SERAP and editors’ group oppose foreign aid bill, demand withdrawal

SERAP and the Nigerian Guild of Editors have asked Nigeria’s lawmakers to reject a bill they describe as “unnecessary, unlawful, unconstitutional and a threat to civic space, media freedom and democratic participation.”

In a joint open letter dated August 29, 2026, the groups addressed Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas. The bill, sponsored by Ibrahim Dankwambo, a Peoples Democratic Party lawmaker from Gombe North, would introduce mandatory registration and disclosure requirements for organisations receiving foreign aid.

“

Unnecessary, unlawful, unconstitutional and a threat to civic space, media freedom and democratic participation in Nigeria.

SERAP and the NGE said the proposal would create “an extensive framework for governmental control” over civil society organisations, independent media, religious bodies and other private entities that receive foreign assistance. The bill also proposes sanctions, including a minimum fine of N20 million for civil society organisations and private entities, along with possible suspension or revocation of operating licences.

“

Although the Bill is presented in the guise of promoting transparency, it would establish an extensive framework for governmental control over civil society organisations and private entities receiving foreign assistance.

The organisations questioned the need for a new Foreign Aid Regulatory Commission. They cited the Corporate Affairs Commission, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Special Control Unit against Money Laundering, Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit and Nigeria Revenue Service as existing bodies with responsibilities covering registration, financial reporting, taxation and anti-corruption enforcement.

They also objected to what they called vague references to “foreign aid”, “national priorities” and “public interest”. In their view, the absence of clear definitions and objective legal standards could permit arbitrary enforcement and conflict with constitutional and international human rights protections. The groups said the bill’s stated transparency purpose did not justify overlapping and potentially intrusive regulatory powers.

“

Nothing in the Bill demonstrates that these institutions are unable to perform their statutory responsibilities or that any regulatory gap justifies creating another regulator with overlapping and potentially intrusive powers.