Human Rights Watch has warned that proposed Nigerian legislation on foreign aid, grants and donations could threaten civil society independence by requiring foreign-funded activities to align with government priorities.
The Foreign Aid (Regulation, Transparency and Disclosure) Bill, introduced in the Nigerian Senate, seeks to establish a regulatory commission to oversee foreign aid entering and used in Nigeria.
Its stated objectives include improving transparency and accountability, preventing misuse and duplication of projects, increasing public access to information and ensuring that foreign assistance supports Nigeria’s national development priorities.
However, Human Rights Watch argues that some of the proposed provisions could go beyond legitimate financial oversight and create mechanisms through which government authorities could influence the activities and priorities of independent civil society organisations.
The rights organisation is particularly concerned about a provision stating that “foreign aid-funded activities shall align with Nigeria’s national development plans and priorities.”
According to Human Rights Watch, the language is too broad and insufficiently defined, leaving uncertainty over who would determine whether an organisation’s activities align with government priorities and what consequences could follow if authorities consider them inconsistent.
The concern is especially significant for organisations involved in human rights, governance, anti-corruption and public accountability, whose work may at times require them to scrutinise government policies, document abuses or publicly challenge decisions taken by state institutions.
Anietie Ewang, a Nigerian researcher at Human Rights Watch, indicated that “independence is essential to the work of civil society organizations working to scrutinize government actions, expose wrongdoing, hold those in power accountable, and advocate for reforms.”
“Legislation that seeks to align foreign funding with government priorities risks expanding government control over independent civil society and suppressing dissent.”
Anietie Ewang
The bill has already moved beyond the initial stages of legislative consideration. It has passed its first and second readings in the Senate, signalling approval of its general principles, and has been referred to the Senate Committee on National Planning and Economic Affairs for detailed examination.
The committee is expected to consider the legislation through further review, public hearings and consultations with stakeholders before presenting its recommendations to the Senate.
If approved at the third-reading stage, the bill would still need to pass the House of Representatives and receive presidential assent before it could become law.
The legislative process therefore remains incomplete, leaving room for lawmakers to amend or remove provisions that critics believe could undermine the independence of civil society.
Human Rights Watch argues that the issue is broader than the regulation of foreign aid, touching on the limits of government authority over organisations that operate outside the state.
Civil society organisations occupy an important position within democratic systems, particularly in countries where public institutions are under pressure to improve transparency, accountability and service delivery. They monitor government programmes, document human rights violations, investigate corruption, provide social services and advocate for communities whose concerns may otherwise receive limited political attention.
Any legislation that creates uncertainty around their funding or activities could therefore have implications extending beyond individual organisations, potentially affecting the ability of citizens to participate in public affairs and challenge decisions taken by those in power.
Human Rights Watch indicated that the proposed requirements could be particularly problematic because non-compliance could result in financial penalties, the revocation of operating licences and even imprisonment.
Rights Groups Cite Constitutional and International Protections
The concerns surrounding the Nigerian bill are also grounded in existing constitutional and international protections for freedom of association and expression.
Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and association, while the country is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Both international instruments impose obligations on Nigeria to respect fundamental rights, including the ability of individuals and organisations to associate and participate in public life.
Human Rights Watch also cited the position of the United Nations special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, who has repeatedly affirmed that associations should be able to seek, receive and use resources, including funding from abroad, as part of the right to freedom of association.
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has similarly stated in its Guidelines on Freedom of Association and Assembly in Africa that associations should be able to seek, receive and use funds freely, including resources from foreign states, international organisations and other external sources.
The relevance of these principles is particularly clear in Nigeria, where the proposed legislation extends beyond financial transparency. According to Human Rights Watch, requiring foreign-funded programmes to conform to national development priorities could shape the activities civil society organisations are permitted to pursue.
That could prove particularly consequential for organisations focused on governance and accountability.
An organisation investigating corruption, documenting alleged abuses or challenging a government policy could potentially find its activities at odds with an official interpretation of national priorities. Human Rights Watch argues that the ambiguity could therefore create opportunities for selective enforcement or pressure against organisations whose work is politically inconvenient.
“Transparency and accountability are legitimate objectives, but they should not become a pretext to undermine the independence of civil society. Nigeria should not create new layers of regulation that give the authorities excessive control over organizations simply because they receive foreign funding.”
Anietie Ewang
The concerns echo earlier legislative attempts to increase government oversight of nongovernmental and civil society organisations.
Nigeria’s National Assembly has previously considered proposals aimed at establishing stronger regulatory structures for NGOs. A 2016 proposal to create a Nongovernmental Organizations Regulatory Commission encountered substantial opposition and stalled after a public hearing in 2017. A similar initiative introduced in 2020 was later withdrawn following opposition from lawmakers.
The current bill therefore enters an already contested policy area, where the government’s interest in ensuring transparency must be balanced against the need to protect independent civic activity.
READ ALSO: Ghana’s Recovery Still Incomplete- World Bank Warns
