The Federal Government’s review of more than 900 federal enactments is a significant step towards making Nigeria’s legal framework more orderly, relevant and accessible. But the exercise’s real value will not be measured by the number of outdated laws it identifies or the size of the volumes it produces. The real test is whether Nigeria can build a legal system that keeps pace with a changing society.
This review is long overdue. More than two decades have passed without an official consolidation of the Laws of the Federation. The Federal Government has now completed a comprehensive review of federal legislation, identifying hundreds of enactments that are obsolete, spent or repealed.
The numbers are substantial. The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), said the committee examined 932 federal enactments and 731 subsidiary legislations. Of the principal enactments reviewed, 664 are proposed for inclusion in the 2025 Laws of the Federation, while 268 were found to be obsolete, spent or repealed.
This is about more than tidying up the statute books. It draws attention to a deeper weakness in Nigeria’s governance: a country cannot respond effectively to present-day realities using laws that have not been regularly reviewed to account for changing institutions, economic conditions and technology.
Laws are not monuments to be preserved simply because they were passed. They are tools for regulating conduct, protecting rights, assigning responsibilities and supporting the orderly functioning of society. When they become outdated, contradictory or irrelevant, they can undermine the very goals they were meant to serve.
The proposed 2025 consolidation offers a chance to address a longstanding weakness in Nigeria’s legislative administration.
Twenty years of legislative accumulation
The last official consolidation of Nigeria’s federal laws took place in 2004. Since then, the country has changed in almost every area of national life.
The Constitution has evolved, public institutions have been created and restructured, new industries have emerged, digital technology has expanded, and new laws have been introduced to address challenges that were either unfamiliar or less prominent at the time of the previous consolidation.
Despite these changes, Nigeria went more than 20 years without a comprehensive official consolidation of its federal laws.
That gap raises an important question: how can citizens, businesses, government institutions, legal practitioners and policymakers confidently navigate the legal system when determining the current status of a law means searching through amendments, repeals, subsidiary instruments and other enactments scattered across different sources?
This is more than an academic concern. Uncertainty about whether a law is still in force can have real consequences. It can complicate legal proceedings, cause confusion in government administration, raise compliance costs and expose individuals and organisations to disputes that might otherwise have been avoided.
An outdated reference may lead someone to rely on a law that has already been repealed. And when amendments are hard to find, people may apply provisions that no longer reflect the National Assembly’s intent.
These problems are especially serious in a country where access to reliable legal information is already uneven.
That is why the decision to undertake a new consolidation deserves recognition as an important institutional step. But the bigger question is whether Nigeria can move beyond occasional clean-up exercises and maintain its laws continuously.
The danger of laws that have outlived their usefulness
One of the committee’s key findings is that 268 enactments are considered obsolete, spent or repealed.
This finding draws attention to a frequently overlooked aspect of lawmaking: legislation does not necessarily remain useful forever.
Some laws become redundant when the circumstances that led to their enactment no longer exist. Others are superseded by later legislation, while some lose their practical relevance after the institutions or administrative structures they govern have been abolished or significantly changed.
Other laws remain technically in force but are no longer suited to contemporary needs.
Leaving such legislation among the active body of federal laws without clearly stating its status can create needless complications. It may lead to conflicting interpretations, perpetuate inconsistencies in administration and make the legal framework harder to navigate.
Even so, obsolete laws must be addressed carefully. Identifying an enactment as obsolete for consolidation purposes is not the same as formally repealing it, and that distinction matters.
The legal status of each enactment must be determined through the proper constitutional and legislative procedures. Consolidation should not be used to bypass legislative authority in the name of administrative convenience.
This is especially important because the committee’s work is expected to undergo executive consideration and legislative action before the revised edition can acquire the necessary legal authority.
The National Assembly must therefore give the exercise the attention it warrants and ensure that the proposed consolidation accurately reflects the country’s existing legal position.
Beyond counting statutes: The quality of the legal framework matters
Perhaps one of the most important parts of the committee’s work is that its mandate went beyond simply compiling existing laws.
As its chairman, Olawale Fapohunda (SAN), explained, the committee reviewed whether federal enactments remain relevant and in force, identified conflicting provisions, and considered areas that may need further legislative attention.
This approach is essential.
A country does not necessarily strengthen its legal system by adding or removing statutes. What matters is whether its laws are clear, consistent, accessible, enforceable and responsive to society’s needs.
Nigeria has seen cases where different laws appear to overlap, creating uncertainty about the responsibilities of government institutions and the rights and obligations of citizens.
These inconsistencies can be especially troublesome when ministries, departments and agencies operate under enabling laws that have not been properly aligned with later legislation.
Overlapping responsibilities can fuel bureaucratic rivalry. Contradictory provisions can make enforcement difficult. And when laws are unnecessarily complex, ordinary citizens may struggle to understand the rules that govern them.
The committee’s focus on these problems is therefore significant.
Its recommendation that the Attorney General issue an advisory note to ministries, departments and agencies on how to review their enabling and subsidiary legislation is particularly relevant.
Government institutions must recognise that passing a law is not the end of the legislative process. Laws need regular review to ensure they remain fit for purpose and to identify gaps revealed through implementation.
Legislative quality should be an ongoing institutional responsibility, not an occasional administrative concern.
The absurdity of outdated statutory fines
Among the concerns raised by Fapohunda, one deserves particular attention: statutory fines and fees that no longer reflect today’s economic realities.
Some penalties, he noted, are still as low as N10 or N50.
This is more than a minor drafting issue. It raises a fundamental question about whether the law can still meet its regulatory and deterrent aims.
Financial penalties should bear a reasonable relationship to the economic conditions in which they apply. When fines remain unchanged for decades as inflation erodes the value of money, they gradually lose their practical force.
A penalty that once carried a meaningful financial consequence can eventually become little more than a token charge.
The effects reach beyond deterrence. Outdated fees can weaken the financial basis of regulatory systems, create inconsistencies between public institutions and leave statutory provisions out of step with current economic conditions.
But simply raising all fines would not be enough.
Any review of statutory penalties should account for proportionality, the nature of the offence, the circumstances of those affected and the broader aims of the legislation. Penalties should discourage wrongdoing without becoming arbitrary or placing unreasonable burdens on citizens and businesses.
There should also be a process for reviewing fines regularly, so they do not become outdated again as economic conditions change.
The National Assembly has an opportunity to make a meaningful contribution in this area as it considers the proposed revised laws and any necessary consequential amendments.
Technology must become part of the administration of law
Another key takeaway from the exercise is how technology can strengthen legislative administration.
Fapohunda said the committee used cloud-based document management systems, shared workspaces and virtual meetings to coordinate its work.
These tools made it easier for committee members and technical teams in different locations to collaborate.
Their use shows how digital infrastructure can make government assignments more efficient, particularly when they would otherwise depend on extensive in-person coordination and manual documentation.
Still, the greatest opportunity for technology lies beyond the committee’s day-to-day work.
Nigeria needs a central, authoritative digital repository of federal legislation that is kept up to date.
Such a platform would give lawyers, judges, researchers, students, public officials, businesses and ordinary citizens easy access to current federal laws, without forcing them to rely on fragmented or unreliable sources.
Ideally, the repository would offer more than downloadable copies of statutes. It should include original enactments, later amendments, repeal information, subsidiary legislation, commencement dates and relevant legislative histories.
Users should be able to check whether a provision is still in force, find out which legislation amended it and see how principal Acts relate to their subsidiary instruments.
This would make federal legislation more transparent and ease the challenge of determining what the law currently says.
More importantly, authoritative legal information should not be a privilege reserved for people who can afford expensive legal databases.
Whether a citizen wants to understand a statutory obligation, a small business needs to meet regulatory requirements, or a journalist is investigating government conduct, everyone should be able to find the applicable law without unnecessary difficulty.
The proposed repository should therefore be open to the public, searchable and properly maintained, with clear editorial and verification procedures.
The National Assembly must play its part
The presentation of the committee’s final report to the Attorney General marks an important milestone, but it does not bring the process to a close.
Fagbemi has said the report will be presented to President Bola Tinubu, who will then send it to the National Assembly for legislative consideration and action.
At this stage, the work needs sustained attention from the relevant institutions.
The Executive and Legislature each have a role to play in ensuring that the revised laws accurately reflect the current legal framework and that any proposed changes follow constitutional procedures.
The National Assembly must carefully review the proposed consolidation, especially where the classification of enactments, the treatment of subsidiary legislation or the identification of inconsistencies could affect existing rights and obligations.
Simply compiling statutes should not be assumed to resolve every legislative problem.
Some issues identified by the committee may call for new legislation. Others may require amendments to existing Acts, while certain inconsistencies could warrant further consultation with relevant ministries and regulatory bodies.
The legislative process should clearly distinguish between consolidating existing law and making substantive changes to what the law should be.
That distinction is essential to protect the integrity of the exercise.
It is also important to ensure the process does not turn into another drawn-out administrative exercise. The country has already waited more than 20 years for a comprehensive consolidation. Any further delays that could be avoided would undermine the initiative’s purpose.
The responsibility of ministries and government agencies
The committee’s recommendation to issue an advisory note to ministries, departments and agencies deserves particular attention. The challenge of outdated legislation does not begin and end with the Attorney General’s office.
Government agencies administer laws that establish their powers, define their responsibilities and govern their operations. They are therefore well placed to identify practical problems, including outdated provisions, conflicting statutory mandates, obsolete administrative procedures and inadequate subsidiary legislation.
Yet when responsibility for keeping legislation up to date is unclear or weak, these problems can go unresolved for years.
Each ministry and agency should have a clear process for monitoring developments that affect its enabling legislation. This should include regular legal reviews, accurate records of amendments, scrutiny of subsidiary legislation and consultation with relevant stakeholders before new regulatory instruments are introduced.
The Attorney General’s office should provide central coordination, technical guidance and quality control. Individual institutions, in turn, should take responsibility for maintaining the legal frameworks that govern their work.
This approach would help prevent the drafting deficiencies identified by the committee from recurring. It would also promote greater care in preparing regulations, orders, rules and other subsidiary instruments.
The case for permanent legal reform
The most important recommendation to emerge from this exercise may be to establish a structured, ongoing process for revising laws.
It’s a reform Nigeria cannot afford to ignore.
We should not have to wait another 20 years to discover that hundreds of the laws of our land are outdated, inconsistent or out of step with present-day realities.
Legislation is constantly changing. New Acts are passed, existing laws are amended, institutions are created or dissolved, and regulations are introduced to address emerging challenges.
A legal system that relies on occasional, large-scale consolidation will always struggle to keep pace.
What Nigeria needs is a permanent system for monitoring and updating legislation, backed by adequate funding, technical expertise and clearly assigned responsibilities.
The government could introduce a regular review cycle, led by relevant law reform bodies and the Federal Ministry of Justice. Annual reports could track new laws, amendments, repeals and unresolved inconsistencies.
The proposed digital repository should be part of this system, allowing verified updates to be reflected promptly.
The goal is straightforward: no federal law should become hard to find simply because the government has failed to maintain an authoritative record of its current status.
This approach would also make future consolidation exercises less costly and demanding. Instead of reconstructing two decades of legislative changes all at once, government institutions could keep accurate records as those changes happen.
That is the difference between treating legal reform as a one-off project and recognising it as an essential part of democratic governance.
A national investment in legal certainty
The committee reportedly worked through 14 thematic groups, with technical teams handling collation, drafting, quality assurance, oversight and editorial review.
It also drew on support from development partners and institutions, including the ROLAC Programme, the Law Commission of England and Wales, LexisNexis South Africa, the Lagos State Law Reform Commission and Law Pavilion.
Their contributions show how valuable technical cooperation can be when addressing complex institutional challenges.
But Nigeria must ensure the knowledge and expertise built up during this exercise are not lost once the final report is submitted.
The 20 proposed volumes of the Laws of the Federation 2025 should be a starting point for continued institutional development, not simply a publication milestone.
Responsibility for maintaining the revised edition must be clearly assigned. That includes correcting identified errors, incorporating later amendments and keeping the official legal record reliable.
An updated legal framework can bring wide-ranging benefits.
For the judiciary, it can make legal research easier and reduce uncertainty about which statutory provisions apply.
For businesses and investors, it can make regulations more predictable and compliance simpler.
For public institutions, it can clarify statutory responsibilities and help prevent administrative conflicts.
For citizens, it can make information about their rights and obligations easier to access.
And for the country as a whole, it can build confidence in the institutions that make, interpret and enforce the law.
Conclusion: A beginning, not a destination
The Federal Government’s review of 932 enactments and 731 subsidiary legislations is a major undertaking. Identifying 268 obsolete, spent or repealed enactments and preparing 20 proposed volumes mark an important step in Nigeria’s effort to modernise its federal legal framework.
But the exercise’s significance cannot be measured simply by the number of laws reviewed, the volume of material produced or the completion of the committee’s work.
Its real value depends on what happens next.
Will the National Assembly give the report the attention it needs? Will government institutions review outdated enabling laws? Will obsolete statutory penalties be examined and revised where appropriate? Will Nigeria create a dependable digital repository? Most importantly, will the country put a lasting system in place to keep its laws up to date?
These are the questions that should guide the next stage.
The law must keep pace with the society it governs. It cannot remain effective if its language, penalties, institutional assumptions and administrative provisions drift too far from present-day realities.
For more than two decades, Nigeria has accumulated legislative changes without a comprehensive, official consolidation. This exercise offers a chance to address that shortcoming and build a more reliable foundation for the future.
The country must not let that opportunity pass.
A modern state needs more than an impressive collection of statutes. Its laws must be relevant, clear, accessible and regularly maintained. It also needs institutions that recognise legal reform is never truly finished.
The publication of the Laws of the Federation 2025 should not be seen as the end of a long-overdue task. It should mark the start of a lasting commitment to legislative accountability, legal clarity and ongoing reform.
