Juliet Akoje in Abuja

The Nigeria Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (NCDC) has strongly opposed the proposed National Institute for Public Health and Infectious Diseases (Establishment) Bill, 2025 (HB 2629), warning the creation of a new public health institution could duplicate existing responsibilities, create governance conflicts, and weaken Nigeria’s disease control and emergency response framework.

The agency stated its position on Thursday during a public hearing on the bill organized by the House of Representatives Committee on Infectious Diseases at the National Assembly in Abuja.

Presenting the NCDC’s memorandum, the Director-General of the agency, Dr. Jide Idris, said while the Centre fully supports efforts aimed at strengthening Nigeria’s health security, epidemic preparedness, disease surveillance, and outbreak response capacity, the proposed institute, as presently drafted, seeks to perform functions already assigned to the NCDC by law.

Idris reminded lawmakers that Nigeria already has a legally established and internationally recognized National Public Health Institute through the NCDC, which was created under the NCDC Establishment Act of 2018.

According to him, the agency’s statutory responsibilities include disease surveillance, outbreak detection and response, laboratory coordination, emergency preparedness, implementation of International Health Regulations (IHR), public health research, workforce development, and the coordination of national responses to epidemics and pandemics.

He noted that the major responsibilities proposed for the new institute substantially mirror those already vested in the NCDC, warning that the bill raises serious concerns about duplication of mandates, institutional overlap, governance challenges, and long-term financial sustainability.

The NCDC boss stressed that effective management of public health emergencies requires a single, clearly recognized national authority.

Establishing another federal institution with similar responsibilities, he argued, could generate uncertainty over leadership, accountability, and operational command during disease outbreaks.

The agency further pointed out that the bill designates the proposed institute as Nigeria’s National Focal Point for the International Health Regulations and empowers it to coordinate national responses to infectious disease outbreaks assigned to the NCDC under existing legislation and recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO).

According to the Centre, overlapping mandates could create confusion among state governments, development partners, and international organizations that currently engage with the NCDC as Nigeria’s official public health authority.

Drawing lessons from Nigeria’s successful management of Ebola, COVID-19, Lassa fever, cholera, meningitis, diphtheria, Mpox, and other disease outbreaks, Idris maintained that the country’s public health response system has evolved around a unified command structure.

He warned that introducing parallel institutions could fragment emergency response efforts when coordination is most critical.

The Director-General also raised concerns about the financial implications of establishing a new federal institution with headquarters, zonal offices, state structures, governing councils, and extensive staffing requirements at a time when the nation faces competing developmental priorities.

He expressed reservations over proposals to allocate part of the Basic Health Care Provision Fund to the proposed institute, warning that such a move could further strain an already limited funding mechanism and reduce resources available for existing health priorities.

Idris noted that the federal government has invested significantly over the years in strengthening the NCDC’s laboratory network, surveillance systems, emergency operations centres, genomic sequencing capabilities, workforce development programmes, and outbreak response infrastructure.

According to him, creating another institution with similar responsibilities would duplicate existing investments and undermine the federal government’s ongoing policy of streamlining public institutions and improving efficiency.

He added that international best practices support the existence of a single national public health institute responsible for disease surveillance, preparedness, and emergency response, noting that Nigeria adopted the same model through the establishment of the NCDC.

The agency therefore urged the National Assembly to strengthen existing public health structures rather than create parallel institutions.

While reiterating support for upgrading the National Tuberculosis and Leprosy Training Centre in Saye, Zaria, into a tertiary institution dedicated to teaching, clinical services, and research, the NCDC called on lawmakers to review provisions of the bill that establish what it described as a parallel public health command structure.

Idris disclosed that the agency had submitted a detailed clause-by-clause analysis identifying areas of conflict between the proposed legislation and the NCDC Act, 2018, noting that several provisions of the bill appeared to have been reproduced almost verbatim from the existing law.

He concluded that the issue before lawmakers was not whether Nigeria should strengthen its public health capacity, but whether that objective would be better achieved by reinforcing the National Public Health Institute already established by law or by creating another institution with substantially overlapping responsibilities.

Earlier, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Tajudeen Abbas, described the proposed institute as a strategic investment in Nigeria’s health security and preparedness against future disease outbreaks.

Represented by Hon. Bashir Zubair, the Speaker said Nigeria’s experiences with Ebola, COVID-19, Lassa fever, and other infectious disease outbreaks exposed significant vulnerabilities within the country’s healthcare system and highlighted the urgent need for stronger institutions capable of anticipating, preventing, and effectively responding to emerging public health threats.

Abbas stressed that a country of Nigeria’s population size and strategic importance could no longer afford a reactive approach to disease outbreaks but must invest in scientific innovation, research, surveillance, and sustainable preparedness.

According to him, the proposed institute would provide a comprehensive framework for integrating disease prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, research, control, and management within a coordinated national system while empowering Nigerian scientists to develop home-grown solutions to infectious diseases.

He maintained that the objective of the legislation was not simply to create another government institution but to establish a functional, agile, and world-class institute capable of delivering measurable health outcomes for Nigerians and contributing meaningfully to global public health.

In his welcome address, Chairman of the House Committee on Infectious Diseases, Hon. Amobi Godwin Ogah, represented by Hon. Mark Esset, explained that the public hearing was convened to receive memoranda from stakeholders on two important bills before the committee—the National Institute for Public Health and Infectious Diseases (Establishment) Bill and the Tuberculosis Anti-Discrimination Bill.

Ogah recalled that during an oversight visit to the National Tuberculosis and Leprosy Training Centre in Saye, Zaria, in October 2025, members of the committee discovered enormous but underutilized human and infrastructural capacity at the facility.

He said the discovery inspired the committee’s recommendation to upgrade the centre into a national public health institute and also informed the decision to broaden the committee’s mandate by changing its name from the House Committee on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Control to the House Committee on Infectious Diseases.

The lawmaker disclosed that the presidency had already approved the upgrade of the Zaria training centre into a public health institute and expressed optimism that the proposed legislation would significantly strengthen Nigeria’s capacity to prevent, diagnose, treat, and manage infectious diseases.

On the proposed Tuberculosis Anti-Discrimination Bill, Ogah said the legislation seeks to protect the rights and dignity of persons living with or affected by tuberculosis, eliminate stigma and discrimination, and encourage early testing, diagnosis, and treatment as part of efforts to reduce the burden of the disease in Nigeria.

Stakeholders from the Federal Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, development partners, civil society organizations, professional bodies, and health institutions also made submissions at the hearing as the House Committee continues legislative consideration of the two bills.