- within Government and Public Sector topic(s)
- in Europe
- in Europe
- with readers working within the Oil & Gas industries
- within Government, Public Sector, Energy and Natural Resources and Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
- with Finance and Tax Executives
Introduction
Nigeria was thrust into economic foray when on the day of his inauguration as President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu decisively declared that fuel subsidy would be removed1. What followed were several other economic reforms as well as large scale country outcry on the hardships meted on the people as a result2. In the midst of all these, there have been speculations that the president's choices have been largely influenced by the demands of western corporations like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
This article therefore examines the structural economic reforms implemented by the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, focusing on their alignment with International Monetary Fund (IMF) conditionalities and whether the negative impact on the economy can be traced to these conditionalities
Western Conditionalities
Before a loan is granted to a country, the IMF stipulates conditions governing the grant referred to as 'conditionalities', with terms such as:
- Fiscal consolidation through subsidy removal.
- Exchange rate liberalization and currency devaluation.
- Monetary policy tightening and inflation targeting.
- Privatisation and deregulation.
- Implementation of targeted social welfare schemes3.
In 2023 and 2024, Nigeria implemented fuel subsidy removal, foreign exchange unification, and tightened monetary control, all policies that are in line with IMF usual recommendations, leading to accusations of interference from western powers putting the Nigerian economy These reforms facilitated the disbursement of international development loans, including a $1.5 billion World Bank Development Policy Operation in late 2023.
There is, therefore, a clear alignment between the core policy decisions of the Tinubu administration and the standard prescriptions offered by the IMF and World Bank.
Both the IMF and World Bank have also publicly commended Tinubu's reforms, calling them "bold steps toward macroeconomic stability"4.
Similarities Between Tinubu's Policy & IBB's SAP
Comparing Tinubu's policies to those implemented by Ibrahim Babaginda during his regime becomes unavoidable at this point. In the 1980s, IBB implemented the Structural Adjustment Program (SAP), a comprehensive package explicitly prescribed by the World Bank and IMF, and whose core tenets included massive deregulation, trade liberalization, aggressive privatization, and a drastic devaluation of the Naira5.
The objective was to diversify the economy and reduce state intervention. However, the outcomes were largely catastrophic. SAP fueled hyperinflation (soaring from 5.72% in 1986 to nearly 60% by 1993), deepened poverty, and significantly increased external debt. While the program offered limited growth in non-oil sectors, it ultimately failed to deliver sustainable stability, largely due to poor implementation, pervasive corruption, and a fundamental mismatch between the prescribed policies and Nigeria's economic realities. Under General Ibrahim Babangida, Nigeria's adoption of IMF and World Bank-prescribed SAPS resulted in sharp public backlash6.
This historical precedent draws a sharp parallel with present conditions.
Is Tinubu Being Influenced by the Western Economy or Is he Decisively Establishing Long Term Benefits for the Nigerian Economy?
While IMF conditionalities are non-binding, their implementation under pressure from financial necessity raises concerns about national policy autonomy.
President Tinubu's administration claims its policies are "home-grown" and essential for fiscal discipline, and have argued that the negative impact of these policies are short-term pains necessary for long-term gains such as increased oil revenue and foreign exchange inflows. However, their alignment with the Western conditionalities attached to loans from the IMF tell a different story7.
Current distress suggests that, much like SAP, these reforms represent "shock therapy" without adequate social safety nets, resulting in increased poverty and economic instability.
The core issue lies in Nigeria's vulnerability to external prescriptions that prioritize market liberalization and fiscal austerity over genuine structural transformation and social welfare. To combat this, Nigeria must begin the pivot towards genuine economic sovereignty, protecting itself from Western influences that prioritize fiscal austerity over development. One of the ways the country can achieve this is by embracing the shift from being a resource exporter to a manufacturing powerhouse. Implementing policies that prioritize Nigerian products, strengthening local industries, and mandating local content in government procurement will reduce reliance on imports and boost job creation.
In addition, rather than solely relying on foreign direct investment (FDI) that often leads to capital flight, Nigeria needs strategic, targeted investment in critical sectors like technology, renewable energy, and infrastructure. This must be coupled with a serious effort to diversify the economy away from oil.
A significant focus on reducing corruption and improving institutional efficiency is also crucial for ensuring that policies are implemented effectively and that economic benefits reach all citizens.
Furthermore, Nigeria should seek to finance its development through increased domestic revenue generation and strategic debt management, lessening its vulnerability to conditionalities imposed by foreign lenders.
Conclusion
The current economic reforms may be inevitable, but their implementation must be guided by the needs of the Nigerian people, not the prescriptions of international financial institutions.
As Nigeria moves forward, the long-term legitimacy of these reforms may depend not only on their macroeconomic success but on whether they deliver equitable outcomes without compromising constitutional principles or social cohesion.
Footnotes
1 Angbulu S, 'FLASHBACK: Subsidy Is Gone - Tinubu Declares' Punch (2024)
2 Ifeanyi I, 'Tinubu's Economic Policies Have Worsened Poverty - Oborevwori' The Guardian (2024)
3 'IMF Conditionality' (IMF, 7 March 2023) (https://www.imf.org/en/About/Factsheets/Sheets/2023/IMF-Conditionality) accessed 11 July 2025
4 Jide O, 'APC Governors: World Bank, IMF's Assessment Vindicates Tinubu' (The Nation, 2025) (https://www.google.com/amp/s/thenationonlineng.net/apc-governors-world-bank-imfs-assessment- vindicates-tinubu/amp/) accessed 11 July 2025
5 Anyanwu JC, 'President Babangida's Structural Adjustment Programme and Inflation in Nigeria'p
6 Ibid.
7 Lashem F, 'Tinubu's Reforms Are Home-Grown Policies, Not Imposed by IMF, Says Group' (NewsDiaryOnline, 26 November 2024) (https://newsdiaryonline.com/tinubus-reforms-are-home-grown- policies-not-imposed-by-imf-says-group/) accessed 11 July 2025
https://www.linkedin.com/company/gresyndale-legal/
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
