The National Insurance Commission has rejected allegations of a N100bn fraud linked to Nigeria’s ongoing insurance recapitalisation exercise, insisting that claims that its top officials were detained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission are false.
The regulator said the allegations were designed to damage the reputation of the commission, its officials and the wider insurance industry at a critical stage of the sector’s capital reform programme.
NAICOM was responding to a September 9 publication alleging a “N100bn fraudulent insurance recapitalisation” and claiming that the Commissioner for Insurance, Olusegun Omosehin, and a director of the commission had been detained by the EFCC and later released on bail.
In a statement issued by its management, the commission dismissed the report as misleading and malicious and demanded its immediate withdrawal and correction.
NAICOM explains EFCC contact
While rejecting the reported detention, NAICOM acknowledged that the EFCC had contacted the commission concerning allegations circulating in the media.
The regulator said it responded by providing the anti-graft agency with the information and explanations requested.
NAICOM stressed that responding to an investigative agency’s request for information should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
According to the commission, it had not received any EFCC finding establishing that its commissioner or any director had committed an offence in connection with the matters under review.
It also denied that any of its officials had been indicted, charged or found culpable of fraudulent activity.
The regulator maintained that the allegations were unsubstantiated and speculative.
Recapitalisation dispute takes centre stage
The controversy comes as NAICOM faces legal challenges over aspects of the insurance industry’s recapitalisation programme.
The dispute involves NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re, which have challenged elements of the implementation of the Nigerian Insurance Industry Reform Act 2025 and NAICOM’s regulatory requirements.
The legislation introduced higher minimum capital requirements for insurers and reinsurers as part of efforts to strengthen the financial position of operators and increase their ability to absorb larger risks.
NAICOM has consistently positioned the recapitalisation exercise as a major reform aimed at improving solvency, protecting policyholders and creating a more resilient insurance market.
The commission said the programme was being implemented in accordance with the 2025 legislation and regulatory guidelines issued under it.
NICON, Nigeria Re challenge charges
Among the provisions being challenged by the two companies is a one per cent capital injection fee, as well as processing and verification charges contained in NAICOM’s Minimum Capital Requirement Guidelines.
The companies have also questioned NAICOM’s directive requiring existing operators to transfer capital injection funds into an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria.
In a petition to the Ministry of Finance, NICON Insurance and Nigeria Re reportedly argued that the escrow requirement conflicted with Section 16(3) of NIIRA 2025, which provides for a 10 per cent statutory deposit with the CBN.
The companies said they complied with the July 31, 2026 recapitalisation deadline by injecting N20bn into NICON Insurance and N30bn into Nigeria Re through Mudaraba Term Deposit accounts with Lotus Bank.
Court battle adds pressure
The disagreement is now before the courts, adding another layer of uncertainty to an already closely watched industry reform.
NAICOM rejected arguments that a court order had stripped it of the authority to perform its statutory functions.
The regulator said it remained empowered and obligated to enforce applicable legislation and regulatory requirements.
The position underscores the broader stakes surrounding the recapitalisation programme, which is intended to reshape the financial capacity of Nigeria’s insurance and reinsurance market.
Reputation becomes another battleground
The latest allegations have introduced a reputational dimension into the recapitalisation dispute.
For NAICOM, the issue extends beyond defending individual officials. The regulator argues that allegations of large-scale fraud could undermine confidence in the entire reform programme and the insurance industry.
That makes the handling of the controversy particularly significant as insurers work to meet higher capital expectations and investors, policyholders and other stakeholders assess the credibility of the regulatory process.
NAICOM’s response is therefore both a denial of the specific allegations and a defence of the integrity of the recapitalisation exercise.
With the substantive dispute already before the courts, the regulator has now made clear that it intends to contest what it describes as attempts to portray the capital reform programme as a fraudulent scheme.
