ALSTDI Warns Against Illegal Assent To Expired Digital Forensics Bill

By Comrade Nelson Ossaieze

We, the African Leadership Strategy and Transparency Development Initiative (ALSTDI), write to take a firm and uncompromising position on the unfolding attempt to secure presidential assent to the proposed Chartered Institute of Digital Forensics of Nigeria through what can only be described as a backdoor process.

This is not a routine legislative matter. It is a constitutional infraction in motion. It is an attempt to validate, through executive action, a Bill that has already expired by operation of law. We consider it our duty to state, clearly and without equivocation, that such an action must not stand.

The Bill was transmitted to the Presidency and received on 25 February 2026. By virtue of Section 58(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the President is required to signify assent or withhold it within thirty days. That constitutional window expired on 25 March 2026.

We have already stated, and we restate here for emphasis, that the position is clear, definitive, and not open to manipulation. The Bill is “now statute-barred.”

This is not a matter for administrative discretion. It is not a matter that can be adjusted through internal processes or political persuasion. The Constitution has spoken, and its timelines are binding.

There are credible indications that certain promoters of this quasi-forensic institute are actively seeking to bypass due process and secure assent after the expiration of the constitutional deadline. This is what we refer to as backdoor assent, an attempt to achieve legality through illegitimate means. We consider this deeply troubling.

Such efforts are, in our view, “unacceptable” and they risk “eroding constitutional authority and public trust.” A law that enters the statute books through procedural violation carries a permanent legitimacy deficit. It undermines not only itself but the system that permits it.

Let us be clear about the nature of the issue before the Presidency. We want to emphasise that the issue is not the substance of digital forensics regulation but procedural validity. We are not opposed to the development of digital forensic capacity in Nigeria. What we oppose is the unlawful pathway being pursued to establish it.

Once a Bill becomes statute-barred, it ceases to exist within the current legislative framework. It cannot be revived by executive discretion. It cannot be legitimised through influence. It must return to the National Assembly and undergo a fresh legislative process. Anything short of this is unconstitutional.

We therefore state, unequivocally, that any attempt to grant assent at this stage would amount to a direct violation of the Constitution and would set a dangerous precedent for executive overreach. This is not an abstract concern. It is a real and immediate risk to constitutional governance.

If this precedent is allowed to stand, then constitutional timelines become optional. Legislative discipline collapses. Executive discretion expands beyond its lawful bounds. That is not a path we can accept.

We must also draw attention to the substantive concerns that surrounded this Bill during its legislative consideration. This was not a universally accepted proposal. On the contrary, it faced strong and consistent opposition from key institutions within Nigeria’s governance architecture.

As we have noted, the Office of the National Security Adviser, the National Information Technology Development Agency, the Computer Professionals Registration Council of Nigeria, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission all raised objections.

This alignment is significant. It reflects a convergence of expertise across security, regulation, and anti-corruption. We therefore maintain that this convergence raises serious concerns about its credibility.

What this means, in practical terms, is that the Bill suffers from a dual deficit. It is procedurally invalid and substantively contested. That combination is not only problematic, it is untenable.

We must then ask, why the urgency to force assent through the backdoor? Why attempt to legitimise a Bill that has both expired constitutionally and been questioned institutionally?

We believe the answer lies in an attempt to secure regulatory advantage through legislative shortcuts. That is precisely what the Constitution is designed to prevent. We reject such an approach.

We insist that constitutional governance must prevail. We have stated that constitutional timelines are binding obligations, not optional guidelines. This is not a negotiable principle. It is the foundation of lawful governance.

We also recognise that this moment carries broader implications. This is not just about one Bill. It is, as we have noted it, a constitutional test case. The decision taken here will define how seriously constitutional timelines are treated going forward.

We therefore call on the Presidency to act with constitutional discipline. The options before it are clear. It must either uphold the Constitution or undermine it. There is no middle ground.

We urge that the President acknowledge the constitutional reality that this Bill has lapsed. We urge that assent be declined. We urge that any form of pressure or influence aimed at subverting due process be firmly rejected.

We further advise that the promoters of this Bill return to the National Assembly and commence a fresh legislative process, one that complies fully with constitutional requirements and incorporates meaningful stakeholder engagement. That is the only lawful pathway.

We conclude by reaffirming our institutional commitment. We will not stand by while constitutional provisions are treated as optional. We will not accept a governance culture that rewards procedural shortcuts. We will continue to defend constitutional democracy and the integrity of legislative processes.

This is not merely a position. It is an obligation. And on this matter, we state clearly, there must be no backdoor assent.

Comrade Nelson Ossaieze is Executive Director and Convener, African Leadership Strategy and Transparency for Development Initiative (ALSDI)