Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Taiwo Oyedele, has said that President Bola Tinubu does not have the powers to halt the implementation of the tax laws already passed and gazetted.

He said this in reaction to calls for the suspension of the tax laws, following the allegations that have trailed them, while appearing on Arise TV programme yesterday, said: “Suspending or putting it on hold, what does it mean? Some people calling for the suspension have never asked who is supposed to do the suspension.

“The President has no powers, the executive has no powers to suspend it, that is the first point. The second point is that there are four tax laws, two commenced immediately. The Nigeria Revenue Service, has already commenced. So, these laws repealed the FIRS Act, we no longer have the FIRS Act, we now have the NIRS, so how do you suspend this, does it mean we will no longer have any revenue service?

“Is there a way somebody will say that in the last six months, we have had an illegal NIRS? The monies paid to them, we should collect and refund back. I feel if we wait for the outcome of their (House of Reps) review, whatever that is established, if we establish that parts of the alteration were there, we remove them. If you suspend the FIRS for one month, that is crisis.”

But senior members of the Nigerian Bar, many of them of the rank of Senior Advocates of Nigeria, SANs, disagree, and advanced reasons the Federal Government should not proceed with plans to commence enforcement of new tax laws from January 1, 2026.

In separate reactions, the senior lawyers insisted that it would amount to an affront to the rule of law for such enforcement to begin, despite alleged post-passage alterations to the legislations.

They argued that a law that was duly passed by the National Assembly and officially gazetted, could not be enforced if it is found to contain illegal alterations.

Lawyers disagree

It was their position that since the alterations were not done by the legislative arm of the government, it rendered the gazetted law unconstitutional, void and unenforceable.

In a blunt reaction, Mr. Mohammed Abeny, SAN, described Oyedele’s remarks as “reckless talk and disregard to rule of law in governance.”

On his part, Chief J. K. Gadzama, SAN, argued that the discrepancies between the version of the tax laws passed by the National Assembly and the official gazetted copy, “created a serious constitutional and legal crisis.”

Arguing that there was a constitutional violation, Chief Gadzama said: “Section 58 of the 1999 Constitution lays out the precise process for how a bill becomes law. It states that once the President gives assent (or the National Assembly overrides a veto), the Clerk of the National Assembly shall cause the Act to be published in the Official Gazette.

“The gazetted version is the definitive, authentic text of the law. If the gazetted version differs from the one passed, it means the constitutional process has been breached. The ‘law’ in the public domain is not the law as legitimately made.”

Continuing, he contended that the development has created a legal uncertainty that touches on the validity of the new law.

“Which version is the true law? Citizens, businesses, and the judiciary cannot know with certainty what the law says. This undermines the rule of law and the principle that laws must be accessible and predictable.

“A court could declare the gazetted version (or parts of it) invalid or null and void if it is proven to be materially different from the version passed. This would create a legal vacuum for tax matters the law intended to address.”

More so, the learned silk stressed that the situation posed challenges to enforcement and compliance.

“The Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, or other tax authorities cannot reliably enforce the law. Any attempt to apply provisions that exist only in the gazetted version (but not in the passed version) would be legally challengeable.

“Tax-payers facing liabilities or penalties under the discrepant provisions could seek injunctions or challenge the law in court, leading to a flood of litigation and a freeze on the law’s implementation.

“This reveals a major failure in the legislative process—either within the National Assembly’s record-keeping, the Clerk’s office, or the Government Printer (Federal Ministry of Justice’s Gazette office). It erodes public confidence in the institutions of government.

“The House of Representatives’ discovery points to the need for a probe. Was the discrepancy a clerical error, or was it a deliberate alteration (a serious criminal act)? The Constitution does not envisage any authority altering a law after passage and before gazetting.”

Remedial actions

Gadzama, therefore, suggested remedial actions he said could entail the immediate suspension of planned enforcement of the law. He said, “The Attorney-General of the Federation may advise that implementation of the discrepant provisions be suspended until rectified.

“The most straightforward legal remedy is for the National Assembly to pass a new ‘Correction Bill’ or an amendment act that explicitly adopts the intended correct version. This new bill would then go through assent and proper gazetting.

“An affected person or the National Assembly itself could seek a judicial interpretation or declaration from the Federal High Court or Supreme Court on the validity of the law and the correct version.”

Past experience

Going down memory lane, the senior lawyer recalled that such incidents occurred in the past.

“Similar issues have arisen in the past (e.g., with the Electoral Act and other statutes). Courts have consistently held that the authentic law is the one passed by the legislature and assented to, not an incorrectly published version.

In Attorney-General of the Federation v. Guardian Newspapers Ltd (1999), the Supreme Court emphasized the supremacy of the constitutionally-passed version.

“This is not a mere administrative error; it is a fundamental flaw that strikes at the heart of legislative due process.

Until resolved, the Tax Reform Law’s legal force is in jeopardy. The National Assembly must act swiftly — either through a corrective legislative action or by collaborating with the Executive to withdraw and re-gazette the correct version — to avert prolonged legal chaos in Nigeria’s tax regime,” he added.

Oyedele’s right — Akinlaja

Reacting to Oyedele’s declaration, Mr. Dayo Akinlaja, SAN, said: “He is legally correct. Rightly or wrongly, the law has been gazetted with a commencement date prescribed.

“Only a court action can stop its operation as legislated at this time. Of course, it is within the constitutional powers of the legislature to amend or repeal the Act if so found necessary. Shorn of these two possibilities, the Act will operate as it is, regardless of its seeming moral blight.”

Earlier, the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, in a statement by its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, maintained that controversies surrounding the tax reform law had cast doubt on the sanctity of the country’s law-making process.

NBA, which is the umbrella body of lawyers in the country, added that the controversies struck “at the very heart of constitutional governance and call into question the procedural sanctity that must attend lawmaking in a democratic society.”

It said: “The Nigerian Bar Association considers it imperative that a comprehensive, open, and transparent investigation be conducted to clarify the circumstances surrounding the enactment of the laws and to restore public confidence in the legislative process. Until these issues are fully examined and resolved, all plans for the implementation of the Tax Reform Acts should be immediately suspended.

“Legal and policy uncertainty of this magnitude have far-reaching consequences.

It unsettles the business environment, erodes investor confidence, and creates unpredictability for individuals, businesses, and institutions required to comply with the law. Such uncertainty is inimical to economic stability and should have no place in a system governed by the rule of law.”

President can’t suspend law he assented to — Aladetola

However, Dr. Opeyemi Aladetola, a lawyer, said: “The President cannot suspend any law which he has given assent to. Even with all the allegations and controversies surrounding the law, once it has been given assent to, the President himself cannot turn around to suspend the law. It is the National Assembly that can make amendments thereafter if what they passed is not the same with what the president assented to.”

NLC calls for total rejection distorted tax law

In like manner, the Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC, has called for total rejection of any distorted or falsified tax law, saying: “it is better to patiently craft a law that is broadly co-created and owned than rush into one filled with serious errors and outright political manipulations.

In a statement titled: “Our hope lies in collective action”, President of NLC, Joe Ajaero, said: “Together, in this season and beyond, we must insist on Tax Justice where the rich pay their fair share and all forms of regressive taxation are removed. It is therefore our responsibility to once again remind government that any tax system that does not include workers in its formulation and passage into Law remains an unjust tax.

“Any tax system that is mired in apparent distortion and outright falsification is unacceptable and should therefore be rejected by all. It is better to patiently craft a law that is broadly co-created and owned than rush into one filled with serious errors and outright political manipulations.

“We must insist on social justice where all citizens have access to dignity, good healthcare, and quality education; greater equity for workers where labour is justly rewarded and rights are respected and in, fact a safe and secure nation where lives and properties are guaranteed and the people move about their businesses without fear and intimidations.”

Don’t insist on Jan 1 – Ndume begs Tinubu

Meanwhile, former Senate Leader, Ali Ndume, urged President Tinubu to take steps to resolve the controversy surrounding the new Tax Act before its implementation.

In a statement, yesterday, Ndume appealed to the President to shelve the January 1 implementation date to allow for a thorough investigation into claims and counter-claims over alleged alterations to the tax laws.

He gave the advice amid calls by politicians, civil society organisations, and the NBA for the suspension of the Act.

In his appeal, Ndume urged President Tinubu to constitute an ad-hoc team to investigate the allegations, saying that proceeding with implementation without resolving the issue will create legitimacy challenges for the tax laws.

His words: “As a responsive leader that he has always been, he should look at it to find out, if the copy that was signed, whether the claim of alterations was genuine so that he will do the needful to bring the controversy to rest. If not, the controversy will continue. That is to say the tax law will not be implemented, because you can’t build on nothing.

“So, Mr. President should suspend implementation until the issues are resolved because so many civil society organisations, the Arewa Community, the Nigerian Bar Association are saying that he should withdraw the Tax Law and investigate the allegation of forgery.

“Therefore, Mr. President should get to the root of the allegation of forgery. The small committee that will be set up should look into it while the House of Representatives does its own.”

House promises speedy probe

However, the House of Representatives Ad-Hoc Committee investigating alleged discrepancies in the gazetted Tax Reform Acts has resolved to conclude its assignment and submit its report to the House within the shortest possible time.

Speaker of the House, Tajudeen Abbas, during plenary, last week, set up a seven-man ad-hoc committee to investigate allegations of discrepancies between the tax bills passed by the National Assembly and the versions subsequently assented and gazetted.

The concern was raised by Rep. Abdulsammad Dasuki (PDP, Sokoto), as a matter of privilege on the floor of the House, alleging discrepancies between the tax laws passed by the National Assembly and the versions subsequently gazetted and made available to the public.

Rising under Order Six, Rule Two of the House Rules on a Point of Privilege, Rep. Dasuki told the House that his legislative privilege had been breached, insisting that the content of the tax laws as gazetted did not reflect what lawmakers debated, voted on and passed on the floor of the House.

According to him, after passage of the tax bills, he took time for three days to carefully review the gazetted copies alongside the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Representatives, as well as the harmonised version adopted by both chambers of the National Assembly, but observed discrepancies.

The committee, chaired by Muktar Aliyu Betara, met for the first time on Tuesday, December 23, 2025, to deliberate on the matter.

During the meeting, members resolved to conclude the investigation and report back to the House within the shortest time for legislative integrity, due process, and public confidence in the lawmaking process.

“The House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee to Investigate Allegations of Discrepancies in the gazetted copies of the Tax Acts passed by the National Assembly met on Tuesday 23rd December, 2025 to deliberate on the Privilege Matter on the alleged discrepancies in the Tax Reform Acts as passed by National Assembly. The Ad-hoc Committee resolved to conclude the investigation and report back to the House within the shortest time,” the committee said.

Reaffirming its commitment to transparency and thoroughness, the committee chairman assured that its findings and recommendations would be presented promptly to the House upon conclusion of the investigation.

“The Ad-hoc Committee was constituted to ensure clarity, accuracy, and full conformity between legislation duly passed by the National Assembly and the gazetted tax reforms in line with constitutional provisions and established legislative standards,’ Betara said

Other members of the committee include former Deputy Speaker, Ahmed Wase, Sada Soli, James Faleke, Fred Agbedi, Babajimi Benson and Iduma Igariwey.

Alteration a bad precedence, criminal — Yiaga Africa

Speaking on the issue, Yiaga Africa, yesterday, described alleged alteration of the tax laws as setting a bad precedence and criminal.

In a chat with Vanguard, Executive Director, Yiaga Africa, Samson Itodo, said the alleged action is a breach of the Constitution, and criminal.

He said: “I think that this entire episode is very concerning and is disturbing, and it is a breach of the Constitution after the National Assembly considered and passed a legislation, and the executive is alleged to have mutilated the legislation passed by the National Assembly, it’s criminal and it amounts to usurping constitutional powers of the National Assembly.

“It is a very bad precedence. How can the National Assembly pass a legislation and then the executive, all they need to do is to assent? The President only has assenting powers.

“He has no power whatsoever to alter a legislation already passed by the body that is a representative of the people saddled with the responsibility of lawmaking. So, it is illegal, it is criminal for that to happen.”

He also called on security agencies to swing into action and investigate the allegation levelled against the executive.

“It calls for thorough investigation and the security agencies need to prosecute anyone who actually mutilated or performed this illegality and criminality because it is short-changing the Nigerian people when their representatives pass the legislation and then somehow the version gazetted is at variance with what the National Assembly passed, especially when some of the provisions that were deleted or inserted border on accountability and transparency,” he stated. (Vanguard)

Update news