Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has ignited a significant constitutional debate, declaring the Tinubu Tax Act validity to be a “constitutional nullity.” His pronouncement stems from an alleged fundamental discrepancy between the version of the tax legislation passed by Nigeria’s National Assembly and the subsequent iteration published in the official gazette. This challenge puts President Bola Tinubu’s flagship tax reforms under intense scrutiny, raising critical questions about the integrity of the nation’s lawmaking process and adherence to constitutional provisions. The controversy underscores the intricate legal and political landscape of Nigeria’s fiscal policy implementation.
Atiku Abubakar, speaking to journalists, firmly asserted that any law not enacted in the precise form approved by the legislative chambers “is not law” and therefore lacks legal force. He emphasized that the House of Representatives’ own confirmation of a divergence between the bill they passed and the published version presented a “grave constitutional issue.” Such a divergence, according to the former Vice President, renders the gazetted document entirely void, irrespective of its official appearance.
The former vice president meticulously referenced Section 58 of the Nigerian Constitution, which clearly delineates the stringent process for a bill to become law. This process mandates passage by both the Senate and the House of Representatives, followed by presidential assent, and only then administrative gazetting. Atiku stressed that gazetting serves merely as an act of publication, an administrative step that “does not create law, amend law, or cure illegality.” He argued that if a gazette misrepresents legislative approval, it inherently possesses no legal authority or force.
Why is Tinubu Tax Act invalid? A gazetted law is deemed invalid if it does not precisely reflect the version passed by both chambers of the National Assembly and subsequently receive presidential assent, as administrative publication cannot cure legislative defects. Such a divergence, particularly as alleged with the Nigeria Tax Act 2025, constitutes a constitutional nullity because the published document does not represent the will of the legislature, thereby lacking legal basis.
Atiku escalated his critique by describing any post-passage alteration of a bill without explicit legislative approval as “forgery,” rather than a mere clerical error. He unequivocally insisted that no administrative directive from the leadership of the National Assembly, whether from the Senate President or the Speaker, could legitimately validate such a profound defect. Furthermore, he maintained that a re-gazetting without a fresh legislative process, including re-passage and new presidential assent, would be legally indefensible and unconstitutional. This highlights the seriousness of the forged laws controversy Nigeria is currently grappling with.
The former vice president’s powerful intervention coincided with the National Assembly’s announcement of its own steps to authenticate the controversial tax laws, following intense public scrutiny and growing concerns. The legislature’s management, in a statement released over the weekend, confirmed that it had commenced an internal review of the processes leading to the enactment of four major fiscal statutes. This proactive measure aims to address the brewing storm around the foundational legal documents governing Nigeria’s taxation system, specifically concerning the Nigeria Tax Act 2025 controversy.
The four critical fiscal laws currently under the National Assembly’s internal review include 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 parliamentary inquiry was specifically prompted by extensive public debates surrounding the harmonisation of versions passed by both chambers, the precise texts that ultimately received presidential assent, and those subsequently published in the official gazette. This intricate review process seeks to clarify the legislative journey of these vital financial instruments.
As part of its immediate administrative measures to address the public’s concerns, the National Assembly has directed the Clerk to facilitate the prompt publication of the authentic Acts in the official gazette. Additionally, the Clerk is tasked with issuing certified true copies of the assented laws to relevant stakeholders and members of the public upon request. The National Assembly management, however, stressed that this exercise is purely administrative, intended to accurately reflect legislative decisions already taken, and does not concede any defect in the exercise of legislative authority by either chamber.
While appealing for calm and restraint from all parties involved, the National Assembly firmly reaffirmed its unwavering commitment to transparency, constitutionalism, and due process in its legislative functions. It insisted that any procedural refinements identified during the ongoing review would be addressed strictly in accordance with established parliamentary conventions and the extant laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This commitment is crucial for maintaining public trust and resolving the discrepancy in Nigeria Tax Act gazette effectively and legally.
Atiku Abubakar strongly warned against any attempts to hastily re-gazette the disputed laws while simultaneously stalling a thorough legislative investigation. He argued that such a move would severely undermine parliamentary oversight and establish a dangerous, anti-constitutional precedent for future lawmaking. The former vice president underscored that his position was not driven by opposition to tax reform itself, but rather by a steadfast defense of constitutionalism and the rule of law, asserting that “illegality cannot be cured by speed.”
The implication of this standoff extends beyond mere procedural technicalities, touching upon the very foundations of democratic governance and the separation of powers. A precedent where administrative actions can supersede or alter legislative intent could erode public confidence in the National Assembly’s authority and lead to a chaotic legal framework. Experts suggest that a failure to meticulously follow constitutional dictates in lawmaking could invite further legal challenges and political instability, impacting the nation’s economic planning and investor confidence.
The ongoing dispute over the Tinubu Tax Act validity represents a critical juncture for Nigeria’s legislative integrity and constitutional adherence. Atiku Abubakar’s unwavering call for fresh legislative consideration, re-passage in identical form by both chambers, fresh presidential assent, and proper gazetting highlights the urgency of resolving this impasse through lawful means. Both the former Vice President and the National Assembly leadership, despite their differing immediate approaches, appear to agree on the necessity of upholding constitutional principles to ensure that Nigeria’s laws are not only effective but also unimpeachably legitimate.
