House of Representative

The House of Representatives has come under intense criticism for reversing its decision on the removal of executive immunity for the Vice President, Governors, and Deputy Governors. Civil society organisations, including the Centre for Accountability and Open Leadership (CAOL) and the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), have faulted the reversal, arguing that it undermines accountability and the principle of equality before the law.

The initial bill, which had passed its second reading, sought to strip executive officeholders of immunity, making them subject to legal prosecution while in office. However, during a plenary session presided over by Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu, the House decided to revisit the legislation, citing the need for a more extensive debate.

“We want to apologise to the sponsors of the bills, but this action is to enable the House to have a further debate considering the importance of the subject matters,” Kalu stated.

Reacting to the development, CAOL Chairman Debo Adeniran criticised the bill’s initial proposal for targeting only the Vice President and Deputy Governors while leaving the President and Governors untouched. He argued that the reversal was predictable because the proposal did not apply to all executive office officeholders equally.

“For so long, we have campaigned that nobody in Nigeria should be above the law. The idea that someone can commit heinous crimes and avoid prosecution is unjust. If immunity is to be removed, it should be done wholesale, not selectively,” Adeniran asserted.

He further insisted that public officials must be held accountable even after leaving office. “No one should go scot-free after losing immunity. If an official was involved in criminal activities while in office, they should be investigated and prosecuted once they step down.”

Executive Director of CISLAC, Ibrahim Musa Rafsanjani, also condemned the immunity clause, describing it as a shield for corruption and abuse of power. He argued that such protections allow Nigerian leaders to govern recklessly, knowing they will not face legal consequences while in office.

“Immunity within the context of Nigeria’s reckless governance is dangerous for democracy and accountability. It allows presidents, vice presidents, governors, and their deputies to loot, abuse power, and even commit crimes without repercussions,” Rafsanjani stated.

He further noted that such privileges are rare in developed democracies and are mostly found in corrupt nations.  “Executive immunity should not be a tool for impunity. Public officeholders must be held accountable just like ordinary citizens,” he added.

Critics of the reversal have urged the National Assembly to reconsider its decision and ensure that all elected leaders are equally subject to the law. Many argue that maintaining immunity for top officials only fosters corruption and weakens public trust in governance.

While the House has promised a more extensive debate, stakeholders continue to push for reforms that promote transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.