Policy experts have called on the Nigerian government to review and possibly exit outdated Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs).
They warned that current frameworks expose the country to costly international arbitration and undermine national interests.
The Head of Programme and Policy, Mr Celestine Okwudili-Odo, speaking at a 2-day National Policy Dialogue/Roundtable on Nigeria’s Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) under the CSAFRIN project policy dialogue organised by ActionAid Nigeria, in collaboration with Policy Alert, the government, CSOs, academia, the private sector, and development partners.
They criticised the continued reliance on the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism, which allows foreign investors to resolve disputes with governments in international tribunals rather than domestic courts.
The Head of Programme and Policy ActionAid Nigeria, Mr Celestine Okwudili-Odo, argued that Nigeria must prioritize its national interest by reassessing agreements that deliver limited benefits while exposing the country to significant financial and legal risks.
He noted that countries such as Netherlands, Germany, and France have also faced challenges under ISDS frameworks, underscoring the global nature of the issue.
According to him, Nigeria has the option to renegotiate or withdraw from such treaties as they expire, particularly where the costs outweigh the gains.
He stressed that multinational corporations often wield disproportionate power under these agreements, leaving host countries with limited control and local communities with little protection.
Celestine further emphasised the need for Nigeria to strengthen domestic conditions such as infrastructure, power supply, and security to attract investment organically rather than relying on agreements that may compromise sovereignty.
Also speaking, Executive Director of Policy Alert,Tijah Bolton-Akpan described many BITs as “outdated” and biased in favor of investors.
He argued that the ISDS system has “outlived its usefulness” and often sidelines the interests of host countries.
Bolton-Akpan cited Nigeria’s experience in the high-profile P&ID arbitration case, where an initial claim of $6 billion rose to about $11 billion, as evidence of the financial risks associated with international arbitration.
He said such cases place enormous strain on public finances and highlight structural flaws in existing agreements.
He also warned that BITs could hinder Nigeria’s commitments to climate action, including its obligations under the Paris Agreement and its goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2060.
According to him, investment treaties tied to fossil fuel sectors may obstruct the country’s transition to cleaner energy.
The experts called for greater involvement of the National Assembly of Nigeria in negotiating and reviewing investment agreements, including public hearings and impact assessments to ensure alignment with national development priorities.
They also recommended capacity building for government officials and policymakers to better negotiate future agreements and protect Nigeria’s economic, environmental, and social interests.