CSOs demand withdrawal of foreign aid bill

Five human rights organizations in Nigeria have jointly demanded the immediate withdrawal of the Foreign Aids (Regulation, Transparency and Disclosure) Bill 2026, codenamed SB. 1034, citing concerns that it threatens civic space and endangers human rights defenders. The groups, Nigerian Human Rights Defenders Network, Partnership for Justice, Front Line Defenders, West African Human Rights Defenders Network, and Protection International, warned that the bill conflicts with Nigeria's international human rights commitments, particularly those outlined during its fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR) cycle. The bill, introduced by Senator Ibrahim Hassan Dankwambo, a representative of Gombe North, passed its second reading in the Senate in July 2026. It proposes the creation of a Foreign Aid Regulatory Commission (FARC) tasked with registering, auditing, sanctioning, and even suspending organizations that receive foreign grants, donations, or technical assistance. Unlike earlier legislative efforts, this bill extends its oversight to a broader range of entities, including government agencies, civil society groups, and private organizations. This expansion has drawn sharp criticism from the advocacy groups, who argue that it could severely curtail the operational independence of non-governmental actors. Among the key concerns raised by the organizations is Section 6(1) of the bill, which mandates a 30-day registration period for all foreign donations. They contend that this requirement could hinder timely access to critical resources, such as legal defense funds, emergency relocation services, and support for victims of gender-based violence and human rights abuses. Another contentious provision is Section 7 and 8, which require the mandatory disclosure of implementing partners and funded activities in a national registry. The groups warned that this transparency measure could expose human rights defenders, survivors, and witnesses to increased risks of surveillance, harassment, and retaliation. Section 11 of the bill poses additional challenges, as it compels foreign-funded activities to align with Nigeria’s national development priorities. The organizations criticized this clause as overly broad and vague, suggesting it could be used to justify restrictions on the work of human rights defenders, environmental activists, and community advocates. They emphasized that such a provision could effectively limit the scope of protected activities, undermining the very principles of free association and expression that Nigeria has pledged to uphold internationally. The groups also pointed out that the proposed FARC overlaps significantly with existing regulatory bodies, including the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), the Special Control Unit Against Money Laundering (SCUML), the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU). This duplication, they argued, could lead to inefficiencies and unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles for organizations already navigating complex compliance requirements. In addition to demanding the withdrawal of the bill, the organizations called for the immediate inclusion of civil society in any future legislative process related to foreign funding regulation. They stressed the importance of adhering to constitutional safeguards and international standards, including the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. The groups also sought stronger legal protections for confidential information related to human rights defenders, survivors, and witnesses, as well as an accelerated mechanism for emergency funding that bypasses the current registration timelines. As Nigeria prepares to run for a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2027–2029 term, the advocacy groups reiterated that the country’s international standing must be matched by robust domestic protections for human rights defenders. Their call for action underscores growing tensions between regulatory oversight and the preservation of civic freedoms, highlighting the urgent need for dialogue between lawmakers and civil society stakeholders.