Nigeria is Africa’s most populous nation. It is a country that operates a federal system of government fostered by a written constitution. The federal government comprises of three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial; guarded by a separation of power pursuant to Chapter I, Part II of the Constitution. The Nigerian constitution sets out the legislative functions of the National Assembly and the State Houses of Assembly.

The Federation of Nigeria encompasses 36 states, divided into six geopolitical zones, each with enacted state laws.

North-Central Zone: Benue, Kogi, Kwara, Nassarawa, Niger, and Plateau; North-East Zone: Adamawa, Bauchi, Bornue, Gomber, Taraba, and Yobe; North-West Zone: Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Jigawa, Kebbi, Sokoto, and Zamfara; South-West Zone: Lagos, Ekiti, Ogun, Ondo, Oshun, and Oyo; South-South Zone: Akwa, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo, Ibom, and Rivers and South-East Zone: Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo.

Nigeria’s domestic legal framework is further made complex because it operates legal systems that include Statutory law, Customary law, Sharia Law, and Common Law.

Where children’s rights are concerned, underpinning their protection is Nigeria’s (UN Membership, 1960) ratification of the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) and the 1990 African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACRWC). Both international treaties have influenced national laws on matters relating to children, including in a cross-border context so far as possible. Thus, the Nigerian Constitution gives effect to these international treaties through the Child Rights Act, which was enacted in 2003. However as to international legal frameworks specific to the cross border movement of children for example, Nigeria is not a Contracting State to any of the HCCH Children conventions, particularly: the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in respondent of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children.

However, Nigeria does have bilateral treaty agreements with a number of neighbouring countries, although these are specific to issues of child trafficking regionally and globally. For example, ECOWAS countries such as Ghana, Gambia, Benin, Togo (See p. 9 of the Nigeria Government Country Report on violence against children).

Returning to the countries’ national laws with respect to children, as stated, the Child’s Rights Act was enacted on 31 July 2003 in order to provide and protect the rights of the Nigerian child; and other related matters (a child being anyone below the age of 18 s277). The Act has 278 sections and 11 Schedules. The four basic rights of the child: – Survival, Development, Protection and Participation. While Nigeria is a signatory to the UNCRC, and national legislation has passed the Child Rights Act, in order for the Act to be enforceable in a State, it must be passed into law by the House of Assembly of the State. The law appears to have differing levels of acceptance and implementation among Nigerian states. Following the bill and implementation stage the CRA is reproduced at state specific level, see for example, the 2006 Child’s Rights Law of Ogun State, 2006 Child’s Rights Law of Oyo State, 2007 Child’s Rights Law of Lagos State, 2009 Child’s Rights Law of Kogi State,

The starting point pursuant to section 1 of the Child Rights Act is that “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interest of the child shall be a primary consideration.”

In addition, matters relating to children following the breakdown of a marriage may be determined pursuant to the 1970 Matrimonial Causes Act (see for example Part IV on Maintenance, Custody and Settlement, and in particular, section 71), supplemented by the Matrimonial Causes Rules 1983 (see for example Parts 4 (custody) and 5 (application for custody by a person order than their parents)).

Onyoja Momoh

Country Reporter:

Onyója Momoh


Onyója is a leading barrister and academic expert in international child and family law.

Practising from England and Wales, her cases involve Nigeria and the sub-Saharian region, as well as instructions to give expert advice.

Onyója has volunteered to keep this page about Nigeria up to date.

Lawyers and mediators in Nigeria

We provide a list of lawyers and mediators in Nigeria, who can assist you in drafting an international parenting plan, in preventing conflicts over the primary residence of the children, and in negotiating and litigating over the children in the event of relocation or child abduction.


Parental authority: Nigeria

Decision making model


A child means a person under the age of eighteen years old, and under the Child’s Right Act 2003, parental responsibility is defined as:

Section 277
(a) all the rights duties, powers, responsibilities, and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property; and
(b) the rights, powers, and duties which a guardian of the estate of the child appointed, before the commencement of this Act to act generally would have had in relation to the child and his property, and includes, in particular, the right of the guardian to recover or receive in his own name, or the benefit of the child, property of whatever description and wherever situated which the child is entitled to receive or recover;

Additionally, parental responsibility may be conferred upon a holder of a residence order and may last for the duration of that order, it may be a parent, or a guardian (section 82) of the child concerned; or even by virtue of a care order. Note the apparent distinction between having parental responsibility and simply having care of a child or other statutory duty to maintain the child, wherein a reasonably expectation that that carer will safeguard or promote the welfare of the child is envisaged (section 68 (9) and 10)).

Whereas one would expect that by operation of the law, parental responsibility is automatic for the birth parent/mother, this is not specified under the Child Rights Act nor explicit anywhere under the Act. The first comprehensive provision on parental responsibility at section 68 expresses that if neither party are married, then either the father or mother may apply to the family court (section 153) for parental responsibility or may agree the same. On this basis, it can be inferred that when the parents are married, a father, for example, would automatically have parental responsibility. As per section 68, parental responsibility can of course be jointly held, it may be by agreement, although for such agreement to be given effect it must comply with regulations pursuant to section 68.

Section 20 of the Child’s Rights Act provides that:

20. Every parent, guardian,’ institution, person and authority responsible for the care, maintenance, upbringing,’ education, training, socialization, employment, and rehabilitation of a child has the duty to provide the necessary guidance, discipline, education, and training for the child in his or its care such as will equip the child to secure his assimilation, appreciation and observance of the responsibilities set out in this Part of the Act.

Section 68
68.-( 1) Where the father and mother of a child were not married to each other
at the time of the birth of the child-
(a) the Family Court established under section 153 of this Act may-
(i) on the application of the father, order that he shall have parental responsibility for the child, or
(ii) on the application of the mother, order that she shall have parental responsibility for the child, or
(b) the father and mother may by agreement have joint parental responsibility for the child

Whereas parental responsibility is vested in a parent or guardian, there may be circumstances where that exercise of parental responsibility in so far as caring for and having the child reside with that parent may be curbed because of abandonment (s72(a)), desertion (s72(b)), or having allowed another person (for example, a relative) to care for the child for such a length of time that the court would not order that child’s return to the parent’s custody unless the child’s welfare supports this, and the parent is fit and proper (s73)). In other words, on the basis that the parent has acquiesced circumstances were their parental responsibility is in essence curbed.

Note also that parental responsibility and custody often intersect within provisions under the Child Rights Act and Matrimonial Causes Act when seeking to address ancillary issues as they arise in the context of custody disputes or divorce. In such disputes, alongside section 69 CRA, is section 71 of the MCA (see below) on the approach to determining custody dispute. Ultimately, it is a welfare exercise, which as per Part IX may involve the appointment of a guardian ad litem pursuant to section 90. In matters relating to children, the court has the power, as the CRA demonstrates through various provisions, to ascertain the wishes and feelings of a child and (see sections 44(2)(d), 75, 193(2)(a), 195(2), 196(3)), taking into account their age and understanding and to engage a Guardian ad litem if need be, to represent the child’ interest (section 89). However, this level of scrutiny is likely to arise within the broader context of custody as opposed to just a dispute on conferring parental responsibility on a parent. Of course it there were disputes as to paternity, then independent evidence such as a DNA test would be obtained.

Section 69 of the Child’s Rights Act, 2003 provides the following:
69. –
(1) The Court may–
(a)on the application of the father or mother of a child make such order as it may deem fit with respect to the custody of the child and the right of access to the child of either parent, having regard to‐
(i) the welfare of the child and the conduct of the parent; and
(ii) the wishes of the mother and father of the child;
(b) alter, vary, or discharge an order made under paragraph (a) of this subsection on the application of–
(i) the father or mother of the child, or
(ii) the guardian of the child, after the death of the father or mother of the child; and
(iii) in every case, make such order with respect to costs as it may think just.

Further, an unmarried parent can acquire parental responsibility:
• if he and the mother make a parental responsibility agreement (s68(1)(b))
• if the court orders that he should have parental responsibility (ss68(1)(a))
• if he has obtained a residence order for the child (s68(5)).

After divorce

Whereas there is no provision that suggests the cessation of parental responsibility upon divorce, this is distinguishable from the term custody. Of note however, custody is not defined though the interpretation as applied in both legislations is synonymous with the ‘care’ and ‘control’ of a child, denoting physical presence with his or her carer. In the case of Nwosu v Nwosu (2012) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1301) 1 p. 32 paras. F-G, custody was defined as: ‘The care, control and maintenance of a child awarded by a court to a responsible adult. Custody involves legal custody (decision making authority) and physical custody (care giving authority), and an award of custody usually grants both rights’.

Note that there are several nationally recognised marriage systems such as customary marriage and traditional marriages, each enshrined in their own principles. In this regard, where the law is concerned, one also needs to take into account whether or not that marriage is subsequently registered. This is because different types of marriages may dictate how custody is viewed and thus parental authority. Custody decisions directly influence the welfare and upbringing of a child, and in divorce proceedings, this is considered pursuant to section 71 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1970. See also Osalade v. Osalade (2020) LPELR-51165 CA.

Section 71 of the Matrimonial Causes Act provides the following:

(1) In proceedings with respect to the custody, guardianship, welfare, advancement, or education of children of a marriage, the court shall regard the interests of those children as the paramount consideration; and subject thereto, the court may make such order in respect of those matters as it thinks proper.

(2) The court may adjourn any proceedings within subsection (1) of this section until a report has been obtained from a welfare officer on such matters relevant to the proceedings as the court considers desirable, and any such report may thereafter be received in evidence.

(3) In proceedings with respect to the custody of children of a marriage, the court may, if it is satisfied that it is desirable to do so, make an order placing the children, or such of them as it thinks fit, in the custody of a person other than a party to the marriage.

(4) Where the court makes an order placing a child of a marriage in the custody of a party to the marriage, or of a person other than a party to the marriage, it may include in the order such provision as it thinks proper for access to the child by the other party to the marriage, or by the parties or a party to the marriage, as the case may be. (Nigeria 1970)

Like section 69 CRA, a welfare exercise is emphasised here, that being the court’s paramount consideration. In Alabi v Alabi (2007) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1039) 297, pp. 347-348, paras G-A., the Court of Appeal elaborated on determining factors as follows:

Thus, certain relevant criteria must be considered in the determination of the welfare of the child as in this case and they include:
1. The degree of familiarity of the child with each of the parents (parties);
2. The amount of affection by the child for each of the parent and vice versa;
3. The respective incomes of the parties;
4. Education of the Child;
5. The fact that one of the parties now lives with a third party as either man or woman and;
6. The fact that in the case of children of tender ages custody should normally be awarded to the mother unless other considerations make it undesirable etc.”

Traveling with children: Nigeria

If a parent wishes to travel outside Nigeria with their child, he, or she needs to obtain permission from the other parent and/or any holders of parental responsibility. There are no specific laws or regulation that confers authority on the travelling parent to leave Nigeria for a period of time without requiring the consent of another parent or holder of parental authority. Unless specific custody arrangements have been agreed by consent or in court proceedings.

Notwithstanding this ambiguity under family law, the authority to travel with a child is a familiar area where cross border movements are guarded by immigration laws (see the 2017 Immigration rules (e.g., Article 40), the 2015 Immigration Act 2015 and the 2017 Immigration Regulations). Thus, there are stages were demonstrating consent is a requirement, from the obtaining of a passport or visa to travel, to checks at official borders during travel.

To that end, when travelling with children, it is encouraged that some form of documentary consent is obtained from the absent parent or that the travelling parent can rely on a court order. As to the former, a consent letter prescriptive to the extent that it sets out the travel itinerary, including but not limited to timescales, destination, accommodation, and contact details, and that the document clearly identifies the child to whom consent is related to and the parents. A copy of a government issued ID of the absent parent should accompany the aforementioned (evidencing at the least the relationship between that parent and child). Sample letter of authorization (children under 18) for a visa to travel to Nigeria or a Nigerian Passport: temple from the Consulate General of Nigeria (New York, USA)

Within separated or divorced families, it is advisable that a court order amply addresses the issue of travel abroad and demonstrably so, taking into account the nature of custody: joint or sole, and access rights. In the absence of this, a consent letter, notarised, if need be, is advisable. If possible, one that is subsequently reflected in a consent order for future purposes. An order that sets out the ambit and limit of travel abroad, such as, consent from either party to travel abroad on holiday without the need to re-ask for consent for every trip. As long as details of the trip is shared and the time frame of such trip does not exceed [insert] month, otherwise, renewed consent is required.

Section 27 of the Child’s Rights Act 2003 provides that where a child is unlawfully removed or taken out of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (subsection 2(a)) away from the custody or protection of his father or mother, guardian or another with lawful care, an offence is committed. See subsequent exploration of section 27 of the CRA below, because whereas this provision may be read as regarding the unlawful removal of a child from the custody of a parental authority holder, it is not so explicit that it applies to the civil aspect of a non-consensual removal between two or more holders of parental authority. Thus, the law is ambiguous on this, and much will depend on a parent seeking to enforce their custody rights by asserting a breach because consent was not granted.

Decision making model

Child relocation: Nigeria

The relocation of a child, unless by consent (from anyone with parental responsibility), will require the permission of the court. This may be relocation within Nigeria, so from one State to another, or outside Nigeria.

As relocation will impact the ability and nature of the parental responsibility exercised by the other parent (or holder of parental responsibility), thus changing the nature of custody, the court will have regard to the welfare of the child.

As per the Child’s Rights Act 2003, Part 1, section 1:
‘In every action concerning a child, whether undertaken by an individual, public or private body, institutions or-service, court of law, or administrative or legislative authority, the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration’.

In conducting a welfare exercise and formulating what is in the best interests of the child, the rights of a child are prescribed under Part II, to include but not limited to the court considering the child’s right to family life, home, education, safety, religion, survival, and development.

Note also, pursuant to section 9(2) which anticipates circumstances akin to relocation, in other words, where a parent, legal guardian or other with authority may exercise ‘control over the movement of the child in the interest of education, safety and welfare of the child’.

Save for the above observations, there is no explicit provision within the Child’s Rights Act on relocation, and the focus for any court, in a custodial dispute, would be to consider the welfare of the children, with the best interest of the child being of paramount consideration in all actions – this it appears, gives the court a broad and wide autonomy on the issue.

Child abduction: Nigeria

Decision making model

International framework

Currently, Nigeria is not a signatory to any international treaties specifically designed to facilitate cross border cooperation in the return of children wrongfully removed or retained away from their country of habitual residence. The multilateral treaties inferred are the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in respondent of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children.

Notwithstanding the lack of an international framework, Nigeria’s domestic laws recognise the harmful effects of child abduction hence reflecting on the abduction, removal, and transfer from lawful custody within section 27 of the Child Rights Act 2003.

27.(1) No person shall remove or take a child out of the custody or protection of his father or mother, guardian or such other person having lawful care or charge of the child against the will of the father, mother, guardian or other person.
(2) A person who contravenes the provisions of subsection (1) of this section commits an offence and is liable on conviction–
(a) where the child is unlawfully removed or taken out of Federal Republic of Nigeria-
(i) with intention to return the child to Nigeria, to imprisonment for a term of fifteen years, or
(ii) with no intention to return the child to Nigeria, to imprisonment for a term of twenty years.
(b) where the child is unlawfully removed or taken out of the State in which the father, mother, guardian or such other person who has lawful care of the child is ordinarily resident, to imprisonment for a term often years, or
(c) in any case, to imprisonment for a term of seven years.

However, section 27 deals with this from a criminal perspective, and thus even if subsection 1 could be read to suggest the removal of a child from his mother or father by another with parental responsibility, the remedy in subsection 2(a) are criminal punishments that simply does not bode well for a taking parent particularly in circumstances where there may be arguable “defences” as to why that abduction was committed.

A child is removed from/to Nigeria – remedies in Nigeria

When a child is removed from Nigeria, depending on the status of the left behind parent, their quest for a remedy is two-fold (in Nigeria and in the country of refuge). The left behind parent should first ensure that their status as a holder of parental responsibility is secure pursuant to section 20 CRA, as is the recognition of their rights of custody (and indeed access) pursuant to section 69 CRA, bearing in mind the definition of custody, this should encompass an order that reiterates the custody rights of the left behind parent, that the child is habitually resident in Nigeria (‘ordinarily resident’ is the term used within the Act) and a Return Order to give effect to those rights. Note however, that any such order will engage a welfare exercise and thus effectively should address any safeguarding concerns that would render a return order inappropriate. A return order should state that the child should be returned to Nigeria. Finally, an application for the child to be made a ward of the court should be made pursuant to section 93-99 of the CRA.

As to criminal proceedings, one should be weary of invoking section 27 of the CRA; with heavily punitive consequences that may in turn mount a defence against the return, especially where the taking parent is the primary carer. As there is currently no concentration of jurisdiction, ideally a special family court pursuant to section 153 CRA is better placed to deal with children matters. In states such as Lagos or the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, there is a stronger likelihood of engaging specialist Family Court High Court Judges.

If a child were removed to Nigeria, similar steps should be adopted in seeking a return order to their country of habitual residence.

If an order is made for the return of a child taken abroad, the left behind parent should ensure that the order is lodged with appropriate authorities. In doing so, a quasi-system of cooperation is forged via diplomatic channels, including liaison between Embassies, Consulate and High Commissions abroad and the foreign Courts. The return order should request the assistance of all judicial and administrative bodies to render support in (i) establishing the whereabouts of the child and/or (ii) taking necessary and appropriate steps in facilitating the return directed in the order. It must be said that challenges may persist without the vehicle for automatic recognition of foreign orders.

If an order is made for the return of a child brought to Nigeria, the order should include tightly worded directions prescribing how the order will be given effect to, taking into account any measures that may assist with a sure and safe return.

Note that the orders made may well be the subject of an appeal.

A child removed from/to Nigeria – remedies in the foreign court

The left-behind parent should seek the return of the child through the forum in the foreign jurisdiction to which the child has been taken to. In essence, an urgent application should be made to the court in the country of refuge. It matters not that the country is a Convention or non-Convention Country, so long as Nigeria is not a signatory to the 1980 Hague Convention, the treaty will not apply. However of course a Convention country would have an awareness of the 1980 Hague objectives, enabling a focused approach to child abduction. In England and Wales for example, an application may be made under the inherent jurisdiction of the high court, seeking that the child be made a Ward of the court, alongside other injunctive reliefs and/or remedies such as a (Tipstaff) passport orders, a Prohibited Steps Order, a Location Order, a Port Alert, Freezing Injunctions, and any other specific injunctive provisions. Much will depend on the circumstances of the case. Making a child a Ward of the court is also a protective measure that vests custody of the child in the Court until final decisions are made. It must also be pointed out that non-Convention proceedings in England and Wales will engage a summary welfare determination and in the same vein almost always require a welfare report to enable an inquiry into aspects of the child’s welfare. In essence, from a Nigerian perspective currently, seeking the return of children wrongfully removed or retained in another country (other than their own) and against the custody rights of another parent will not benefit from the swift return mechanism under the 1980 Hague Convention, whichever remedy is pursued.

Parents are encouraged to seek out specialist international child abduction lawyers in which ever jurisdiction the child has been taken to.

Child participation

Proceedings under CRA 2003 make provision for the appointment of a Guardian ad litem who is tasked with representing the child and his or her interests in certain proceedings. As per section 89:
89.-( I) The Court may, for the purpose of any specified proceedings, appoint
a guardian ad litem. for the child concerned to safeguard the interests of the child, unless it is satisfied that it is not necessary to do so.
(2) The guardian ad litem shall-
(a) be appointed in accordance with the Rules of Court; and
(b) be under, a duty to safeguard the interests of the child in the manner prescribed by those rules.

Time scale

There are no published timescales or guidance on the length of time to deal with cases in Nigeria involving child abduction. However, given the scope to pursue a remedy in the foreign country (country of refuge), if a Nigerian child were removed to England and Wales for example, the country has adopted a similar timeframe to Hague Convention cases, that being six weeks; although this timescale, especially in wardship proceedings is in reality over-optimistic.


Some jurisdictions offer transnational mediation through formally recognised services, and this is to be encouraged where appropriate. In Nigeria, AMDR is championed, with initiatives such as the Multi-Door Courthouses in several states, In Lagos State, the initiative earned its 20th anniversary recently, while striving to continue to maintain the services of professionals and accredited mediators to help resolve suitably screen civil cases. The concentration of mediation expertise in children cases involving cross border matters is, however, unknown. Again, parents are encouraged to seek out specialist international child abduction lawyers where possible.

Legal aid

When seeking a return order or other remedy from the court of refuge, exploring access to legal aid is beneficial. In England and Wales for example, legal aid is available however for an application under the inherent jurisdiction (child abduction/ wardship) it is means and merits tested.

In Nigeria, the 2011 Legal Aid Act provides for the establishment of a legal aid and access to justice fund. The qualification of having access to Legal aid as provided by Section 9 of the Legal Aid Act 2011 ‘Legal aid shall only be granted to a person whose income does not exceed N5,000 per annum’ (approximately £5.60). Thus, legal aid is available in Nigeria, but it is still a very limited resource, nor does it appear to be available in child abduction cases in a means tested scenario.

Decision making model

Criminal law : Nigeria

Criminal law

Section 371 of the Criminal Code criminalises the kidnapping of a child, with a 14 year maximum sentence if found guilty. The provision states that:

Any person who, with intent to deprive any parent, guardian or other person who has the lawful care or charge of a child under the age of twelve years, of the possession of such child, or with intent to steal any article upon or about the person of any such child‐

(1) forcibly or fraudulently takes or entices away, or detains the child;


(2) receives or harbours the child, knowing it to have been so taken or enticed away or detained, is guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years.

It is a defence to a charge of any of the offences defined in this section of this Code to prove that the accused person claimed in good faith a right to the possession of the child, or, in the case of an illegitimate child, is its mother or claimed to be its father.

In addition, as already mentioned, pursuant to section 27 of the Child Right’s Act, the abduction of a child from lawful custody is a criminal offence. If found guilty under this law, the sentence is up to 15 years imprisonment where an intention is established to return the child and 20 years where the offender had no intention to return the child.

Decision making model

Websites : Nigeria

See full provision:

The Child Right’s Act 2003

Matrimonial Causes Act 1990

Nigeria High Commission (London, UK)
Permission for the issuance of first passport, or Emergency Travel Documents (requirements including letter of consent). As to assistance in children matters, note that there is currently no Consular Section or Unit at the Nigeria High Commission in the UK designated to address cross border children issues, such as child abduction or care proceedings.

Nigeria Immigration Service
Applying for a passport from or outside Nigeria or applying for a visa to travel to Nigeria. From England for example, you apply through the Nigeria High Commission. 9, Northumberland Avenue, London WC2N 55BX.
United Kingdom; +(44) 207 839 12 or 440207 839 1244

High Commissions and Foreign Embassies in Nigeria
To engage diplomatic supports and assistance, especially in cases involving the unlawful removal or retention of children. For example, a list of EU Member states that have a residence Embassy and Consulate in Nigeria may be found here.

The Embassy of Nigeria Abroad
With a presence in over 100 countries, parents are strongly encouraged to seek support from diplomatic authorities in the country the child has been removed to or from Nigeria.

The Nigeria Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs website can be found here.

The Nigeria Federal Ministry of Justice website can be found here.

The Nigeria Federal Ministry of Women Affairs and Social Development website can be found here.

The information on this page about Nigeria is based on work originally generated from research by the author into international family law in Nigeria.

Books & Articles: Nigeria

Nigeria and The Hague Conventions

Why Nigeria should welcome the value and feasibility of acceding to the Hague Conference Children's Conventions

August 2020

By Onyoja Momoh,
barrister at 5 Pump Court Chambers, London

Onyoja discusses why Nigeria should become a contracting party to the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s (HCCH) “big four” Children’s Conventions: the 1980 Child Abduction, 1993 Intercountry Adoption, 1996 Child Protection and 2007 Maintenance conventions.

This article was published on Africa Portal.


Nigerian adoption orders

The Recognition at Common Law of Nigerian Adoption Orders in the UK and the Role of the 1993 Hague Convention on Inter-country Adoption in Nigeria: Learning from Re V (A Child) (Recognition of Foreign Adoption) [2017] EWHC 1733 (Fam)

June 2020

By Onyoja Momoh,
barrister at 5 Pump Court Chambers, London

This article argues that the benefits for Nigeria of acceding to the 1993 Hague Convention are far reaching, the default position of recognition at common law is not sustainable. The best interests and welfare of the Nigerian child demands a robust and protective practice of inter-country adoption and the recognition of foreign adoptions.

This article was published on the website of IISTE.

Blogs about Nigeria


No posted blogs published yet.

Case law in Nigeria

No posted blogs published yet.

Lawyers and mediators: Nigeria

Onyója Momoh

Onyója Momoh


Header: image by Andrew Esiebo.