Imo NURTW Warns Members Against Hunger Protest

Imo NURTW cautions its members against joining the hunger protest. Find out the reasons behind this warning and the potential consequences.

Samuel Udeh, the Imo State Chairman of NURTW, has advised members of the union not to participate in the hunger protest planned for August 1 nationwide.

According to him, it would result in greater damage than benefit.

During an emergency meeting of the State Executive Committee (SEC) that took place on Tuesday in Owerri, he delivered a warning to his fellow union members.

Udeh spoke to the executives, acknowledging that while it was a constitutional right for citizens to peacefully demonstrate against unfair treatment from their leaders, this particular right had been misused and executed incorrectly.

Read Also: Tragic Crash: 3 Nigerian Students Die on Protest Break

As a result of this abuse, he believed there were more negative effects such as pain, sorrow and setbacks.

The leader of NURTW advised the members to avoid succumbing to any urges of participating in the scheduled demonstration.

His opinion was that engaging in dialogue with the country’s leaders was a superior method of accomplishing tasks appropriately, rather than turning to protest.

Imo citizens should be concerned about the possibility that miscreants and hoodlums could hijack the protest with an intention to perpetrate evil and cause havoc.

According to Udeh, while acknowledging the presence of poverty and famine in the country, we should be cautious not to permit wicked individuals seeking harm against people and assets from triumphing.

During their individual speeches, several executive members concurred with the Chairman’s remarks and praised him for organizing the meeting that proved to be well-timed in providing an update on Union’s stance towards the protest. Accordingly, they acknowledged how it allowed them a chance to remain informed on this matter.

The Chairman’s commitment to promoting the collective welfare of members was recognized, as he consistently ensured their involvement in decision-making processes.

Their general claim was that participating in the protest as drivers would not benefit them; instead, it could lead to their disadvantage. Therefore, they were determined not to take part in it.