Niger’s military authorities adopted a sweeping “general mobilization” decree on December 26, granting the state extensive powers in the name of addressing security threats. While the authorities say the measure is designed to protect national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and public safety, it significantly expands government authority in ways that place fundamental human rights at risk.
The decree creates a broad legal framework that allows the government to summon citizens, requisition goods, compel the reporting of alleged hostile activities, and restrict communications considered harmful to national mobilization efforts. The vague and expansive nature of these provisions raises serious concerns about how they may be applied in practice, particularly in a political environment where safeguards against abuse are weak.
Human rights organisations warn that the law could become a tool of repression in a country where civic space has steadily narrowed since the July 2023 military coup. The broadly worded clauses risk being used to suppress peaceful dissent and curtail freedoms of movement and expression. Requirements for citizens to report individuals described as foreign nationals from “hostile” countries, without clear definitions, are especially concerning and could be exploited to target critics or perceived opponents of the junta.
These risks are heightened by an ongoing crackdown on political opposition, independent media, civil society groups, and trade unions. The continued arbitrary detention of former President Mohamed Bazoum and his wife, as well as prominent human rights defenders, underscores a pattern of rights violations that the new decree could further entrench.
At the same time, Niger is grappling with severe security challenges, particularly in the western Tillabéry region, where armed groups linked to the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda have carried out repeated attacks on civilians and security forces. While the security situation is serious, international and regional human rights law place clear limits on how governments may respond.
Under international human rights obligations, emergency measures must be strictly necessary, proportionate, and limited to the specific circumstances at hand. Restrictions on freedom of expression, in particular, must be narrowly defined and must not undermine the right itself. Regional human rights standards go even further, prohibiting the suspension of protected rights during states of emergency.
Against this backdrop, Niger’s military authorities are urged not to use security threats as justification for further eroding fundamental freedoms. Strengthening legal safeguards and establishing independent oversight mechanisms are essential to preventing abuse of the mobilization decree and to ensuring that respect for human rights remains central to any efforts to restore security and stability.
