CSOs Back Human Rights Defenders Bill, Seek Technical Changes At NASS Hearing

Civil society groups on Wednesday threw their weight behind the proposed Human Rights Defenders Bill before the House Committee on Human Rights, calling it a major legal step for civic protection in Nigeria.

Hope Behind Bars Africa, the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development and Accountability Lab presented a joint memorandum at the National Assembly in Abuja during a public hearing on the Human Rights Defenders Bill (HB 1867) and the National Human Rights Commission Bill, 2025 (HB 2376).

The organisations described HB 1867 as Nigeria’s first broad legislative effort focused specifically on protecting people who defend rights, including those who work outside formal institutions. Their submission, read by Hope Behind Bars Africa Executive Director and Founder, Oluwafunke Adeoye, commended the committee for an earlier technical review session held in December 2025, which the groups said showed commitment to improving the country’s protection framework.

While supporting the bill, the groups also asked lawmakers to make targeted drafting adjustments. They said discussions around Section 3 revealed concerns from some stakeholders over possible operational pressure on institutions and questions about practical implementation. To address that, they recommended that Section 21(2) should be expressly cross-referenced within Section 3 so that obligations are interpreted in context rather than as isolated duties.

According to the memorandum, that linkage would improve internal consistency, reduce legal ambiguity and reassure implementing agencies without changing the central intent of the bill. The groups said their proposal is a technical refinement intended to strengthen acceptance and execution, not a weakening of protections.

They also asked the committee to add clear timelines to key provisions, especially Sections 28, 32 and 33, which cover investigation processes, protection measures and assistance pathways for human rights defenders. In their view, time-bound obligations would improve accountability and reduce delays in urgent cases.

Another recommendation from the organisations was to include an illustrative but non-exhaustive list of who may qualify as a human rights defender, either in the definitions section or as a schedule. Suggested categories include human rights lawyers, investigative journalists, trade union leaders, student activists, digital rights advocates, whistleblowers, women’s rights defenders, environmental defenders, disability rights advocates, election observers, community organisers and traditional leaders resisting harmful practices.

The groups said that listing examples would make it clear that protection is based on function and risk exposure, not job title. They argued that this approach would help extend legal coverage to persons acting in both formal and informal settings, across urban and rural communities, and in digital as well as physical spaces.

Speaking after the hearing, Adeoye responded to criticism that the Constitution and existing statutes already provide sufficient safeguards. She said the proposed law remains necessary because many people carrying out rights-protection work still face threats and violations without specific legal cover tailored to their role.

Adeoye said the bill does more than define defenders. She said it identifies what form of protection should be available, clarifies responsible institutions and strengthens the mandate of the National Human Rights Commission in relation to defenders at risk. She added that groups such as journalists, whistleblowers, election observers, labour organisers and environmental advocates have often faced reprisals despite contributing to public accountability.

She said the bill should not be viewed as narrow civil society legislation. According to her, it also covers ordinary citizens, including market women, labour rights actors and local community defenders who intervene against abuse. She said the draft aligns with international practice in jurisdictions that have enacted specific laws for defenders.

House Speaker Rt. Hon. Abbas Tajudeen, who declared the hearing open, said the process reflects both constitutional and moral obligations of the legislature. He said protecting rights and dignity, strengthening rule of law and supporting good governance are central responsibilities of parliament.

Lawmakers are considering two connected proposals: one to establish and protect human rights defenders, and another to repeal and replace the National Human Rights Commission Act and its 2010 amendment. The second bill seeks stronger investigative powers, better financial integrity mechanisms and greater operational independence for the Commission in line with the UN Paris Principles.

Stakeholders at the hearing included representatives of the Federal Ministry of Justice, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Space for Change, Lawyers Alert, the Nigerian Bar Association, Tearfund, Partnership for Justice and Avocats Sans Frontières. Their contributions focused on improving the final drafting as HB 1867 moves through the National Assembly process.