A/HRC/43/43/Add.1 E. Criminalization and stigmatization of the poor 45. The Special Rapporteur was appalled to observe that those who have the greatest need to be protected and assisted by the State are instead stigmatized, persecuted, extorted and even arrested and jailed without having committed a crime. 46. In Lagos, the Special Rapporteur was informed that a police “task force” conducted “raids” and carried out “mass arrests” of poor people found walking in the streets. These people were put in trucks and delivered to a “mobile court” and encouraged to plead guilty to the offence of “wandering without evident means of livelihood”, a defunct criminal offence, and forced to pay a fine of approximately 15,000 Naira (42 US$). Those who could show a company identification document, had some money on them or were well dressed might be released. The poorest, who could not afford to pay the fine, could face imprisonment. Some civil society organizations claim that the “mobile courts” were in fact “set up to exploit the urban poor and scare them out of the city”.43 47. Vagrancy laws criminalizing the poor were introduced in Nigeria during the British colonial regime and abolished by the military junta in 1989, after a long campaign by the human rights movement: the 1989 Minor Offences (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, section 1, states that a person shall not be accused of or charged with the offence of wandering (by whatever name it is called) or with any other offence by reason only of being found wandering (by whatever name it is called) and, accordingly, that any person accused of or charged with such offence shall be released or discharged. 48. The Special Rapporteur is extremely concerned about the blatant disregard of the rule of law shown by the arrest and fining of poor people, a practice documented by NGOs and directly observed by the Special Rapporteur during her visit to a “mobile court”. The Special Rapporteur regrets that her concern was met with scepticism by government and judicial officials. Officials who admitted that the practice may be taking place suggested that lawyers should challenge in court the imposition of a law that was abolished decades ago. The Special Rapporteur notes, however, that, first and foremost, resolute action by the Government is required to immediately suspend the unlawful, discriminatory and exploitive behaviour of the police and the “mobile courts”. 49. Often, people living in informal settlements resort to hawking, the informal sale on the streets of low-value items, to make a living. This practice is seen as a nuisance by the Government and is therefore banned in many areas, resulting in arrests and extortion by the police. The Special Rapporteur understands the need to regulate economic practices in urban areas but the poorest inhabitants should not be penalized for their attempts to make a living through street trade in a country where 60 per cent of the economy remains informal.44 50. Another worrying aspect of the criminalization and stigmatization of people living in poverty was reflected in the views expressed by some government officials during meetings with the Special Rapporteur. An informal settlement was referred to as “a den of kidnappers and criminals”, and others jokingly doubted whether their inhabitants were “actually human”. While forced evictions are mainly carried out for economic interests, the stigmatization and dehumanization of inhabitants of informal settlements also provides a pretext for forced evictions and for the brutal use of force with which they are often conducted. Demolishing entire communities based on the alleged criminal activities of some of their inhabitants is not only discriminatory, but also constitutes collective punishment. 43 44 Urban Resilience Hub, “The crackdown on the informal poor: a problem or a solution?” (25 September 2018). Vivian Malta and others, “Informality and gender gaps going hand in hand”, p. 18. 11