Nigeria Suspends Parliamentary Engagements With South Africa Over Anti-Migrant Attack

Nigeria’s National Assembly has suspended all official visits to South Africa and ordered lawmakers, committees, officials and staff to boycott South African-hosted legislative activities over continuing reports of attacks against Nigerians and other African nationals.

The decision, announced on September 11, 2026, represents a significant escalation in Nigeria’s response to renewed anti-migrant violence in South Africa. The suspension will remain in place until further notice.

The National Assembly said it was particularly concerned by reports of Nigerians being killed, injured, displaced and forced to abandon homes, businesses, investments and other property because of recurring violent attacks.

However, the parliamentary action does not amount to a severing of diplomatic relations between Abuja and Pretoria. The National Assembly has stressed that Nigeria’s longstanding diplomatic and people-to-people relationship with South Africa remains important.

What the National Assembly Has Suspended

The directive covers official visits to South Africa by the National Assembly, its committees, lawmakers, officials and staff.

It also extends to legislative activities organised, hosted, sponsored or co-sponsored by South African legislative institutions.

The boycott includes physical and virtual conferences, seminars, workshops, meetings and parliamentary exchanges.

Any Nigerian parliamentary delegation seeking to participate in such activities will require express approval from the leadership of the National Assembly.

The decision was communicated by the Clerk to the National Assembly, Kamoru Ogunlana, following consultations between the leadership of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The measure therefore represents an institutional decision of Nigeria’s federal legislature rather than a general travel ban on Nigerians going to South Africa.

Why Nigeria Took the Step

The immediate reason is the continuing concern over anti-migrant violence in South Africa.

Nigeria says Nigerians have been among those affected by attacks, intimidation, displacement and destruction of property.

The National Assembly said repeated appeals for the protection of Nigerians and other foreign nationals had not sufficiently addressed the problem, prompting lawmakers to take a stronger position.

The issue has been building for months.

South Africa experienced renewed anti-foreigner protests in 2026, with some groups demanding that undocumented migrants leave the country. The protests have affected migrants from several African countries, not Nigerians alone.

Two Nigerians Killed in June

The latest parliamentary decision follows several deadly incidents.

Nigeria’s Foreign Ministry said two Nigerian nationals were killed in South Africa in June amid heightened anti-migrant tensions.

One of the victims was reportedly killed in connection with an incident involving South African police, while the other was killed outside his business.

The Nigerian government called for investigations and prosecution of those responsible.

More recently, Nigeria’s Foreign Ministry reported the deaths of two other Nigerian nationals in September.

According to the ministry, James Uchechukwu Nwankwo died in Cape Town on September 5 after what Nigerian officials described as “gruesome interrogation techniques” allegedly used by South African police officers. Another Nigerian, Bishop Taiwo Michael Fakunle, was killed at his home in Johannesburg on September 4.

The circumstances surrounding Fakunle’s death, including the motive and identity of the perpetrator, were not established in the report.

These cases have added to concerns about the safety of Nigerians living and working in South Africa.

Nearly 1,500 Nigerians Evacuated

Nigeria has already taken steps to help citizens who wanted to leave South Africa.

The Federal Government said in July that it had evacuated 1,490 Nigerians through a series of voluntary humanitarian flights following xenophobic attacks and related security concerns.

The evacuation programme involved Nigerian and South African authorities, the Nigerian High Commission, the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission, the National Emergency Management Agency and other agencies.

The government said the operation was intended to protect Nigerians affected by the deteriorating security situation.

The evacuation figures show that the dispute is not limited to diplomatic statements.

A significant number of Nigerians have already decided to leave South Africa because of security concerns associated with the attacks.

Nigeria and South Africa Have Tried Dialogue

Despite the escalation, Abuja and Pretoria have continued diplomatic discussions.

South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola visited Abuja in July for discussions with Nigerian officials on migration, law enforcement and the treatment of Nigerians in South Africa.

The South African government has said it condemns xenophobia and vigilante attacks against foreign nationals.

South Africa has also maintained that law enforcement operations should target individual criminal conduct rather than entire nationalities.

During the July discussions, South African officials said the government had arrested people in connection with relevant incidents and that investigations remained underway.

Nigeria, meanwhile, has stressed the need for due process and the protection of Nigerians who are living and conducting legitimate businesses in South Africa.

South Africa’s Migration Problem

The tensions are occurring within a broader South African debate over migration.

Some local groups blame foreigners for unemployment, crime and pressure on public services.

Those claims have contributed to hostility against migrants from other African countries.

But the presence of foreign nationals is not itself evidence that migrants are responsible for the country’s economic or security problems.

South African authorities have repeatedly said that criminal conduct should be addressed through law enforcement rather than collective punishment or attacks on foreigners.

The Nigerian government’s position is similar: individuals accused of crimes should be investigated and prosecuted, while law-abiding Nigerians should be protected.

The Problem Is Wider Than Nigeria

The current tension does not involve Nigerians alone.

Migrants from several African countries have faced pressure and anti-foreigner protests in South Africa.

This is why Nigeria has increasingly framed the issue as one involving xenophobia and Afrophobia, rather than simply a bilateral disagreement between Abuja and Pretoria.

At an African Union level, Nigerian officials have called for a broader continental response.

President Bola Tinubu has raised concerns about xenophobic and Afrophobic attacks, while Vice President Kashim Shettima has called for the issue to receive attention at the African Union’s forthcoming deliberations.

The Nigerian government therefore appears to be pursuing two tracks: bilateral engagement with South Africa and broader African diplomatic pressure.

The Boycott Is Not a Diplomatic Break

The distinction between parliamentary engagement and diplomatic relations is important.

Nigeria has not announced the termination of diplomatic relations with South Africa.

The National Assembly itself acknowledged that the suspension does not undermine the historical and people-to-people relationship between the two countries.

The measure is better understood as a political and parliamentary pressure mechanism.

By refusing to participate in South African-hosted legislative activities, Nigerian lawmakers are signalling that continued attacks on Nigerians have consequences for bilateral institutional cooperation.

At the same time, the Federal Government can continue using diplomatic channels to engage Pretoria.

Nigeria Wants South Africa to Act

The National Assembly has called on South African authorities to take urgent and concrete steps to protect Nigerians and other African nationals.

It also wants reported attacks to be investigated, suspected perpetrators arrested and those found responsible prosecuted according to law.

The demand places the emphasis on accountability.

Nigeria is not asking South Africa to prevent all crime involving foreigners. Rather, it is pressing Pretoria to ensure that Nigerians are not targeted because of their nationality and that attacks against them receive an effective legal response.

That distinction is important because Nigeria itself has a responsibility to protect foreign nationals and businesses operating within its borders.

Possible Impact on Bilateral Relations

Nigeria and South Africa are two of Africa’s most influential economies and major political powers.

Their relationship extends across trade, investment, telecommunications, aviation, banking, education, diplomacy and people-to-people exchanges.

Large numbers of Nigerians live, work and operate businesses in South Africa, while South African companies maintain significant commercial interests in Nigeria.

A prolonged deterioration in relations could therefore have consequences beyond parliamentary exchanges.

The current suspension may remain limited if South African authorities can demonstrate stronger protection for foreign nationals and progress in investigations into attacks.

If violence continues, however, pressure for stronger Nigerian action could increase.

What Happens Next?

The National Assembly’s suspension will remain in force until further notice, subject to review by its leadership.

Nigeria has also urged South African authorities to take concrete measures to protect Nigerians and other African nationals.

Meanwhile, the Federal Government is continuing diplomatic engagement rather than cutting relations with Pretoria.

For Nigeria, the immediate priority is the safety of its citizens.

For South Africa, the challenge is balancing legitimate concerns about illegal immigration and crime with its constitutional obligations to protect people living within the country.

For both governments, the larger question is whether diplomatic engagement can prevent the current dispute from developing into a deeper bilateral crisis.

Nigeria’s parliamentary boycott sends a clear message that Abuja is prepared to use institutional pressure when it believes the safety and dignity of its citizens are not adequately protected.

But whether the measure produces lasting change will depend on what happens next on the ground in South Africa.

The central question is whether stronger diplomatic and parliamentary pressure can persuade South Africa to provide greater protection for Nigerians while preserving the longstanding relationship between two of Africa’s most important countries.