Due Process Is Not Optional: Why the National Assembly’s Authentication of the Tax Reform Acts Upholds Law, Order, and Democratic Integrity

Written by Philip Agbese
Every constitutional democracy bases its legal legitimacy on procedure rather than sentiment or expediency. Laws get their power from strict obedience to the processes outlined by the Constitution and statute, not just from public consent or political will. In light of this, it is important to comprehend and appropriately place recent public discussion regarding the authentication, assent, and gazetting of important tax reform legislation within Nigeria’s constitutional framework.

As the guardian of legislative power, the National Assembly has reacted with institutional sobriety rather than defensiveness or obfuscation. The exact safeguards that give law its moral and legal force—verification, certification, and transparency—have been activated by the leadership of both Chambers. This is not a sign of weakness. It is the fundamental component of legislative power.
This argument is made rather clearly in the press statement that the National Assembly Management released. The legislature opted for constitutional due diligence over public polemics when faced with questions concerning the harmonization, assent, and gazetting of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025; and the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025. That decision is commendable.
The Acts Authentication Act, Cap. A4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, is at the center of the issue. The purpose of this act is straightforward but profound: to guarantee that the language passed by the legislature, approved by the president, and published for public consumption is the same. Authentication is the link between legislative intent and legal certainty; it is not only a bureaucratic routine. The integrity of the statute book itself would be jeopardized without it.
Long-standing parliamentary practice is reflected in the actions performed by the National Assembly, as demonstrated by the documented authentication procedure. Every step of the process, from creating the certified true copy of the bill following its enactment to compiling and certifying the schedule of bills for assent to gazetting and official publication, has a specific constitutional function. Together, they create the legal chain of custody. Legal pandemonium ensues if that chain is broken.
Importantly, the leadership has taken care to make it clear that the continuing internal assessment does not compromise legislative authority or interfere with the duties of the Executive or Judiciary. Clarity, precision, and the integrity of the legislative record are the goals of this internal administrative activity. This is exactly how a mature legislature should act in terms of the constitution: making essential corrections to its own procedures without grandstanding or assigning blame.
It is also important to consider the moral aspect. Every individual, every enterprise, and the state’s financial health are impacted by tax policy. Such laws must be trustworthy. Public trust is strengthened when the legislature shows that it is prepared to wait, confirm, and certify before demanding finality. Due process is what makes reform genuine and long-lasting, not the opposite.
This strategy’s legal implications are similarly significant. Courts, regulators, investors, and people have access to an authoritative document that serves as a safe foundation for rights and duties thanks to official gazetting and the issuance of certified true copies. The demand on authentication is not pedantry in a time when disagreements frequently center on the exact wording of statutes. It’s caution.
Those who advocate for expediency over procedure ought to consider comparative experience. To preserve the integrity of the legal system, lawmakers in developed democracies frequently postpone commencement, fix clerical mistakes, and recertify statutes. Nigeria is acting orthodoxly rather than exceptionally.
In the end, the National Assembly’s actions reinforce a deeper fundamental principle: that procedure is the protector of content and that law is superior to politics. The leadership has demonstrated loyalty to both authority and accountability by operating within the bounds of the Constitution, the Acts Authentication Act, Standing Orders, and established parliamentary customs.
The National Assembly is upholding the rule of law by protecting due diligence. That goes beyond just being correct legally. It is a virtue of democracy.
Agbese The House of Representatives’ Deputy Spokesperson is LLB [UK], LLM [UK], and MBA [UK].*Why the National Assembly’s Verification of the Tax Reform Acts Preserves Law, Order, and Democratic Integrity: Due Process Is Not Optional
Written by Philip Agbese
Every constitutional democracy bases its legal legitimacy on procedure rather than sentiment or expediency. Laws get their power from strict obedience to the processes outlined by the Constitution and statute, not just from public consent or political will. In light of this, it is important to comprehend and appropriately place recent public discussion regarding the authentication, assent, and gazetting of important tax reform legislation within Nigeria’s constitutional framework.
As the guardian of legislative power, the National Assembly has reacted with institutional sobriety rather than defensiveness or obfuscation. The exact safeguards that give law its moral and legal force—verification, certification, and transparency—have been activated by the leadership of both Chambers. This is not a sign of weakness. It is the fundamental component of legislative power.
This argument is made rather clearly in the press statement that the National Assembly Management released. The legislature opted for constitutional due diligence over public polemics when faced with questions concerning the harmonization, assent, and gazetting of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; the Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025; and the Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025. That decision is commendable.
The Acts Authentication Act, Cap. A4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, is at the center of the issue. The purpose of this act is straightforward but profound: to guarantee that the language passed by the legislature, approved by the president, and published for public consumption is the same. Authentication is the link between legislative intent and legal certainty; it is not only a bureaucratic routine. The integrity of the statute book itself would be jeopardized without it.
Long-standing parliamentary practice is reflected in the actions performed by the National Assembly, as demonstrated by the documented authentication procedure. Every step of the process, from creating the certified true copy of the bill following its enactment to compiling and certifying the schedule of bills for assent to gazetting and official publication, has a specific constitutional function. Together, they create the legal chain of custody. Legal pandemonium ensues if that chain is broken.
Importantly, the leadership has taken care to make it clear that the continuing internal assessment does not compromise legislative authority or interfere with the duties of the Executive or Judiciary. Clarity, precision, and the integrity of the legislative record are the goals of this internal administrative activity. This is exactly how a mature legislature should act in terms of the constitution: making essential corrections to its own procedures without grandstanding or assigning blame.
It is also important to consider the moral aspect. Every individual, every enterprise, and the state’s financial health are impacted by tax policy. Such laws must be trustworthy. Public trust is strengthened when the legislature shows that it is prepared to wait, confirm, and certify before demanding finality. Due process is what makes reform genuine and long-lasting, not the opposite.
This strategy’s legal implications are similarly significant. Courts, regulators, investors, and people have access to an authoritative document that serves as a safe foundation for rights and duties thanks to official gazetting and the issuance of certified true copies. The demand on authentication is not pedantry in a time when disagreements frequently center on the exact wording of statutes. It’s caution.
Those who advocate for expediency over procedure ought to consider comparative experience. To preserve the integrity of the legal system, lawmakers in developed democracies frequently postpone commencement, fix clerical mistakes, and recertify statutes. Nigeria is acting orthodoxly rather than exceptionally.
In the end, the National Assembly’s actions reinforce a deeper fundamental principle: that procedure is the protector of content and that law is superior to politics. The leadership has demonstrated loyalty to both authority and accountability by operating within the bounds of the Constitution, the Acts Authentication Act, Standing Orders, and established parliamentary customs.
The National Assembly is upholding the rule of law by protecting due diligence. That goes beyond just being correct legally. It is a virtue of democracy.
The House of Representatives’ Deputy Spokesperson is Agbese LLB [UK], LLM [UK], and MBA [UK].