18 December 2024 –

A recent report authored by the Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity (CeFTPI) finds that despite Nigeria’s progress in establishing anti-corruption laws and policies, compliance with UNCAC Chapters II (Preventive Measures) and V (Asset Recovery) across the country is weak in practice. Anti-corruption agencies lack independence, there is no comprehensive whistleblowing legislation that adequately safeguards citizens reporting on corruption, and barriers persist in access to information. The report is intended as a contribution to the UNCAC implementation review process in its second cycle, produced with technical and financial support from the UNCAC Coalition. 

On Chapter II of the UNCAC, Nigeria has made progress in passing preventive anti-corruption measures, including the recent adoption of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS). However, there is a low awareness of the NACS at the sub-national level, and anti-corruption agencies lack structural independence. Despite a robust legal framework on political financing and public procurement, compliance is weak. Furthermore, Nigeria has yet to pass comprehensive whistleblowing legislation into law that adequately safeguards citizens who report acts of misconduct by corrupt individuals and groups. 

Regarding Chapter V of the UNCAC, Nigeria has anti-money laundering and asset recovery frameworks in place and has recovered significant assets through international cooperation. In the example of the Abacha case,  there have been significant asset freezes, such as approximately USD 700 million linked to a former Head of State and held abroad. However, actual returns remain limited, and a lack of accountability measures for organizations involved in asset recovery has led to concerns about compliance with protocols and the repatriation of assets. The legislation also fails to provide a precise mechanism establishing the direct compensation of victims of corruption and other crimes, with recovered funds. 

The UNCAC review process in Nigeria officially began in 2016. The country visit by reviewing countries Côte d’Ivoire and Myanmar was held on 10-12 May 2017, including civil society organizations. The self-assessment checklist was published on 30 January 2017, the executive summary was published on 24 May 2019, and the country review report was published on 15 December 2019 – all available on Nigeria’s UNODC Country Profile page. Including civil society in the review and making all key documents available follows best practice. 

For detailed findings and recommendations, read the full civil society parallel report in English here. 

Main Findings

Preventive anti-corruption policies, practices and bodies

Nigeria has made notable progress in the formulation of laws and policies on anti-corruption. The recent adoption of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy (NACS) (2022-2026) demonstrates Nigeria’s commitment to combating corruption and aligning with international practices. The anti-corruption laws enacted enabled the establishment of anti-corruption bodies, including the Technical Unit on Governance and Anti-Corruption Reforms (TUGAR), which play a crucial role in implementing anti-corruption policies. TUGAR, in particular, is pivotal in coordinating anti-corruption initiatives, collecting data, and evaluating policies. The central role of TUGAR instills confidence in the system’s effectiveness and ensures innovative practices among the anti-corruption agencies, reassuring the public.

Whilst there are some good practices, such as the coordination of the implementation of NACS by the Office of the Attorney-General and the monitoring and evaluation committee for the implementation of the NACS and the development of various anti-corruption instruments, there is low awareness of the NACS at the sub-national level, and no information is available to measure the reduction in corruption and the impact of establishing anti-corruption laws, agencies, and mechanisms. Further, the anti-corruption agencies lack structural independence. 

Public Sector Employment

The Federal Civil Service Commission can appoint, promote, and discipline public officials in the Nigerian public service. The Public Service Rules, a cornerstone of the system, provide standard operating procedures and policies that regulate the work and the conditions of the public service. These rules guide the conduct of public officials, aiming to entrench the issues of transparency, accountability, justice, equity, due process, and the rule of law and ensure the system’s fairness and integrity. However, challenges such as corruption, nepotism, and political interference hinder the implementation of these rules.

Codes of Conduct, Conflicts of Interest and Asset Declarations

The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) receives asset declarations from public officers and examines them to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Code of Conduct. It verifies and investigates complaints and refers violations to the Code of Conduct Tribunal. Nigeria has also implemented the National Strategy on Public Service Reforms and the Service Compact with All Nigerians (SERVICOM) and has a monitoring and evaluation mechanism to ensure compliance with service standards across all Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs).

However, there is no information on the effectiveness of implementing the National Strategy on Public Service Reforms. The Federal Character Commission also reports poorly on implementing the Federal Character principle, and there is a lack of effective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms of the Public Service Rules and relevant codes of conduct for Public Officials. The Code of Conduct Bureau does not make declared public officer assets publicly accessible, hindering verification by civil society organizations and the general public.

Political Financing 

Nigeria has enacted relevant laws and strategies on political financing, including the requirement for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to prepare and submit a report on the accounts of every political party to the National Assembly annually. INEC Regulations and Guidelines for Political Parties (2022) provides the rules for financial reporting and audits of political party accounts, and the Electoral Act 2022 provides limits on campaign spending by political parties and candidates; it prohibits accepting anonymous donations and requirements for financial disclosures by political parties and candidates. 

Despite the robustness of the legal framework on electoral financing, a year after the 2023 general elections, INEC, the regulating body, and most political parties still need to make their election expenses public as mandated by the law. INEC has yet to take decisive action against parties that have failed to comply with the Act’s financial disclosure requirements.

Reporting Mechanisms and Whistleblower Protection

Nigeria has yet to pass comprehensive whistleblowing legislation that adequately safeguards citizens who report acts of misconduct by corrupt individuals and groups. The absence of this legislation underscores the urgent need for its implementation. The 2016 Whistleblowing Stopgap Policy encourages employees to report bribery, corruption, fraud, and other crimes. The Federal Ministry of Finance also has an online portal for reporting financial violations, public fund mismanagement, malpractice, fraud, and theft, offering easy access to whistleblowing and transparent reporting mechanisms. However, the lack of a comprehensive law leaves a significant gap in the protection of whistleblowers. 

Public Procurement and Management of Public Finances

On public procurement and public finance management, the Public Procurement Act (PPA) 2007 guides all Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) procurements, and the Bureau of Public Procurement enforces the provisions of the PPA. State Governments have Procurement Acts that govern procurement processes in the States. Twenty-four states have enacted procurement laws, and twelve states had yet to domesticate the law when writing the report, which shows the disparity in adopting procurement regulations across the country. The Bureau of Public Procurement has no public reporting on compliance of the MDAs with the Public Procurement Act at the national level. Many procurement personnel in both public and private institutions lack the necessary training and qualifications on procurement, affecting the entire process and causing ineffectiveness. There is no public report on compliance at the sub-national level for states that have implemented the Procurement Act.

Access to information and the participation of civil society

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) of 2011 is the primary law mandating that public institutions publish public records and make information freely available. It provides for public access to public records and information while strongly emphasizing the need to protect personal privacy to the extent consistent with the public interest. Government institutions like the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission actively collaborate with CSOs to enhance public reporting mechanisms and accountability through partnerships and hotlines for reporting corruption.

However, investigative journalists and CSOs face significant obstacles in accessing information: Many public institutions need more resources and updated technology, which hampers their ability to maintain transparency and respond effectively to information requests. At the sub-national level, only three states have domesticated the FOIA, and many local governments do not have functional websites for public access to information. There is also poor proactive disclosure of information by MDAs to the public. Further, investigative journalists face significant barriers in accessing information due to legal constraints, such as the Official Secrets Act and limitations imposed under the guise of national security.

Concerning the participation of society, CSOs were invited to give input on various drafts of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy. Various other initiatives have also been launched in this respect. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission launched an online community platform allowing the public to engage with the commission’s officials around corruption issues, a radio station to engage with stakeholders and society on issues related to financial crimes, as well as efforts to engage children and young people in the fight against corruption. However, more systematic and sustained engagement with CSOs is necessary to fully harness their potential in combating corruption.

Judiciary and Prosecution Services

The National Judicial Council is responsible for appointing, promoting, and disciplining judicial officers on Judiciary and Prosecution Services. The Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee comprises the Attorney-General of the Federation, State Attorney Generals, and twelve Legal Practitioners appointed by the Body of Benchers to address issues of misconduct by legal practitioners. However, the current appointment process for judicial officers is criticized for being less rigorous and competitive, leading to the selection of less qualified individuals. The judiciary is also plagued by significant delays, with cases often taking years to resolve. The backlog is caused by procedural bottlenecks, such as frequent adjournments and jurisdictional challenges, leading many to seek informal justice systems or self-help. There is also low monitoring to ensure strict adherence to judicial ethics, which has led to cases of conflicting court orders, especially on political matters.

Private sector transparency

The legal framework ensures adequate transparency in the private sector. However, despite the robustness of the legal frameworks, the strategic implementation of these laws still needs to be improved, and regulatory bodies should engage in capacity building against punitive measures. These measures have created a hostile environment for compliance and cooperation between law enforcement and the private sector. Many private entities exhibit weak internal control mechanisms, leading to unethical conduct and corruption. There is also a need for regular reporting and engagement with the public on the effectiveness of the legal framework and institutions.

Anti-Money Laundering

The Nigerian government has enacted various legislative measures to prevent money laundering, including the 2022 Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (MLPPA). The MLPPA provides for Beneficial Ownership disclosure, record keeping, customer due diligence, and identification and reporting of Suspicious transaction reports (STRS) to the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU). There are also various frameworks in place governing beneficial ownership to improve transparency. The Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020 mandates public companies to publish an annual report and disclose their beneficial owner and has established a persons with significant control register with open access. Numerous institutions also provide guiding principles for financial institutions, designated non-financial businesses, and professional sectors of the economy. 

NFIU’s adoption and implementation of the goAML software have facilitated the online receipt and automated analysis of suspicious transaction reports and rapid information sharing between law enforcement agencies. This software has significantly increased the number of Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) submitted to the NFIU from 16 in 2021 to 6,749 in 2023. However, despite the increase in STRs, there are ongoing challenges regarding the timely reporting of suspicious transactions; delays can hinder effective investigation and prosecution efforts. Nigeria remains on FATF’s gray list due to AML/CFT framework deficiencies. This status indicates that while improvements have been made, further actions are necessary to meet international standards and effectively prevent money laundering.

International Cooperation for Conscifaction and the Return and Disposal of Assets

Nigeria has successfully utilized frameworks such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act and the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 2019, which aligns with UNCAC provisions to recover significant assets. Nigeria cooperates with other state parties about confiscation matters. However, the absence of specific accountability measures for organizations involved in asset recovery under POCA is a significant gap, leading to concerns about enforcement and compliance with established protocols. Although substantial amounts have been frozen, repatriation remains limited due to bureaucratic hurdles affecting the impact of asset recovery initiatives. Section 70 of the POCA allows the President, with the approval of the Federal Executive Council, to authorize expenditures from the Confiscated and Forfeited Properties Account to compensate states that have suffered financial losses due to crimes leading to asset forfeiture. However, the Act does not establish a precise mechanism for directly compensating individual victims of corruption or other crimes.

Key Recommendations for Priority Actions

1. Enhance the independence of anti-corruption bodies to ensure effective enforcement of anti-corruption laws in Nigeria.
2. Develop a monitoring and evaluation framework to assess the impacts of anti-corruption policies and bodies in Nigeria.
3. Adopt an effective public sector policy that promotes transparency and meritocracy in recruitment and promotions.
4. Enhance political parties’ compliance with political financing regulations to ensure transparency and accountability in electoral financing.
5. Promote the implementation of a comprehensive whistle-blower protection framework into law and strengthen existing reporting mechanisms for corrupt activities.
6. Facilitate access to information at the national and especially at the sub-national level to promote participation in governance.
7. Reform the Judiciary and prosecution services to ensure the timely handling of corruption cases and increase public trust in Nigeria’s legal institutions.
8. Enforce the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, enabling financial institutions and designated non-financial businesses and professions to reduce public and private sector corruption.
9. Develop training programs for financial institutions and DNFBPs to ensure they understand their obligations to report Suspicious Transactions Reporting (STRs).
10. Establish effective standard operating procedures for returning and disposing of confiscated assets, ensuring that recovered assets are used for public good and development.
11. Improve government interaction with CSOs in the recovery and disposal of assets to ensure transparency and accountability.

 

Fullscreen Mode