Nigeria: Urges UN for Universal Jurisdiction Safeguards Amid Misuse Concerns

• Nigeria urged the United Nations to establish safeguards against the selective application of universal jurisdiction.
• The nation's representative, Ambassador Jimoh Ibrahim, stated that universal jurisdiction should be a last resort, used only when directly connected countries cannot prosecute.
• Nigeria proposed restricting universal jurisdiction to the gravest crimes, requiring the accused's presence, and prior consultation with the connected country.
• Concerns were raised about the principle's politically motivated application, particularly in cases involving African officials.
• Nigeria, a Rome Statute party, reaffirmed its support for complementarity, emphasizing national responsibility for prosecuting crimes.

This concern extends to the politically motivated or selective application of the principle, particularly in cases involving African officials.

Nigeria recently issued a strong caution regarding the potential misuse of universal jurisdiction, advocating for the United Nations to implement robust safeguards. This intervention, delivered during a plenary meeting of the UN General Assembly’s Sixth Committee at the UN headquarters in New York on October 16, 2026, specifically targeted the selective application of this legal principle. The nation's primary concern is to prevent more powerful states from exploiting international criminal justice mechanisms for their own ends.

During the session, which focused on the scope and application of universal jurisdiction, Nigeria’s representative, Ambassador Jimoh Ibrahim, articulated the country’s position. He emphasized that this principle, which permits the prosecution of certain severe international crimes across national borders, should be considered an exceptional measure. Ambassador Ibrahim stressed that its invocation must be a last resort, reserved for instances where the nations most directly linked to alleged offenses are either unable or unwilling to conduct prosecutions themselves.

The Nigerian delegation further expressed significant apprehension that stronger nations might leverage universal jurisdiction to impose their domestic legal systems upon less powerful states. This concern extends to the politically motivated or selective application of the principle, particularly in cases involving African officials. Such practices, Nigeria contends, not only erode the credibility of international criminal justice but also diminish trust and cooperation among sovereign states.

To counter potential abuses while upholding accountability for grave international crimes, Nigeria outlined several crucial conditions for the legitimate exercise of universal jurisdiction. Firstly, the nation proposed that its application be strictly limited to the most serious offenses, those whose international character is unequivocally established by existing treaties or customary international law. Nigeria firmly argued against individual countries unilaterally broadening the categories of crimes subject to this principle.

Secondly, the delegation stipulated that a third country should only exercise universal jurisdiction when the territorial state or the country of the accused's nationality is demonstrably unable or unwilling to prosecute the alleged crime. This condition is coupled with a call for mandatory prior consultation with the nation directly connected to the alleged offense, ensuring a collaborative approach rather than unilateral action.

Finally, Nigeria asserted that the accused individual must be physically present within the prosecuting country’s territory before universal jurisdiction can be invoked. The nation explicitly opposed trials conducted in absentia and called for comprehensive safeguards to prevent politically motivated prosecutions. It further recommended that decisions to initiate such proceedings should be made by the highest prosecutorial authorities, strictly adhering to due process and guaranteeing fair trial rights. Additionally, Nigeria highlighted the importance of clearly distinguishing universal jurisdiction from both extradition obligations and the established jurisdiction of international courts.

Despite its warnings, Nigeria reiterated its unwavering commitment to combating impunity for serious international crimes. However, it maintained that the principle of universal jurisdiction must always operate within clearly defined international legal boundaries, serving as an exceptional tool. The nation recalled that the unresolved questions surrounding the principle’s scope and application were precisely what prompted African countries to advocate for its inclusion on the General Assembly’s agenda, underscoring a long-standing need for internationally agreed safeguards.

Nigeria underscored that its own domestic legal framework, encompassing its Constitution, the Geneva Conventions Act, terrorism legislation, and mutual legal assistance arrangements, demonstrates its capacity and commitment to accountability. As a signatory to the Rome Statute, Nigeria reaffirmed its support for the principle of complementarity, which assigns primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting crimes to national authorities.

The nation concluded by emphasizing that the pursuit of international criminal justice and the fight against impunity must consistently align with fundamental principles of sovereign equality, foster genuine international cooperation, and strictly adhere to established legal procedures. This balanced approach, Nigeria argues, is essential for maintaining the integrity and effectiveness of the global justice system.

Lawyers and compliance officers advising on international criminal law or cross-border human rights issues should monitor developments from the UN's Sixth Committee. Nigeria's strong advocacy for stricter safeguards on universal jurisdiction, particularly concerning African officials, could influence future international legal frameworks, potentially impacting the scope and application of extraterritorial prosecutions and the defense strategies for clients facing such allegations.

Source: Original reporting via PUNCH