Nigeria’s governments have a habit of treating national policy like a personal project. A new leader arrives, brings out a fresh notebook, and sometimes acts as though everything before them was rubbish. Now, the Federal Government (FG) has said it wants to do something about that. At the 32nd Nigerian Economic Summit on October 26, 2026, Finance Minister Taiwo Oyedele said the government was considering a law to protect economic reforms from reversal by future administrations. The proposed framework covers taxation, tariffs, subsidies, investment and industrial development, among other areas.

The document is still a draft, and the government is consulting the public until November 27 before further consideration of its approval. 

The idea is to give economic policies staying power. But if the government wants to turn its economic playbook into a rulebook for future presidents, there are a few things Nigerians should consider.

Policy continuity is not the bad guy

Imagine spending years building a house, only for the next owner to demolish the walls because they prefer a different paint colour. That is what happens when governments abandon useful policies simply because their predecessors introduced them.

Nigeria has examples of reforms that successive administrations have continued.

Take telecommunications. In 2001, Olusegun Obasanjo’s federal government opened up the GSM market to private operators, helping transform how Nigerians communicate. The sector expanded from fewer than 500,000 telephone lines around the year 2000 to millions of mobile connections in the years that followed. Successive governments maintained the regulatory framework and supported further investment instead of starting the industry afresh every four years. 

Electricity is another example. Nigeria’s power sector reforms led to the unbundling of the former Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) and the privatisation of generation and distribution companies in 2013. 

That reform was continued and remains in place today. Its results are debatable and have remained uneven. The lesson, however, is that reforms need continuity, investment and proper oversight to deliver results.

Successive governments should build on previous efforts, fix what is failing and work to improve the electricity supply Nigerians receive instead of treating the sector as a fresh experiment. 

Continuity can save money, build investor confidence and give long-term projects time to deliver. Businesses are unlikely to invest confidently when tax rules, trade policies and regulations can change with every new administration.

But beyond the good reasons

The government has a point in wanting continuity, but there’s more to it, and we need to unpack what this really means for Nigerians and future governments. 

Firstly, who decides when a policy has outlived its usefulness? A policy can be well-intentioned and still fail. It can also work initially and become unsuitable when circumstances change.

That is why the idea of legally locking future governments into an economic framework deserves careful consideration.

Take Nigeria’s tax reforms. The new tax laws took effect in January 2026, but by September 17, the Federal Government had begun a six-week review to address implementation gaps, ambiguities and unintended consequences.

The review covers issues including Value Added Tax (VAT) thresholds, withholding tax and capital gains treatment. These are not imaginary concerns. They are issues the government itself has acknowledged need attention.  

Now imagine a future administration discovering that a policy is hurting small businesses or placing an unreasonable burden on low-income households. Should it be able to amend that policy after presenting its evidence, consulting affected Nigerians and following the law? Or should it have to preserve the original framework because the previous government already made a law that forbids any form of change? 

The current administration is still working to implement or refine some of its own reforms. So, a framework that protects the underlying principles of sound economic management could be useful, but one that makes specific policies unnecessarily difficult to change could preserve mistakes alongside successes.

And who decides which policies deserve permanent protection? The government of today cannot know every economic challenge Nigeria will face in the next ten or twenty years.

The Big Daily is your weekday shortcut to the biggest news shaping Nigeria. We cut through the noise, connect the dots, and explain why the news actually matters, all in one quick read.

A law cannot replace accountability

There is a difference between establishing institutions that promote stability and making it harder for elected governments to change direction.

Nigeria can protect transparent public spending, responsible borrowing, predictable regulation and proper assessments of the costs and benefits of policies. For example, Section 48 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 requires the Federal Government to conduct its fiscal and financial affairs transparently, including through the disclosure and publication of decisions involving public revenue and expenditure.

These are standards future administrations should uphold. Governments should also explain the likely costs and benefits of major economic policies and publish evidence of their results, so Nigerians can judge whether those policies are working or not.

The FG’s proposed framework itself reportedly recommends policy impact assessments before major economic interventions and an annual National Economic Scorecard measuring outcomes such as real wages, productive employment and poverty.

Those are ideas worth examining. If governments must explain the likely costs of their decisions and publish evidence of what their policies achieve, Nigerians will have a better basis for judging them.

But the public should also be able to hold governments accountable when the evidence shows that a policy is failing. A law should not turn an economic strategy into a sacred text that nobody is allowed to edit.

Section 4 of Nigeria’s Constitution vests federal legislative powers in the National Assembly. Any proposal to bind future administrations must therefore be examined carefully, including how it would interact with constitutional powers, existing legislation and the ability of future National Assemblies to amend the law.

What can Nigerians do about it?

The proposal is still open to public consultation, which means Nigerians have an opportunity to make their views heard before the framework moves through the approval process.

The Federal Ministry of Finance’s  Economic Policy Framework consultation page contains the proposed Nigeria Economic Policy Framework and accompanying consultation materials. The stated deadline for public submissions is November 27, 2026.

If you support the proposal, you can make the case for predictable economic policies, stronger institutions and safeguards against politically motivated reversals. You can also ask for clearer rules explaining how policies will be reviewed when they stop working.

If you oppose giving the framework binding legal force, you can explain why future administrations should be allowed to change policies after public consultation, legislative scrutiny and evidence-based assessment. You can suggest alternatives, such as mandatory impact assessments, transparent reporting and regular independent reviews.

Citizens can also contact their representatives in the National Assembly and follow the proposal as it moves through the approval process.

The important thing is to engage with the actual proposal, identify what should be protected and ask what safeguards will keep it accountable to Nigerians.

Policy continuity can help a country move forward. But a government must also leave room for the next government to learn, adapt and correct mistakes. Nigeria needs institutions that make good policies last and give bad policies a fair chance to be fixed.