At least 22 people, including civilians and security personnel, have died and around 197 others injured following protests in Angola triggered by a sudden one‑third hike in diesel prices according to the Office of the President.
The unrest erupted on Monday, when minibus taxi associations and other workers initiated a three-day nationwide strike in response to the government’s move to phase out fuel subsidies, a move seen as necessary for fiscal reforms but highly unpopular among citizens
Protests began in Luanda, the capital, before spreading to at least six provinces. Demonstrations included looting, vandalism, and clashes with police, prompting the deployment of the army.
Security forces arrested over 1,200 people, with 66 shops and 25 vehicles vandalized during the unrest.
Human Rights Watch and other observers criticized the authorities for excessive force, using tear gas, rubber bullets, and mass arrests against largely peaceful protestors. Angola’s long-ruling MPLA has a history of suppressing dissent, raising concerns about democratic backsliding.
The fuel price hike resulted from the removal of heavily subsidized diesel, which reportedly amounted to 4% of Angola’s GDP in 2024 down to 1.8% in 2025 after reforms supported by the IMF and international investors.
The ripple effect was immediate: minibus fares surged by up to 50%, pushing transport costs beyond reach for many and sparking widespread outrage.
Fuel-driven protests are not unique to Angola. Similar crises have erupted elsewhere in Zimbabwe (2019), a sudden 130% fuel price increase spurred mass protests; police responded with a harsh crackdown resulting in at least 12 deaths and numerous arrests.
In Jordan (2022): Truck drivers and merchants protested rising fuel and energy costs. In the city of Maan, a senior police officer was shot dead during riots and dozens were arrested
These cases illustrate that economic shocks especially sudden removal of subsidies often lead to explosive public backlash, particularly when state mechanisms for public consultation and communication are weak or absent.
In Angola, opposition groups remain marginalized, and the protests reflect voiceless frustration. In contexts like Uganda, political parties (NRM, NUP, FDC, PFF) often engage public anger for electoral leverage. In Angola, the lack of visible opposition presence may limit protest-to-politics translation.
The Angolan government’s heavy-handed response mirrors patterns across Africa where militarized governance seeks to quash protests swiftly. Such tactics may restore temporary order but deepen mistrust.
The Angolan protests reveal a hard truth: economic reforms that alter daily affordability can no longer proceed without engagement, communication, and social cushioning. When reforms accelerate faster than social adaptation, protests are inevitable and if mismanaged, deadly.
As Angola grapples with balancing fiscal prudence and public tolerance, the unfolding crisis serves as a sobering caution for other African countries navigating fuel and subsidy reforms.
Also read: Downtown Kampala Traders Protest Hiked Taxes
