Nutrition Council Bill sparks controversy over University autonomy, food businesses

A proposed bill seeking to establish the Nutritionists Registration Council of Nigeria has sparked controversy, with critics warning that its provisions could undermine university autonomy, duplicate existing professional regulation and impose restrictions on food-related businesses and public nutrition communication.

The bill, sponsored by Chike John Okafor, a member of the House of Representatives, was discussed during a recent edition of Breakfast Central, where policy experts and food safety advocates questioned its implications for Nigeria’s food system amid persistent malnutrition and food safety concerns.

Supporters of the proposed legislation argue that establishing a dedicated regulatory council would professionalise nutrition practice, strengthen standards and improve the country’s response to malnutrition and stunting.

However, critics, including representatives of the Centre for African Policy Research and Advisory and the Centre for Food Safety and Agricultural Research, said the legislation could create overlapping regulatory responsibilities and excessive control over nutrition education and practice.

Dr Segun Adebayo, Director of the Centre for African Policy Research and Advisory, said the National Universities Commission (NUC) had raised concerns about provisions that could give the proposed council substantial influence over university nutrition programmes.

According to Adebayo, the NUC questioned whether the council should have powers to determine academic standards, curricula and accreditation for university programmes, responsibilities traditionally exercised through established higher education regulatory frameworks.

READ ALSO; Nutritionists’ Council Bill: Coalition alleges foreign interests, demands probe

He also noted that representatives of the dietetics profession had raised concerns about the proposed legislation, arguing that a separate bill with similar provisions had already progressed through the National Assembly and was awaiting further legislative action.

Adebayo said the existence of the two proposals raised questions about duplication, the necessity of the new council and the possible implications for professional regulation.

Concerns over food businesses and public communication

Professor Christopher Amoa, Executive Director of the Centre for Food Safety and Agricultural Research, argued that the proposed legislation appeared to extend beyond professional registration into areas that could affect food businesses, public nutrition education and the communication of dietary information.

Amoa said the bill could restrict the ability of university lecturers and other professionals to determine academic curricula and certify graduates independently.

He also expressed concern that its provisions could limit who is permitted to provide nutrition advice or communicate information about food and dietary choices.

According to him, the proposed restrictions could potentially affect food vendors and other businesses if interpreted broadly.

Amoa cited possible penalties of up to N5 million or five years’ imprisonment for certain unauthorised activities, arguing that the implications required careful scrutiny.

He further questioned provisions he said could allow foreign participation in decisions concerning nutrition practice and dietary standards in Nigeria.

The claims reflect the concerns raised by the bill’s opponents during the discussion. The precise scope of the proposed restrictions and penalties would need to be assessed against the bill’s actual provisions and any amendments adopted during the legislative process.

Malnutrition debate intensifies

The controversy comes as Nigeria continues to face significant public health challenges associated with malnutrition, food insecurity and unsafe food practices.

Advocates of the proposed council maintain that stronger professional regulation could help improve the quality of nutrition services and establish clearer standards for practitioners.

Opponents, however, argue that reform should avoid duplicating existing regulatory structures or creating unnecessary barriers for researchers, educators, food businesses and other professionals involved in nutrition-related work.

They have called for a closer examination of the bill, particularly its relationship with existing legislation governing dietitians, universities and professional practice.

Calls for legislative scrutiny

The debate has placed renewed attention on how lawmakers can strengthen nutrition standards without creating conflicting institutional mandates.

Key issues include the division of responsibilities between professional councils and universities, the scope of activities reserved for registered practitioners, the regulation of nutrition advice and the potential impact on small businesses.

The existence of a separate bill concerning dietetics has also raised questions about whether the two legislative proposals should be harmonised to prevent overlapping responsibilities.

As deliberations continue, the central challenge for lawmakers will be to determine whether the proposed council addresses genuine regulatory gaps while protecting academic freedom, existing professional frameworks and legitimate food-related businesses.