Compliance Order and Nigeria’s 1983 expulsion of West African migrants, including Ghanaians, episodes that scholars have analysed as part of a broader West African history of nativism and forced removals. It could also erode one of West Africa’s most important bilateral relationships.
Continentally, the political danger is copycat nationalism. “Locals first” movements in one State, can embolden reciprocal hostility elsewhere. Nigerians in South Africa, Zimbabweans in South Africa, Nigerians in Ghana, Somalis in Kenya, Congolese in Southern Africa, and other mobile African communities, may all become targets whenever economic conditions deteriorate.
Social Implications
Socially, these attacks corrode African identity. They turn shared Blackness, shared colonial histories, shared economic struggle, and shared aspirations for development into suspicion. They also produce collective punishment: one Nigerian accused of crime, becomes “Nigerians are criminals”; one undocumented migrant becomes “foreigners are invading”; one overloaded clinic becomes, “foreigners are stealing health care”; one foreign-owned shop becomes, “foreigners are taking over”.
This has severe human consequences. Migrants may avoid clinics, Police stations, schools, labour offices, and courts, out of fear. Families may become undocumented, not because they entered unlawfully, but because bureaucratic systems are slow, expensive, corrupt, or hostile. Children inherit stigma. Businesses close. Communities segregate. Social media then amplifies fear, faster than governments can restore trust.
The most troubling aspect is that xenophobia among Black Africans fractures the moral language of anti-racism. Africans cannot credibly denounce racism abroad, while tolerating nationality-based dehumanisation at home. Xenophobia against Nigerians or other African migrants may not always be “racism” in the classic white-versus-Black sense, but it is a form of group hatred that often produces the same practical injuries: exclusion, violence, humiliation, denial of services, and unequal protection.
Conclusion
The State has every right to enforce immigration, criminal, labour, business-licensing, tax, and public-health laws. But, the line is crossed when enforcement becomes ethnic profiling, mob action, denial of emergency services, collective blame, threats of mass expulsion, or State tolerance of vigilante intimidation.
South Africa and Ghana should treat these incidents, as early-warning signs of broader democratic decay. The proper response, is not appeasement of xenophobic groups. It is lawful immigration administration, prosecution of attackers, protection of victims, public correction of misinformation, and bilateral consular cooperation.
At the AU and ECOWAS levels, the deeper answer is to make African mobility orderly, documented, rights-based, and economically useful. Free movement cannot mean, borderlessness without systems. But, sovereignty cannot mean mob veto over the humanity of other Africans.
Practical Recommendations
South Africa should enforce court orders against vigilante groups, prosecute attacks on migrants, protect clinics and schools, and publicly distinguish lawful immigration enforcement from xenophobic harassment.
Ghana should criminally deter incitement to collective expulsion and use the Nigeria-Ghana Joint Commission to address trade, residency, landlord, licensing, policing, and community grievances before they become street politics.
Nigeria should strengthen consular registration, legal-aid channels, emergency response desks, and diaspora documentation support. It should avoid retaliatory rhetoric, because reciprocal xenophobia would only endanger Ghanaians, South Africans, and other Africans in Nigeria.
The AU and ECOWAS should create a rapid-response mechanism for xenophobic violence, including fact-finding missions, early-warning alerts, model anti-xenophobia legislation, and a public database of attacks, prosecutions, and remedies.
The AU should also push ratification of the AU Free Movement Protocol, but pair it with credible systems: biometric identity cooperation, labour-market data, portable social protections, mutual recognition of qualifications, fast consular dispute channels, and stronger national anti-discrimination enforcement.
Bottom Line
The legal bottom line is clear: African States may regulate migration, but they may not dehumanise migrants.
The political bottom line is equally clear: a continent that attacks its own mobile citizens, cannot build credible continental integration.
The social bottom line is most urgent: xenophobia against Nigerians or other Black foreigners is not only an attack on migrants; it is an attack on the idea of Africa as a community of peoples.
Kingsley Jesuorobo, Lawyer; Member, Board of Governors of the Law Commission of Ontario, Canada; Vice President, African Bar Association (North America)
African Union Must Act Fast on Xenophobic Attacks in South Africa
Ibrahim Eddy Mark
The African Union must act swiftly and decisively, to address the ongoing xenophobic attacks against fellow Africans in South Africa. There is absolutely no justification, for such violence.
It is important to remember that many African nations stood firmly with South Africa during its long windy and difficult struggle against apartheid, offering support, solidarity, and sacrifice. That shared history, should be a foundation for unity-not division.
Africa cannot afford to turn against itself. Acts of xenophobia undermine the vision of a united, peaceful, and prosperous continent.
Immediate action is needed to protect lives, restore dignity, and reinforce the spirit of African brotherhood.
Some African countries have began taking steps to protect their citizens, in response to the xenophobic attacks in South Africa, while these efforts are understandable, isolated actions by individual nations will not produce a lasting solution.
What is Needed
What is needed is a coordinated and unified response led by the African Union. Only a collective approach can deliver meaningful, consistent, and enforceable outcomes, that address the root causes of these attacks and prevent their recurrence.
A fragmented response, risks weakening the continent’s voice and effectiveness. Africa must stand together, speak with one voice, and act decisively to end xenophobia and uphold the principles of unity, safety, and mutual respect among all African people.
Ibrahim Eddy Mark, President, African Bar Association