IN what is shaping up to be one of the most consequential diplomatic flashpoints between Nigeria and US in recent months, News Point Nigeria learned that five United States lawmakers have introduced a sweeping bill seeking sanctions against former Kano State Governor, Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, alongside two prominent Fulani socio-cultural organisations.
The proposed legislation, titled “Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Act of 2026,” has ignited intense political debate, drawn sharp reactions across party lines in Nigeria, and reopened contentious conversations about religious freedom, terrorism, sovereignty, and foreign policy.
The bill was introduced in the US House of Representatives by: Chris Smith, Riley Moore, Brian Mast, Mario Diaz-Balart and Bill Huizenga
The legislation seeks to impose targeted sanctions, including visa bans and asset freezes, under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act on individuals and entities accused of severe religious freedom violations in Nigeria.
Specifically named in the bill are: Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) and Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore.
The bill also references “Fulani-ethnic nomad militias in Nigeria” and directs the US Secretary of State to determine whether certain groups qualify as Foreign Terrorist Organisations under Section 219 of the US Immigration and Nationality Act.
If passed, the Departments of State and Treasury would be required to either impose sanctions or formally justify to Congress why such sanctions were not implemented.
The proposed Act contains some of the strongest language yet from US lawmakers on Nigeria’s religious crisis. It claims that Nigeria accounts for 82 per cent of Christians martyred globally and alleges that systemic persecution has persisted since at least 2009.
Citing sources including the Open Doors 2024 World Watch List, the lawmakers state that between 50,000 and 125,000 Christians were killed between 2009 and 2025, while over 19,000 churches and Christian-owned facilities were attacked or destroyed.
The bill lists Boko Haram, ISWAP, and Fulani-ethnic militant groups as key perpetrators and alleges that between May 2023 and May 2025 alone, Fulani militias carried out massacres in Umogidi, Mgban, Yelwata, and during Christmas Eve, Holy Week, and Easter attacks.
It further states that these incidents allegedly killed more than 9,500 people and displaced over half a million others.
The legislation criticises Nigeria’s enforcement of blasphemy laws in 12 northern states under Sharia criminal codes, noting that such laws carry the death penalty.
It references cases such as Rhoda Jatau and Deborah Yakubu, as well as Sunday Jackson of Adamawa State, who was sentenced to death in 2021 after killing an armed herder in what many viewed as self-defence. Jackson was pardoned in December 2025.
The bill claims more than 250 religious leaders, both Christian and Muslim, have been attacked or killed in the past decade, citing the 2025 killing of Father Sylvester Okechukwu.
The bill comes months after US President Donald Trump redesignated Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC), citing religiously motivated violence.
Trump had previously designated Nigeria a CPC in 2020 and again in October 2025. Lawmakers argue that removing Nigeria from the CPC list in 2021 coincided with a surge in attacks.
On Christmas Day, the United States launched strikes in Nigeria targeting terrorist elements, in what both governments later described as a coordinated effort.
Speaking at the National Breakfast in Washington, Trump said: “I ordered powerful air strikes to decimate the ISIS terrorists who have been slaughtering Christians in that country by the thousands… We hit them so hard they still don’t know what happened.”
Following earlier threats of possible military action, Nigeria intensified diplomatic engagement with Washington, dispatching a high-powered delegation to the United States.
The proposed sanctions have drawn immediate resistance from Nigeria’s political establishment.
The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the opposition New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) both rejected the recommendations.
The NNPP described the bill as blackmail and politically motivated.
At a press conference in Abuja, the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Ladipo Johnson, said: “We see this development as a contrived action against an innocent man who clearly has no relationship with religious fundamentalism in Nigeria.”
Johnson argued that Kwankwaso had publicly cautioned against oversimplified narratives when Nigeria was redesignated as a CPC.
He questioned why other northern governors who implemented Sharia law were not similarly named.
In a post on X, Congressman Riley Moore directly addressed Kwankwaso, writing: “Governor, do you care to comment on your own complicity in the death of Christians? You instituted Sharia law. You signed the law that makes so-called blasphemy punishable by death.”
Under Kwankwaso’s leadership, Kano joined other northern states in implementing Islamic legal codes.
The NNPP’s Campaign Secretary, Folashade Aliu, speaking on Channels Television, described the bill as malicious.
“How can anybody in their right senses put up a bill that is as important as talking about religion and terrorism and single out one individual in this country?” She insisted there was no evidence linking Kwankwaso to extremist groups.
Similarly, the Kano State chapter of the NNPP called on the Presidency and the Office of the National Security Adviser to publicly exonerate Kwankwaso.
The party described him as a patriotic Nigerian and cautioned against politicising national security matters.
Senator Ali Ndume of Borno South also expressed surprise at Kwankwaso’s inclusion.
“I am surprised that Kwankwaso’s name was mentioned, and I want to know why and how he got mentioned,” Ndume said.
He described the proposed sanctions as misplaced and urged foreign governments to focus on individuals rather than labeling Nigeria as a whole.
The Kwankwasiyya Movement rejected the proposed legislation, calling the allegations unfounded and politically motivated.
Spokesperson Habibu Mohammed stated: “We state unequivocally that these allegations are consistent with nothing in the verifiable public record of Senator Kwankwaso’s life and service.”
As of the time of this report, Kwankwaso himself has not officially commented.
MACBAN National President, Baba Ngelzarma, rejected the allegations. “We are not a terrorist group,” he said.
He noted that the association, registered 42 years ago, represents peaceful herders across religious and ethnic lines.
Similarly, MACBAN’s Benue State Secretary, Ibrahim Galma, said the visa ban proposal violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and insisted the group includes Christian members.
He urged US Congress to send a delegation to Nigeria before passing judgment.
Not all reactions have been defensive.
Speaking, human rights activist, Dr. Abdullahi Maikani Hamisu said Kwankwaso inaugurated Sharia law in Kano reluctantly.
According to him, the decision came only after some clerics mobilised youths to stage demonstrations, during which stones and other objects were reportedly thrown at the Government House. He said the tension at the time was extremely high, and Kwankwaso eventually yielded in order to calm the situation.
“It is an established fact that Kwankwaso did not initially want the implementation of Sharia at that time,” Hamisu said. “The atmosphere was tense, and the pressure was enormous.”
He further argued that the Sharia controversy ultimately cost Kwankwaso a second term in office, alleging that some influential elites later rallied behind Malam Ibrahim Shekarau on the grounds that he would implement Sharia more strictly.
Hamisu concluded that anyone suggesting Kwankwaso should be prosecuted solely for the introduction of Sharia either misunderstands the political realities of Nigeria and Kano at the time or lacks proper knowledge of the historical context.
Lawyer and political analyst, Audu Bulama Bukarti, criticised the inclusion of Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso’s name in a proposed United States congressional bill. Members of the U.S. Congress introduced the bill in the House of Representatives seeking to impose sanctions on certain individuals.
In a post he shared on his Facebook page, Bulama Bukarti stated that, in fairness, Kwankwaso has no connection with religious extremism.
Bukarti challenged members of the U.S. Congress, saying in his write-up that Kwankwaso’s name should be removed from the bill without delay. He added that the situation exposes the weakness of the information being used to promote claims that Christians are facing genocide in Nigeria.
According to him, those spreading the narrative are fabricating baseless allegations and then repeatedly referring back to those same claims as evidence. He stressed that such an approach is inappropriate when making judgments on matters involving countries and their citizens.
Conversely, a political science professor at Bauchi University, Professor Bashir Inuwa Ahmad, said he was not surprised by Kwankwaso’s inclusion in the bill.
“There has been no politician in recent years from the North who has promoted violence and ethnic sentiment the way Kwankwaso has,” he said.
“Have we forgotten how he popularised the phrase ‘Yaro ka ji wuju wuju’? Today, there is even an estate known as ‘Wuju Wuju.’ The expression implies striking someone so hard that they fall and become disoriented.
“Or have we forgotten what he meant when he repeatedly said, ‘zasu ci goro dan ujile ko zamu saka musu jan baki,’ which translates to giving someone a bloodied nose?
“When he inaugurated KAROTA, the state traffic agency, he reportedly said that any visitor who spoke English to its officials would pay a fine of N5,000 or face the consequences.”
The professor concluded that, in his view, Kwankwaso cannot be described as a peaceful or accommodating politician.
Beyond sanctions, the bill calls for co-funded humanitarian assistance in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, prioritising food, shelter, trauma care, and safe return of displaced persons.
It also urges US cooperation with Nigeria to counter alleged foreign exploitation, including claims that illegal mining operations may be funding militia activity.
If enacted, the Act would require detailed reporting within 90 days and annually thereafter on Nigeria’s compliance with the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998.
The proposed legislation places Nigeria at a delicate diplomatic crossroads. On one hand, US lawmakers frame the bill as a moral imperative to protect persecuted religious minorities.
But what is clear is that the “Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Act of 2026” has already reshaped the discourse around religion, security, and international accountability and its ripple effects may extend far beyond Kano and Kwankwaso.