Okechukwu Nwanguma
Nigeria is confronting a troubling pattern that strikes at the heart of constitutional governance: the alteration of laws after they have been duly debated, passed, and harmonised by the National Assembly. This is not merely a procedural anomaly. It is a democratic fraud.
The current controversy surrounding the tax reform laws – where a serving lawmaker has alleged discrepancies between what was passed by the National Assembly and what was later gazetted – sadly mirrors a precedent many Nigerians may have forgotten, but which I witnessed first-hand during the passage of the Nigeria Police Act 2020.
A déjà vu from the Police Act 2020
I was directly involved in the review process of the Police Act 2020, including clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill. The process was one of the most inclusive and rigorous legislative exercises Nigeria had seen in recent years.
The then Senate President, Dr Bukola Saraki, demonstrated an uncommon commitment to repealing the colonial-era Police Act. Working in synergy with civil society, his office – working closely with the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC) – set up a technical committee of experts drawn from the legislature, the Federal Ministry of Justice, the Police Service Commission (PSC), the Nigeria Police Force, and civil society organisations.
This committee painstakingly reviewed the Senate and House versions of the Bill, harmonised them, subjected them to intense scrutiny, and navigated controversies and compromises arising from competing institutional interests. After extensive deliberations and public hearings, a clean, harmonised Bill was produced and submitted to the Senate President.
At no point in that process – none whatsoever – was there any proposal or agreement to transfer the constitutional power of police recruitment from the Police Service Commission to the Nigeria Police Force. Such a move would have been patently unconstitutional, and everyone in that room knew it.
Yet, to the shock of all of us involved, the version of the Police Act that was eventually assented to and gazetted contained a provision that purported to transfer police recruitment powers to the Nigeria Police Force.
This insertion occurred after the Bill had been passed by the National Assembly and transmitted to the President for assent.
The courts confirmed the fraud.
Unsurprisingly, the Police Service Commission challenged the provision in court. The court agreed. That section of the Nigeria Police Act was nullified and declared unconstitutional, affirming what we already knew: that the provision was a fraudulent insertion that violated both the Constitution and the legislative process.
That episode should have triggered serious institutional soul-searching. It did not.
The tax laws controversy: history repeating itself
Fast forward to 2025, and history appears to be repeating itself.
A serving member of the House of Representatives, Abdulsamad Dasuki, has now raised alarm that the tax reform laws signed by President Bola Tinubu and subsequently gazetted do not reflect what the National Assembly debated, harmonised, and approved.
According to Mr Dasuki, after personally reviewing the Votes and Proceedings of both chambers and comparing them with the gazetted laws sold to the public, he discovered material discrepancies. His words are chilling:
“What was passed on this floor is not what is gazetted… I’m seeing something completely different.”
This is not an allegation made by a civil society actor peering from the outside. It is a claim by a legislator who voted on the Bill, whose legislative privilege has been directly implicated, and who followed the paper trail.
This is not an administrative error.
Let us be clear: this is not a clerical mistake. It is not a formatting issue. It is not a typo.
If laws passed by Parliament can be altered between harmonisation, transmission, assent, and gazetting, then the sovereignty of the legislature is compromised, the assent of the President is tainted, and citizens are governed by laws they never consented to through their elected representatives.
That is a constitutional crisis.
Why this matters for democracy
Democracy does not end with elections. It rests on process integrity – especially legislative integrity. Once the legislative pipeline becomes porous to manipulation by unknown hands, the entire architecture of accountability collapses.
Worse still, such practices breed cynicism, weaken public trust, and normalise impunity at the highest levels of governance.
What must be done
The National Assembly must treat this matter with the gravity it deserves. A transparent, document-by-document comparison of what was debated, what was harmonised, what was transmitted for assent, and what was eventually gazetted must be undertaken in the open, not behind closed doors.
Those responsible for any unauthorised alterations must be identified and held accountable – administratively and criminally where appropriate.
A final warning
Nigeria cannot afford a system where laws are negotiated in Parliament but rewritten elsewhere. We have seen where that road leads. The Police Act episode was a warning. The tax laws controversy suggests that the warning was ignored.
If this practice is not decisively confronted, no law passed by the National Assembly will ever again be taken at face value.
And that would mark a dangerous descent from constitutional democracy into legislative anarchy.
Mr Okechukwu Nwanguma is the Executive Director, RULAAC
