An independent accountability organisation has defended the leadership of Nigeria’s National Assembly following the re-gazetting of the country’s recently enacted tax reform laws, describing the move as a routine administrative safeguard rather than evidence of legislative error or misconduct.
In a statement issued on Monday, the Centre for Accountability and Fiscal Responsibility (CAFR) said public criticism of the re-gazetting process reflected a misunderstanding of constitutional lawmaking procedures and the legal requirements that govern how Acts of parliament are formally authenticated.
The controversy centres on the re-publication of four major fiscal statutes passed in 2025: the Nigeria Tax Act 2025, the Nigeria Tax Administration Act 2025, the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act 2025, and the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act 2025. The laws form the backbone of Nigeria’s recent tax and revenue reforms and were passed by both chambers of the National Assembly of Nigeria before receiving presidential assent.
CAFR said the re-gazetting was carried out in line with the Acts Authentication Act, which requires the legislature to ensure that the version of any law sent for official publication accurately reflects the text approved by lawmakers and signed into law by the president. According to the group, this verification process is designed to prevent discrepancies between legislative records, assent documents and the final version that becomes legally enforceable.
“The re-gazetting exercise should be understood as a verification mechanism, not a confession of error,” said Dr Lawal Sadiq, national president of CAFR. “Authentication exists to ensure certainty and legal clarity, particularly for laws with far-reaching fiscal and economic consequences.”
He said the leadership of the National Assembly acted within its constitutional authority by initiating an internal review to confirm the accuracy and completeness of the legislation before final publication. CAFR argued that failing to carry out such checks could expose the government to avoidable legal challenges, especially in areas such as taxation, where even minor inconsistencies can have significant implications for enforcement and compliance.
The group stressed that the review process did not reopen debate on the substance of the tax reforms, amend policy decisions already taken by parliament, or encroach on the powers of the executive or judiciary. Instead, it said, the exercise was limited to administrative confirmation that the authenticated laws matched what had been duly passed and assented to by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
CAFR also rejected suggestions that the re-gazetting signalled confusion or weakness within the legislature. It said similar post-assent verification processes are common in established democracies, where parliaments routinely correct clerical inconsistencies or reissue authenticated copies of statutes to protect legal certainty.
“In mature legislative systems, accuracy is prioritised over haste,” Dr Sadiq said. “Credible laws depend not only on political agreement but on procedural integrity.”
The organisation warned that portraying administrative safeguards as political failures could erode public confidence in democratic institutions and blur the distinction between substantive policy disagreements and routine legislative practice. It urged stakeholders, including the media and civil society groups, to engage critically with the reforms while recognising the importance of due process in lawmaking.
According to CAFR, the re-gazetting ultimately strengthens the legal foundation of the tax reforms by ensuring that courts, businesses and citizens rely on texts that are precise and authoritative. The group said this clarity would be essential as Nigeria moves to implement the new tax framework in 2026, when the reforms are expected to take full effect.
