By Rita Enemuru, Reporting
CIVIL society organisations and the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development have thrown their weight behind the proposed Human Rights Defenders Bill (HB 1867), declaring at a National Assembly hearing in Abuja that anyone who stands up for fundamental rights in Nigeria must be legally protected.
At the public hearing organised by the House of Representatives Committee on Human Rights, Hope Behind Bars Africa (HBBA), the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID), and Accountability Lab described the bill as long overdue and essential for safeguarding civic space.
In a joint memorandum presented at the session, the organisations characterised the proposed legislation as Nigeria’s first comprehensive attempt to specifically recognise and protect human rights defenders (HRDs). The document was signed by the three groups and delivered by the Executive Director and Founder of Hope Behind Bars Africa, Oluwafunke Adeoye.
The groups commended the committee for convening a technical review meeting in December 2025, describing it as a demonstration of commitment to strengthening legal protections for defenders. However, while expressing strong support for the bill, they raised technical observations aimed at improving clarity and implementation.
One of their key recommendations focused on Section 3 of the bill, which had generated concerns over possible operational burdens on state institutions. To address this, the organisations proposed that Section 21(2) be formally cross-referenced within Section 3 to enhance internal coherence and clarify that the obligations outlined are neither excessive nor standalone.
According to the memorandum, such an adjustment would not alter the substance of the bill but would strengthen its structural consistency, reduce interpretative ambiguity and encourage institutional buy-in.
The organisations also urged lawmakers to introduce clear timelines in Sections 28, 32 and 33, which address investigation procedures, protection measures and assistance for human rights defenders. They argued that defined timelines would enhance accountability and ensure timely responses when defenders face threats or violations.
In addition, the civil society groups called for the inclusion of an illustrative, though non-exhaustive, list of individuals who qualify as human rights defenders. Suggested categories included human rights lawyers, investigative journalists, whistleblowers, trade union leaders, student activists, digital rights advocates, women’s rights campaigners, environmental defenders, disability rights advocates, election observers, community organisers and traditional leaders opposing harmful practices.
They explained that such clarification would reinforce the principle that protection under the law should be function-based rather than profession-based, extending to individuals working formally or informally, in both rural and urban communities, and across digital and physical spaces.
Speaking with journalists after the hearing, Adeoye dismissed concerns from some stakeholders who argued that existing provisions in the 1999 Constitution already guarantee sufficient protection for citizens.
She maintained that the proposed legislation goes beyond general constitutional guarantees by clearly defining who qualifies as a human rights defender, outlining the nature of protection to be provided, identifying responsible institutions and strengthening the mandate of the National Human Rights Commission.
“Over the years, individuals functioning as human rights defenders have suffered violations without specific legal safeguards,” she said, citing journalists, whistleblowers, election observers and environmental rights advocates as examples of those frequently exposed to risk.
Adeoye emphasised that the bill is inclusive and not limited to established civil society organisations. According to her, ordinary citizens — including market women, labour activists and community-based environmental advocates — would also benefit from its protections.
“I don’t think this is a bill that should scare anybody,” she said. “It is designed to protect anyone who seeks to defend human rights.”
Declaring the hearing open, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Abbas Tajudeen, described the exercise as both a moral responsibility and a constitutional obligation.
“This hearing is not merely procedural,” he said. “It is a critical aspect of our duty to uphold fundamental freedoms, protect citizens’ dignity, strengthen the rule of law and promote good governance.”
The Human Rights Defenders Bill seeks to formally recognise and protect defenders while enhancing the Federal Government’s capacity to safeguard them. A related bill under consideration would repeal the existing National Human Rights Commission Act and its 2010 amendment to establish a stronger legal framework for the Commission, in line with the Paris Principles adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.
Stakeholders present 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, among others.
The Human Rights Defenders Bill (HB 1867) remains under consideration by the National Assembly.
What's your reaction?
