By Mohammed Bougei Attah
In recent public discourse, the phrase “Nigeria First Policy” has increasingly been reduced to a matter of public procurement and local contracting preference. While procurement reform is an important instrument of economic policy, equating Nigeria First solely with government contracting is both legally inaccurate and strategically limiting.
A properly conceptualized Nigeria First Policy is not a procurement regulation. It is a national development doctrine—one grounded in constitutional authority, economic strategy, trade law, and institutional reform.
Under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), Section 16 mandates the State to control the national economy in such a manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom, and happiness of every citizen as well as ensure that the material resources of the nation are harnessed and distributed to serve the common good.
These constitutional directives establish a clear legal basis for a national-first economic framework. They go far beyond procurement processes. Similarly, the Public Procurement Act 2007 provides mechanisms for transparency, value for money, and competitive tendering—but it does not prohibit strategic industrial policy or local content frameworks enacted under other legislation.
For example, the county, Nigeria already operates sector-specific national preference regimes. These include the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act 2010, Executive Orders promoting local procurement in public contracting, industrial and trade policy instruments administered by relevant ministries. These legal frameworks demonstrate that national economic prioritization is lawful when properly structured.
Critics sometimes argue that a Nigeria First approach would violate international trade commitments. This position misunderstands both Nigeria’s treaty obligations and the architecture of the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Several important clarifications are therefore necessary to justify this position. First among the facts is that Nigeria is not a party to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).
The WTO’s Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) requires non-discriminatory procurement among member signatories. However, Nigeria is not a signatory to the GPA.
Therefore, Nigeria retains sovereign discretion over public procurement preferences, subject to its own laws and general WTO obligations.
Another fact is that the WTO framework regulates tariffs, subsidies, and trade barriers, but it does not prohibit strategic industrial development policies, production-linked incentives (when in compliant with subsidy rules), sectorial development strategies and local capacity-building measures
Many advanced economies actively deploy industrial strategies within WTO parameters. For example the United States maintains “Buy American” requirements under federal law and has enacted major industrial subsidy programs, including semi-conductor and clean energy incentives.
China has built a globally competitive manufacturing base through long-term industrial planning, export promotion, and strategic state-backed investment. India implements Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) schemes and the “Make in India” program to deepen domestic manufacturing capacity.
The European Union and the United Kingdom both maintain industrial strategies focused on supply chain resilience, green transition industries, digital sovereignty, and strategic autonomy.
None of these jurisdictions rely solely on procurement rules to protect national interest. They integrate trade, fiscal, regulatory, and industrial tools into coherent national strategies.
The argument that the Nigeria First Policy cannot be reduced to procurement lies in the fact also that public procurement is an instrument of demand stimulation.
It can encourage local participation, build industrial capacity, and create domestic supply chains. But procurement addresses only one question: Who supplies government contracts?
Nigeria First must address far broader national questions including who owns productive capacity, who controls strategic sectors, who benefits from value addition and who acquires technology and skills among others?
In my opinion, reducing Nigeria First Policy to procurement ignores fiscal policy, trade protection, foreign exchange management, technology transfer frameworks, industrial financing and regulatory coordination. Procurement is tactical, but Nigeria First Policy must be strategic.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) must incorporate enforceable local capacity-building mechanisms. Major infrastructure and technology contracts should include skills development provisions, research partnerships, local manufacturing commitments and technology localization requirements. Without these mechanisms, national policy becomes extraction-oriented rather than transformation-oriented.
Where procurement preference exists, it must comply with Transparency standards, Competitive safeguards, Anti-corruption frameworks and Value-for-money principles. Otherwise the “Nigeria First” risks becoming elite capture under patriotic branding.
National prioritization does not mean economic isolation. The United States remains globally integrated while protecting strategic industries. China trades globally while safeguarding industrial sovereignty.
The European Union promotes open markets while enforcing regulatory autonomy. Thus Nigeria can engage internationally while negotiating from a position of strength.
Procurement reform is necessary, but procurement alone cannot deliver structural transformation. Nigeria First must be understood as a comprehensive national development doctrine integrating industrial policy, trade strategy, fiscal discipline, technology acquisition, and ethical governance.
If properly structured within constitutional and international legal frameworks, Nigeria First does not contradict global engagement. It strengthens Nigeria’s negotiating position within it. The choice is not between openness and sovereignty, the choice is between passive participation and strategic participation.
Mohammed Bougei Attah is a Procurement and Supply Chain Professional and National Coordinator, Procurement Observation and Advocacy Initiative. He can be reached via 234-8034537392 (WhatsApp Only)
