A POTENTIALLY incendiary diplomatic showdown is brewing between Nigeria and the United States as a draft U.S. bill proposes targeted sanctions against a group of Nigerian public officials, including 12 northern governors, senior judges and traditional rulers, over alleged complicity in religious persecution.
News Point Nigeria observed that the legislation; the Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025 backed by Republican Senator Ted Cruz and reported to be circulating on Capitol Hill, would require the U.S. Secretary of State to produce a list of Nigerian officials who, in the view of the bill’s sponsors, have “promoted, enacted, or maintained blasphemy laws” or “tolerated violence by non-state actors invoking religious justification.” If adopted, the measure would trigger consequences under the U.S. Global Magnitsky framework, including visa bans, asset freezes and other financial restrictions.
The move follows U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent designation of Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” (CPC) for religious freedom and his public call for immediate action. In a post on Truth Social, Trump lamented that “thousands of Christians are being killed” in Nigeria and urged members of the House Appropriations Committee to investigate and act.
Under the draft bill introduced in September 2025, the Secretary of State would have 90 days after passage to submit to Congress a report naming Nigerian officials; governors, monarchs, judges and other public figures, who are credibly alleged to have enforced or tolerated laws and practices that discriminate against religious minorities, including provisions of state-level Sharia penal codes described by the bill’s sponsors as “blasphemy laws.”
Sen. Cruz, defending the measure, argued that parts of Nigeria’s legal architecture have institutionalised discrimination and enabled violence. “Religious persecution and violence against Christians and other religious minorities in Nigeria is endemic,” he said in remarks accompanying the draft. The bill cites long-running violence by extremist groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS-West Africa and alleges thousands of deaths and widespread destruction of places of worship since 2009.
The controversy centers in part on the expansion of Sharia-based criminal codes in many northern states following Nigeria’s return to civilian rule in 1999–2000.
Zamfara State led the move in 1999, and within two years a number of northern states had adopted Sharia-derived penal provisions that apply to Muslims in those jurisdictions. The draft bill singles out those provisions and the officials who administer or tolerate them as grounds for listing.
Nigeria’s federal government has repeatedly pointed out the constitutional limits of such state laws and stressed that Sharia criminal provisions apply only to Muslims who voluntarily submit to them; non-Muslims are not subject to Sharia penal codes.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has published a policy note underscoring Nigeria’s constitutional protections for freedom of religion (sections 10, 38 and 42 of the 1999 Constitution) and emphasising that federal and appellate courts provide checks on state laws.
In an official policy note and public statements, FG dismissed the U.S. draft legislation as “legally and factually flawed,” arguing that it conflates separate legal regimes and misunderstands Nigeria’s plural legal system.
The government reiterated that public-order offences are religion-neutral and that federal and state authorities prosecute violent extremism including Boko Haram and ISWAP without religious bias.
The Presidency also said President Bola Tinubu would meet with U.S. officials to discuss the matter. Daniel Bwala, Special Adviser on Policy Communication, said the proposed engagement would focus on counter-terrorism cooperation and clarifying what he described as misconceptions about the nature and drivers of violent attacks in Nigeria. Bwala stressed that the U.S. had supported Nigeria with arms sales used against insurgents and described both countries as having shared security interests.
The dispute took a sharper turn when President Trump warned the U.S. could “stop all aid and assistance” and even “go into that now disgraced country, ‘guns-a-blazing,’” if killings of Christians continued.
The statement was followed by a flurry of posts from U.S. officials describing readiness to act, including one from a senior U.S. official who said the Department of War was “preparing for action” language that intensified concern in Abuja and among regional partners.
Nigerian government spokesmen and diplomats have criticised both the listing and the rhetoric, arguing the measures threaten bilateral security cooperation and could hamper ongoing joint efforts to combat terrorist groups that operate across religious and geographic lines.
If enacted, the draft U.S. law would compel the American government to apply targeted sanctions under Executive Order 13818 (the Global Magnitsky authorities) against named Nigerian individuals and could expand the U.S. designation of Boko Haram and ISIS-WA as entities of particular concern.
For the targeted governors and officials many of whom govern large and strategically important states — sanctions could mean travel bans and restrictions on access to assets or transactions with U.S. financial institutions.
The issue has produced vigorous debate inside Nigeria. Supporters of the bill in the U.S. point to documented attacks on Christian communities, destroyed churches and horrific massacres that have left civilians dead and displaced.
Nigerian officials, civil society groups and legal experts counter that many attacks stem from terrorism, criminality, resource disputes, and climate pressures not official state policy and that heavy-handed external sanctions could undermine both national sovereignty and fragile security cooperation.
Nigeria’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, framed the controversy as part of a broader campaign he described as “orchestrated” against the country’s image, and he defended President Tinubu’s decision to reshuffle the military hierarchy and press security chiefs to deliver results.
Onanuga said the president had already taken decisive steps to tackle insecurity and that the government would use diplomatic channels to address the U.S. concerns.
The draft bill remains under consideration in the U.S. Congress. If advanced to law, the list the Secretary of State would produce could include governors from states named by the bill, Zamfara, Kano, Sokoto, Katsina, Bauchi, Borno, Jigawa, Kebbi, Yobe, Kaduna, Niger and Gombe as well as appointed judicial officers and traditional rulers.