The National Insurance Commission (NAICOM) has rejected allegations of fraud and financial misconduct linked to the recently concluded recapitalisation exercise in Nigeria’s insurance industry, describing a publication making the claims as false and misleading.
The commission also denied reports that the Commissioner for Insurance or any of its directors had been detained, indicted or found culpable of fraudulent activities in connection with the exercise.
NAICOM made its position known in a rejoinder to a publication titled “100 Billion Fraudulent Insurance Recapitalization: EFCC Detains NAICOM Director and Commissioner, Both on Bail”, published on September 9, 2026.
According to the commission, the publication was sponsored by the promoters of NICON Insurance Plc and Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation, which it said are both currently under liquidation.
NAICOM said the publication misrepresented the facts surrounding the recapitalisation exercise and was intended to undermine its regulatory processes and cast aspersions on the integrity of its officials.
The commission said the recapitalisation was conducted in accordance with the Nigerian Insurance Industry Reform Act (NIIRA) 2025 and guidelines issued by the regulator.
It said the exercise was part of its statutory responsibility to strengthen the financial capacity, solvency and resilience of insurance institutions while protecting policyholders and supporting the stability of the insurance sector.
NAICOM also addressed references in the publication to a court order, saying the order did not restrain it from carrying out its statutory and regulatory responsibilities.
The commission said it remained empowered and obligated to discharge its functions in accordance with applicable legislation and regulatory requirements.
On the reported involvement of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), NAICOM acknowledged that the anti-graft agency had recently requested information and explanations from the commission regarding allegations previously circulated in sections of the media.
The regulator said it responded to the request and provided the relevant information and clarifications sought, describing the engagement as a routine administrative process.
NAICOM said the request for information should not be construed as evidence of wrongdoing, indictment or detention, adding that it had not received any finding of wrongdoing in relation to the issues on which the EFCC sought clarification.
The commission maintained that neither the Commissioner for Insurance nor any of its directors had been indicted, charged or found culpable of fraud in connection with the matter.
It described the allegations as unsubstantiated and speculative, saying they could undermine public confidence in the commission and the wider insurance industry.
The latest denial comes against the backdrop of ongoing legal dispute between NAICOM, NICON Insurance Plc and Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation over the implementation and verification of recapitalisation requirements under NIIRA 2025.
The two companies are challenging NAICOM’s assessment of a 1 percent Capital Injection Fee, alongside additional processing and verification fees, pursuant to Appendix 2 of the commission’s Minimum Capital Requirement Guidelines.
They have also challenged NAICOM’s directive requiring existing insurance operators to transfer their entire capital injection funds into an escrow account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).
In a petition sent to the Ministry of Finance last month, the companies argued that the escrow requirement was inconsistent with Section 16(3) of NIIRA 2025, which provides for a 10 percent statutory deposit with the CBN.
The ministry subsequently directed NAICOM to provide the legal basis for the ₦680 million charges and suspend enforcement pending resolution of the petition.
That intervention had earlier raised concerns from Isolac & Associates, an insurance, training and advisory firm, which told Business A.M. that the manner in which the dispute was handled could raise questions about regulatory independence and equal treatment among operators.
The consultancy said the controversy has brought together two distinct questions: whether the companies funded their recapitalisation in accordance with the admissibility requirements under the Nigerian Insurance Industry Reform Act (NIIRA) 2025 and NAICOM’s Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR) Guidelines, and whether the conditions imposed by the regulator for verifying the funds were properly applied.
According to the firm, NICON and Nigeria Re would need to provide documentary evidence that the capital they raised met the applicable admissibility requirements, stressing that the amount of money raised was only one part of the regulatory process.
“Funding of the new capital thresholds in naira figure is necessary but needed to be verified and confirmed either by NAICOM directly and/or through its appointed consultants or agents,” the firm said.
Isolac argued that this distinction was important in understanding NAICOM’s position in the dispute, noting that money placed in a term deposit but not yet subjected to regulatory verification may not necessarily be the same as verified and admissible regulatory capital.
NAICOM, meanwhile, has called on publishers and those responsible for disseminating the September 9 report to retract and correct what it described as misleading claims.
The commission urged media organisations to verify allegations concerning public institutions before publication, particularly where such reports could affect confidence in critical sectors of the economy.
It also advised stakeholders, insurance operators, investors and members of the public to rely on official communications from NAICOM and other competent authorities on matters concerning the regulation of the insurance industry.
The commission said it would continue to cooperate with lawful enquiries from government agencies while carrying out its regulatory responsibilities in accordance with applicable laws and due process.
