The Abuja Coalition of Civil Society Organisations has called for an independent investigation into alleged foreign interests behind the proposed Nutritionists Registration Council of Nigeria Bill, 2025, sponsored by Hon. Chike John Okafor.

In a statement signed by its leader, Comrade Amina Mohammed, and dated October 24, 2026, the coalition said allegations of possible backing by interests in Europe and the United States remained unverified but warranted transparent scrutiny of the bill’s funding, sponsorship and institutional relationships.

The coalition said the controversy raised broader concerns about Nigeria’s food sovereignty, indigenous agricultural heritage and the right of citizens to determine their own food systems.

It warned that establishing a powerful regulatory council without adequate safeguards could marginalise indigenous nutritional knowledge and create opportunities for commercial interests to influence national food policies.

The group acknowledged that the allegations did not establish foreign interference in the bill but insisted that any links between its promoters and international biotechnology, agricultural or food industry interests should be disclosed and examined.

It also sought clarification on who participated in drafting and promoting the legislation, who funded or advised the process, and what safeguards would prevent external or commercial interests from influencing the proposed council.

The coalition cited Nigeria’s approval of genetically modified crops as part of the wider public debate over biosafety, biodiversity, seed ownership and farmers’ independence.

It stressed, however, that this context did not in itself establish foreign involvement in the proposed legislation.

On indigenous knowledge, the coalition expressed concern that the bill’s registration requirements and penalties could create uncertainty for traditional and community-based nutritional practices if the boundaries of regulated professional practice were not clearly defined.

It noted that generations of Nigerians had preserved knowledge of indigenous crops, food preparation, fermentation and traditional diets, arguing that such knowledge deserved scientific evaluation where appropriate rather than indiscriminate exclusion or criminalisation.

The coalition maintained that professional regulation should not become a means of monopolising knowledge passed down through communities.

While affirming its support for scientific nutrition and reasonable professional regulation, it said these objectives must not undermine Nigeria’s cultural heritage, farmers’ livelihoods or national independence.

The group outlined six key demands: withdrawal of the bill pending a comprehensive review; an independent investigation into the allegations of foreign involvement, with findings made public; full disclosure of the bill’s funding, consultations and institutional contributors; safeguards against conflicts of interest and external influence on national nutritional policies; legal protection for indigenous food knowledge and traditional practices; and meaningful participation by farmers, independent scientists, public health experts, consumers and civil society in any future legislative process.

The coalition urged the National Assembly to suspend further consideration of the bill until the concerns had been transparently addressed through an independent inquiry and comprehensive public consultation.

It comprises the Transparency Initiative for Good Governance, the African Centre for Cultural Rights, and the Good Governance and Civil Rights Institute.

The statement concluded that Nigerians must retain the right to determine what they grow, produce and eat, stressing that the country’s food sovereignty and indigenous heritage should be protected from undisclosed commercial interests.