Tinubu’s Executive Order Unites 5 Agencies to Regulate Nigeria's Virtual Assets

For legal practitioners, the Executive Order marks a pivotal shift from fragmented enforcement to coordinated oversight. By invoking Section 5 of the 1999 Constitution, President Tinubu establishes a multi-agency council with the mandate to craft a comprehensive legal regime—raising new questions about jurisdictional boundaries and regulatory compliance. The involvement of the Attorney-General's office signals that statutory enactment may follow, potentially reshaping virtual asset law in Nigeria.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has taken a decisive step toward unifying Nigeria’s disjointed oversight of virtual assets by signing the Presidential Executive Order on Virtual Assets Coordination, 2026. The order, effective immediately, establishes a Virtual Asset Council—an inter-agency body chaired by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) with the Nigeria Revenue Service (NRS) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as vice-chairs—tasked with harmonizing regulatory policies, combating financial crimes, and fostering responsible innovation. The Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) and the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) complete the council’s membership, signaling the administration’s prioritization of both security and fiscal objectives in the rapidly growing digital asset market.

“

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has taken a decisive step toward unifying Nigeria’s disjointed oversight of virtual assets by signing the Presidential Executive Order on Virtual Assets Coordination, 2026.

Nigeria has been one of the world’s most active cryptocurrency markets, yet its regulatory approach has been fragmented and often contradictory. In 2021, the CBN prohibited banks from facilitating crypto transactions, only for the SEC to issue a framework for digital asset registration in 2022, and later for the government to impose taxes. This patchwork created significant legal uncertainty, with crypto exchanges and fintech startups often operating in gray areas, while citizens faced risks from unregistered platforms and scams. The Presidency directly acknowledges this failure, stating that the absence of coordinated oversight “created loopholes exploited by fraudulent and unregistered operators, exposing Nigerians to financial losses, cybersecurity threats, data privacy risks and other criminal activities.”

The new Executive Order, issued under the President’s executive powers as enshrined in Section 5 of the 1999 Constitution, represents a top-down effort to impose order. By creating a council with the CBN at its helm, the government aims to bridge the divide between monetary authority, securities regulation, tax collection, and anti-money laundering enforcement. Importantly, the order mandates collaboration with the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation to develop a harmonised legal and institutional framework, suggesting that the council is not merely a coordination forum but a precursor to comprehensive legislation. This could lead to a Virtual Assets Act or similar statutory instrument, replacing the current mosaic of circulars, rules, and guidelines.

For legal practitioners, the move raises both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, a single regulatory clearinghouse promises to clarify obligations for virtual asset service providers (VASPs), easing compliance burdens and potentially attracting institutional capital. The involvement of the NRS as a vice-chair signals that tax compliance will be a central pillar, likely leading to more robust reporting requirements for exchanges and investors. On the other hand, the council’s composition introduces complex questions of jurisdiction: with CBN and SEC holding dual vice-chair positions, which agency’s rules take precedence for dual-character tokens? The order does not detail operational protocols, so inter-agency disputes could hamper efficiency unless resolved by statutory mandate.

The timeline is aggressive. The council is to convene immediately, and its deliverables—including policy direction and a legal framework—are expected to be coordinated swiftly. Given Nigeria’s history of slow legislative processes, the executive route may prove faster, but it also risks pushback from stakeholders who argue that crypto taxation and oversight should have parliamentary approval. Additionally, the order’s emphasis on security and anti-terrorism financing aligns with global Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards, potentially improving Nigeria’s compliance ratings and easing international banking relationships for local exchanges.

Market impact is likely to be mixed. Crypto-savvy businesses may welcome regulatory clarity, but stringent KYC/AML requirements could stifle innovation if the council adopts an overly restrictive stance. The absence of a dedicated ministry or agency for innovation suggests that the council’s primary focus will be control rather than promotion. Still, if the framework reasonably balances oversight with growth, Nigeria could attract Web3 entrepreneurs who have been deterred by the previous opaque environment.