By Atoyebi Nike
Former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Dr. Sam Amadi, has warned that the controversy surrounding Nigeria’s newly enacted tax laws raises serious constitutional and criminal concerns, including the possibility of forgery.
Speaking on Tuesday, Amadi said the issue goes beyond policy disagreement and strikes at the core of the country’s legislative process and democratic legitimacy.
“This is of serious dimension,” he said, describing the situation as a potential case of executive overreach and a breakdown of due legislative procedure.
According to Amadi, if the version of the tax law that was gazetted differs from what was actually passed by the National Assembly, there is prima facie evidence of forgery.
He explained that the Supreme Court has clearly defined forgery as the existence of an original document alongside a false version presented as authentic.
“If, as has been established, the gazetted version of the tax law is not exactly what the National Assembly passed, then whoever altered it and presented it as law has committed forgery,” Amadi said.
He outlined two possible scenarios arising from the dispute. The first, he said, is that the President may have assented to a version different from what was passed by both chambers of the National Assembly, which would invalidate the assent and mean that no valid law exists.
The second scenario, according to him, is that the President assented to the correct version, but the law was altered before being gazetted, an act that would amount to criminal forgery.
Amadi stressed that fiscal policy must be grounded in legality, warning that taxation without a valid legal framework undermines democracy and public trust.
“Fiscal policy is not just about revenue,” he said. “The minimum requirement for taxing citizens is that taxation must be based on valid law. Anything else damages democracy, legitimacy, and the social contract that supports taxation.”
He cautioned that enforcing taxes under a legally defective framework could result in court reversals, public resistance, and erosion of confidence in government institutions.
“Keeping the legal order proper is far more sensible for economic stability than cutting corners in the name of revenue,” Amadi concluded.
