The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has asked the federal government to immediately clarify the contents of the health cooperation memorandum of understanding (MoU) recently signed between Nigeria and the United States, citing concerns over alleged conflicting framings.
In December, the US signed a five-year bilateral health MoU with Nigeria to strengthen the country’s health system with a strong focus on supporting Christian faith-based healthcare providers.
The agreement is expected to expand access to essential preventive and curative services, including HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, maternal and child health, and polio interventions.
Under the MoU, the US government intends to commit nearly $2.1 billion over five years to health funding in Nigeria, while Nigeria will increase its domestic health expenditures by nearly $3 billion during the same period.
The US government had said the agreement remains subject to its broader foreign policy priorities and that its president and secretary of state retain the right to pause or terminate any programmes that do not align with the national interest.
In a statement issued on Sunday, Bolaji Abdullahi, ADC spokesperson, said the party is disturbed by “materially different” framings of the agreement.
He said while the Nigerian government has portrayed the MoU as an inclusive framework to strengthen health security and boost domestic health financing, the official statements from the US introduced “identity-based elements” that were absent from Nigeria’s account.
Abdullahi said the US description suggests that spending under the MoU could be targeted at health institutions linked to a particular religion, a framing that violates Nigeria’s constitutional provisions on non-discrimination and national unity.
“The US characterisation introduces religious, identity-based framing, indicating that spending under the MoU should be targeted at health institutions backed by a particular religion only,” the statement reads.
“It is the ADC’s considered view that the Nigerian government should not enter into any agreement that is sectional or potentially inimical to Nigeria’s constitutional commitment to inclusion and national unity.
“We find it particularly curious that these troubling conditionalities, including those that grant the United States unilateral powers of termination, are conspicuously missing from the Federal Government’s public rendering of the agreement. The ADC believes that this divergence is not a mere communications issue.”
The ADC spokesperson argued that the divergence goes beyond a communication gap and raises questions about transparency, constitutional compliance, and national sovereignty.
Citing section ection 42(1) of the 1999 constitution, Abdullahi said no citizen of Nigeria “shall be discriminated against on the grounds of place of origin, sex, religion, or political opinion”.
He said sections 15 and 17 of the constitution equally impose a duty on the state to promote national integration, eliminate discrimination, and guarantee equality of rights and opportunities for all citizens.
“Therefore, any international agreement, or public framing of such an agreement, that appears to introduce identity-based distinctions into the provision of public services raises serious constitutional and national cohesion concerns,” he said.
“We are particularly at a loss as to why the Nigerian Government would enter into such an agreement, especially considering that Nigeria is reportedly committing more resources under the arrangement.”
Abdullahi called on the government to state clearly which version of the agreement reflects the actual terms signed and why there are significant differences between the two accounts.
