The military junta in Niger is using citizenship revocations as a weapon in a widening political purge, stripping nationalities from former allies of ousted president Mohamed Bazoum while invoking national security concerns. With 25 people now facing provisional denationalization since 2024, the strategy raises serious questions: is this a legitimate security measure or a calculated campaign to eliminate rivals?
From coup to purge: how denationalization became a political tool
Since seizing power in July 2023, General Abdourahamane Tiani’s administration has escalated its confrontation with figures from the Bazoum era. In September 2026, a new decree revoked the Nigerien citizenship of five more individuals, including former Prime Minister Ouhoumoudou Mahamadou and several ex-collaborators of Bazoum. This brings the total to 25 provisional denationalizations under a 2024 decree ostensibly designed to protect national interests.
The pattern is unmistakable: the junta is targeting high-profile figures from the previous government, not just on criminal grounds but based on their political affiliations. Such a targeted approach fuels suspicions that denationalization has become an extension of the junta’s power struggle rather than a legitimate security tool.
Exile as a consequence: the hidden cost for dissidents abroad
For those living outside Niger, losing citizenship creates severe administrative hurdles. Without a valid passport or consular support, former officials face difficulties renewing documents, traveling, or even returning home. The most alarming risk is statelessness particularly for individuals whose only citizenship is Nigerien.
The consequences extend beyond bureaucracy. Revocations cut off access to legal protection, financial services, and professional opportunities abroad. Exiled politicians can become trapped in legal limbo, unable to navigate host countries’ systems or challenge the charges against them.
Statelessness: a trap for the politically inconvenient
Human rights groups warn that provisional denationalization, while not immediately stripping citizenship, can lead to long-term statelessness if the revoked passport becomes unusable. Without alternatives, individuals may find themselves unable to prove nationality anywhere, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation or deportation.
Legal black holes: where security accusations meet due process
The junta justifies denationalizations with accusations like undermining public order, collaborating with foreign powers, or threatening state security. However, these broad charges raise critical questions about fairness and transparency.
Under Niger’s 2024 decrees, individuals can be stripped of citizenship based on electronic communications or social media activity. But accountability requires proof, context, and a chance to defend oneself a process that appears to be missing. Some revocations stem from criticism of the military or dissenting opinions, which, under international law, do not constitute crimes.
Presumption of innocence sacrificed for political ends?
If membership in Bazoum’s administration alone were grounds for denationalization, the measure would be a blunt tool rather than a legal one. Courts have yet to rule on the merits of these cases, leaving defendants without clear avenues for appeal. The lack of procedural safeguards risks turning citizenship revocation into a weapon against political opponents rather than a response to genuine threats.
Narrowing politics: how denationalization deepens division
Each new revocation reinforces the perception that the junta is not merely enforcing the law but purging rivals. Instead of fostering national healing, these actions deepen the rift between the military leadership and the Bazoum legacy. The junta’s refusal to differentiate between criminal acts and political alignment risks prolonging instability.
For Niger’s long-term stability, institutions must balance security concerns with fundamental rights. Denationalization cannot become a substitute for fair trials, transparent investigations, or credible legal processes. If the junta’s actions continue to target Bazoum’s allies disproportionately, the message is clear: political loyalty, not evidence, determines one’s place in Niger’s future.
Security or score-settling? The junta’s gamble with citizenship
The erosion of judicial safeguards in the name of security sets a dangerous precedent. Citizenship, once stripped, cannot be easily reclaimed. For the individuals involved, the consequences are irreversible loss of identity, inability to re-enter the country, and years spent fighting for recognition that may never come.
While the junta asserts these measures are necessary to protect the nation, the evidence suggests otherwise. A policy that relies on legal ambiguity and political vengeance undermines the very institutions it claims to defend. In a nation already grappling with political fractures and regional instability, such tactics may do more harm than good.
By Cécile Mboua — Journalist