Nigeria’s PPP regime is entering a new phase of rigorous scrutiny.
The ICRC PPP Regulatory Notice sets clearer benchmarks for project approvals. It also redefines the balance of accountability across the system.
At its core, however, lie two critical questions. First, what counts as “value” in a Public–Private Partnership under the new thresholds? Second, where should presidential oversight rightly begin and end?
These questions are not merely procedural. They go to the heart of investor confidence, project bankability and the credibility of Nigeria’s infrastructure delivery framework.
What the ICRC PPP Regulatory Notice changes
The President issued the Notice under section 33 of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission Act. It introduces revised financial approval thresholds for federal PPP projects. Until now, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) was the sole approving authority for those projects.
The Notice delegates approval to Project Approval Boards (PABs). A project worth less than ₦20 billion may be approved by a Ministerial PAB. A project worth less than ₦10 billion may be approved by an Agency PAB. By contrast, projects above those limits, or projects involving more than one MDA, still go to the FEC.
The new regime reaches pipeline projects that had not secured FEC approval before the Federal Government Circular (SGF Ref. No. 59804/II243) of 7 July 2025. It also covers all future PPP projects. In addition, the Notice requires full private-sector financing, so proponents can no longer rely on government guarantees, comfort letters or direct public funding. The ICRC keeps its central role. It leads negotiations, runs due diligence and issues the Certificate of Compliance that every project needs before approval.
Why the Notice sits on a fragile legal footing
The Notice is subsidiary legislation. Consequently, it cannot override the ICRC Act, which is the principal law governing PPPs in Nigeria. Sections 2(1) and (2) of the Act require every concession to reach the FEC for approval before any contract is signed. By handing that power to the PABs, the Notice departs from the statute and risks being ultra vires.
Sections 33 and 34 let the Commission make regulations and issue guidelines with the President’s approval. However, a guideline cannot reassign a statutory power. Nigerian courts have held consistently that a statute cannot be amended by subsidiary legislation, as in NNPC v FAMFA Oil and Godwin Ugwuanyi v NICON Insurance. Therefore the proper route is an amendment to the ICRC Act by the National Assembly, which could formally establish the PABs and add an appeals process.
Two further problems stand out. First, the Notice does not explain how project cost is to be benchmarked, which leaves the threshold open to dispute. Second, the blanket ban on guarantees is hard to justify, because the Act permits guarantees with FEC approval. A cleaner rule would restrict guarantees only for PAB-approved projects.
What investors should do now
The Notice aims to speed up infrastructure delivery. Even so, it carries real invalidation risk for deals approved outside the FEC. Sponsors and lenders should map each project against the thresholds, confirm the correct approving authority, and document FEC involvement wherever a guarantee or public support is contemplated. Our analysis of the Nigerian Ports Economic Regulatory Agency (NPERA) Act, 2026 covers a related shift in infrastructure regulation, and our note on the NGN4 trillion power sector issuance programme shows how large infrastructure financings are now being structured.
Click the button above to read our full legal analysis of the ICRC PPP Regulatory Notice and its implications for PPP projects in Nigeria.