The House of Representatives has voiced strong opposition to a motion introduced in the United States Senate that seeks to designate Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” over alleged violations of religious freedom.
Lawmakers warned that such a designation could misrepresent Nigeria’s complex security situation, strain diplomatic ties, and infringe on its national sovereignty.
This position was the outcome of a unanimous vote on a motion titled, “Urgent Need for a Coordinated Diplomatic and Domestic Response to the Proposed Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025 (U.S. Senate Motion S.2747) and to Mischaracterisations of Nigeria’s Security and Religious Freedom Landscape”.
The motion, co-sponsored by Deputy Speaker Hon. Benjamin Kalu and several lawmakers, was adopted during plenary on Tuesday.
The U.S. Senate motion, introduced on September 9, 2025, urges the Secretary of State to designate Nigeria as a CPC and impose sanctions on selected Nigerian officials under Executive Order 13818 (Global Magnitsky Act) and other U.S. legal frameworks. The proposal follows repeated calls by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which has cited Nigeria for widespread abuses and government inaction in addressing violence by non-state actors, according to Independent.
However, Hon. Kalu, with widespread support from the chamber, dismissed the allegations as inaccurate and overly simplistic portrayals of Nigeria’s security and religious dynamics.
“Our challenges are multifaceted and cannot be reduced to religious intolerance,” the motion stated. “They include terrorism, insurgency, organised criminality, farmer-herder clashes, separatist movements, and communal violence — all of which cut across religious and ethnic lines.”
He highlighted constitutional protections under the 1999 Constitution that guarantee freedom of religion, prohibit any state religion, and ensure every citizen’s right to practice and propagate their faith. Kalu further referenced the 2023 U.S. State Department human rights report, which acknowledged Nigeria’s continued efforts—by successive governments, security forces, religious leaders, and civil society—to promote religious tolerance and prosecute violations.
Lawmakers expressed concern that foreign legislation based on inaccurate or incomplete data could embolden violent extremists, destabilise national security, and endanger diplomatic progress. They reaffirmed Nigeria’s longstanding cooperation with the U.S. in key areas such as counterterrorism, democracy promotion, interfaith dialogue, and peacebuilding, and urged U.S. policymakers to adopt a more balanced, evidence-driven approach.
Following a lengthy debate, the House adopted several resolutions in response. These included a formal condemnation of religious persecution, rejection of any narrative portraying Nigeria’s security crises as state-driven religious conflict, and directives for relevant committees to develop coordinated diplomatic and legislative strategies within 21 days.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Nigeria’s Embassy in Washington were instructed to issue a formal diplomatic protest to the motion’s sponsors and key U.S. congressional committees. The House also proposed the creation of a Nigeria-U.S. Joint Fact-Finding and Dialogue Mechanism on Freedom of Religion or Belief, and extended an invitation to USCIRF officials to appear before Nigerian lawmakers to clarify their sources and methodology.
The Committee on Legislative Compliance was tasked with tracking implementation and is expected to report back within 28 days. The House’s resolutions will be transmitted to the Presidency, security agencies, U.S. authorities, and regional organisations including the African Union and ECOWAS.
Concluding the session, Kalu reaffirmed Nigeria’s dedication to religious liberty and mutual respect in global affairs.
“The House calls on our international partners to adopt balanced, nuanced, and evidence-based approaches to issues affecting Nigeria’s national interest,” he stated. “We remain committed to protecting the fundamental rights of all Nigerians and promoting interfaith harmony while safeguarding our sovereignty.”
House Majority Leader Hon. Julius Ihonvbere cautioned against complacency, warning that inaction could lead to significant diplomatic fallout.
“Some of us underestimate the gravity of this development in the U.S. Senate,” he cautioned. “If we don’t act swiftly and the motion gains traction, reversing it will require enormous time and resources.”
He attributed the situation to misinformation circulated by certain individuals, including some members of the Nigerian diaspora, as well as outdated perceptions held by American policymakers and academics. “Many Americans — students, parents, even lawmakers — still view Nigeria through the lens of the 1950s and 60s, as a nation mired in ethnic and religious divisions,” he noted.
Hon. Oluwole One criticised the lack of inclusion in the legislative process, revealing that the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee had already conducted a public hearing on the motion without extending an invitation to Nigeria’s diplomatic mission.
“Our President is a Muslim married to a Christian. An Islamic scholar was recently honoured in Katsina and tragically killed by bandits. These examples show that our conflicts are not religious,” he argued, describing the Senate motion as a “deliberate attempt to tarnish Nigeria’s image.”
Former diplomat Hon. Saddam Sodi urged a broader rethinking of Nigeria’s international legislative engagement.
“This is the time for our parliament to reinvent its international engagement strategy,” he said. “Nigeria is a strategic player for the U.S., not just in Africa but globally, due to our energy potential and geopolitical relevance. Our actions can reshape global political and energy dynamics.”
Sodi recalled Nigeria’s successful effort in countering a 2015 U.S. National Security Council report predicting the country’s disintegration, calling for similarly proactive diplomacy.
“This motion is not yet U.S. government policy, but if we stay silent, it could become one. Parliament must lead a robust diplomatic response to stop that,” he concluded.
The House resolved to deepen engagements with the U.S. Congress, leverage diplomatic channels, and work with Nigerian diaspora organisations to address misperceptions and prevent the motion’s advancement.
