Nigerian lawmakers probe USAID-funded non-profit groups, others, document shows
ABUJA (Reuters) -Nigerian lawmakers are probing the activities of more than a dozen non-profit organisations and demanded they submit within a week tax and financial statements dating back a decade, a letter seen by Reuters showed, prompting accusations of "bullying".
The groups affected include some who were previously funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Washington's primary humanitarian aid agency whose work has been largely frozen by the Trump administration for 90 days pending assessments of their effectiveness.
A committee of Nigeria's House of Representatives sent out letters to groups involved in human rights and accountability work, including Transparency International Nigeria, informing them of the probe "with a view to unravelling their real identities, sources of funding and what they expend their monies on".
The letter said the investigation was a response to comments made last month by U.S. Congressman Scott Perry who, without providing evidence, said USAID had funneled money to various Islamist groups worldwide, including Boko Haram in Nigeria.
The U.S. ambassador to Nigeria, Richard Mills, rejected Perry's assertion regarding Boko Haram.
Nigerian lawmakers are demanding audited statements from the civil society groups, their sources of funding and how they spent their money between 2015 and 2024.
Some of the groups said the investigation was an excuse to undermine their work and amounted to a clampdown on free speech.
"On the basis of hearsay, just an unfounded allegation and lack of any proven evidence from either Nigerian security or Nigerian financial agencies, the national assembly will embark on this walk," Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, head of Transparency International in Nigeria, told Reuters.
Abiodun Baiyewu, the executive director of Global Rights, which is also being investigated, said of the investigation: "It is a brazen attempt at bullying the non-profit sector and not done in good faith."
House of Representatives spokesperson Akin Rotimi said the probe was not intended to harass non-profit organisations but that the allegations made by the U.S. Congressman were "too weighty to be dismissed".
"It is to gain a clearer understanding of how these funds have been managed over the years to determine whether there have been any lapses," he told Reuters.
Parliamentary committees in Nigeria can investigate any issue deemed of national interest and their reports if adopted by a majority of lawmakers can lead to the arrest or prosecution of groups or individuals.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Japan PM Ishiba says President Trump may be misinformed on some tariff issues
TOKYO (Reuters) -Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said on Thursday U.S. President Donald Trump's views on some tariff-related issues may be based on misunderstanding or misinformation, as a pause on a 24% reciprocal tariff on imports from Japan expires next week. "We hear President Trump say no U.S. cars are running in Japan and that we are not importing (U.S.) rice. That could be based on misunderstanding or misinformation," Ishiba said on public broadcaster NHK's news programme. Japan has in fact imported historically high volumes of U.S. rice in recent months as domestically grown rice has skyrocketed in price since last year, hurting consumers. Ishiba said, however, tariff negotiations with the United States are making steady progress, without going into specifics. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brazil's Lula urges Mercosur to deepen ties with Asia
BUENOS AIRES (Reuters) -Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said on Thursday that the Mercosur bloc of South American countries should focus on strengthening its ties with Asian nations, which he described as the "dynamic center" of the global economy. "Our participation in global value chains will benefit from closer ties with Japan, China, South Korea, India, Vietnam and Indonesia," Lula said during a speech at the Mercosur summit in Buenos Aires.
Boston Globe
16 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump goes ‘woke' in report on antisemitism at Harvard
What the administration mainly offers in its finding, though, is a litany of sit-ins, walk-outs, and group letters organized by pro-Palestinian student groups — with remarkably little evidence of any intention to harass or discriminate against Jewish peers. Take, for example, the government's finding that 'Jewish and Israeli students at Harvard were repeatedly denied access to … libraries.' That sounds like an accusation of intentional discrimination. In fact, though, the only evidence for several of these 'denials of access' consists of Advertisement The answer is that the administration could classify that behavior as discriminatory only by embracing an especially radical version of an effects-based theory of discrimination. Specifically, the implicit argument proceeds in two steps. First, Jews or Israelis are much more likely than others to be offended by this kind of anti-Israel rhetoric — and so to feel unwelcome or uncomfortable in spaces where it is present. Second, when certain behavior (here, certain expression) has that kind of disproportionate impact on one group, engaging in that behavior amounts to discrimination against the disparately affected group — even absent any intent to single out its members. The legal term for this kind of discrimination theory is 'disparate-impact liability,' although that legal theory is usually seen only in domains such as employment and housing — not as a basis for speech regulation, let alone for mandating how peers should interact on college campuses. Advertisement And hence the rich irony: Not only is disparate impact widely recognized as a progressive idea, it is intensely embattled — thanks in no small part to President Trump. Just months ago, Trump issued a landmark executive Advertisement But somehow the anti-Harvard legal team, alone among federal officials tasked with enforcing civil rights, didn't get the memo. When it comes to people of color who are excluded from voting by ostensibly neutral requirements, the administration's position is that there can be no discrimination without proof of intent. Likewise for women excluded from public-safety jobs by physical capacity tests, or Black citizens who bear the brunt of police violence or decrepit public infrastructure. But if a college student's political activity disproportionately affects Jewish or Israeli peers — even just by causing offense or making them feel alienated — the administration deems that inherently discriminatory, no intent required. Could the administration claim instead that hostility toward Israel or Zionism is inherently antisemitic because many Jews see Zionism as part of their Jewish identity? Not really. Because Title VI does not cover religion, Jewishness is protected by the law only insofar as it constitutes a 'race' — a fact about one's ancestry. Under existing law, however, culturally salient practices or beliefs can play no role in the definition of racial categories. That is why judges have ruled that bans on dreadlocks and cornrows are not racially discriminatory, even if Black employees view these hairstyles as expressive of their racial identity. Advertisement The irony, once again, is that the contrary view — the culture-oriented conception of race that Trump's legal theory in the Harvard case would require the courts to embrace — is a well-known tenet of critical race theory, the 'woke' school that Trump and his allies have ridiculed for years. Maybe it is a mistake to scrutinize the legal analysis in what is evidently a political document. Yet if anyone still doubts the sham quality of this 'civil rights' action, there is no better proof than the lawyers' shameless reliance on ideas about discrimination that, when enlisted in the service of traditional civil rights concerns, the administration purports to find fundamentally un-American.
