Court Upholds Criminality of Prostitution, Dismisses Sex Workers’ Rights Suit

A LANDMARK legal battle over the rights of sex workers in Nigeria’s capital city, Abuja, has ended in defeat for the plaintiffs, as the Federal High Court declared that commercial sex work remains an offence under Nigerian law.

Justice James Omotosho, in his ruling, dismissed the case filed by the Lawyers Alert Initiative for Protection of Rights of Children, Women, and Indigent on behalf of Abuja-based prostitutes. The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/642/2024, sought to prevent the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, and the Abuja Environmental Protection Board (AEPB) from harassing, arresting, or prosecuting women suspected of engaging in sex work.

The Explainer gathered that the case also targeted the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), arguing that the sex workers’ fundamental rights were being violated.

Justice Omotosho, however, ruled that prostitution is “an immoral act alien to the cultural values of all ethnic groups in Nigeria.” He asserted that the applicants had no legal rights under the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to support their claim. Citing the Penal Code, which criminalises commercial sex work with a penalty of up to two years in prison, the court held that the AEPB acted within its mandate.

“This court wonders what kind of message the applicant is sending when it decided to bring an action to protect prostitutes,” Justice Omotosho declared. “A reasonable person would have expected that the applicant would instead occupy itself with developing the girl child and protecting the sanctity of womanhood instead of promoting immorality and the spread of sexual diseases.”

ALSO READ: Chief Ayo Adebanjo – Memories of a Political Warrior

The Explainer learned that the plaintiffs had argued that the AEPB’s reference to sex workers as “articles” and their bodies as “goods for purchase” in the FCT Mobile Court violated Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom from discrimination. However, the court held that the application was incompetent and lacked merit under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009.

Justice Omotosho further emphasised the principle of cultural relativism, stating that “prostitution is alien and has never been part of our culture.” He cited the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which allows nations to uphold their cultural values in interpreting human rights.

The court also rejected the argument that legalising prostitution in some Western countries, such as the Netherlands, could serve as a precedent. “This is not so in Africa,” the judge remarked. “Even in the United States, apart from a few counties in Nevada, prostitution remains illegal in all 50 states.”

The Explainer gathered that the plaintiffs had sought multiple declarations, including an order restraining the AEPB from harassing or arresting sex workers and compelling proper enforcement of the AEPB Act, 1997. However, Justice Omotosho insisted that the rights of individuals can be breached under Section 45 of the Constitution on the grounds of public safety, public order, and morality.

“Allowing prostitutes to have free reign on the streets of Abuja will, in no time, destroy the moral fibre of the city and turn it into a hotbed of immorality,” the judge ruled.

Analysts have described the ruling as a pivotal moment in Nigeria’s ongoing debate over the decriminalisation of sex work. While some human rights advocates argue that criminalising prostitution further endangers vulnerable women, others support the court’s stance as a defence of Nigeria’s moral and cultural values.