Topic starter
04/07/2026 10:16 pm
TL;DR: Nigeria’s AML/CFT regime now combines the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, the CBN Customer Due Diligence Regulations 2023, and the SCUML Regulations 2024, creating a more complex obligation set for firms that operate across multiple regulated categories, according to Sumsub. The practical issue is not just rule volume but how compliance teams translate sector-specific KYC, EDD, screening, monitoring, and reporting duties into a single operating model.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by SumSub: “AML/CFT compliance checklist for Nigeria”.
Key questions
A: They should build one operating model that branches by sector before it branches by customer risk.
A: The programme loses the ability to prove who owns the entity and who is authorised to act for it.
Q: Why do AML screening and transaction monitoring need to be tied to onboarding identity checks?
A: Because the customer profile created at onboarding determines what should be screened, monitored, and escalated later.
Practitioner guidance
- Map each sector rule to a single onboarding decision tree Create one decision tree that separates financial institutions, SEC registrants, and SCUML-regulated businesses before verification starts, so the right KYC, KYB, and EDD path is applied from the first touchpoint.
- Separate beneficial ownership checks from representative verification Treat legal-entity ownership evidence and signatory authority as different controls, because the article shows both must be verified and they fail in different ways.
- Align screening lists to the customer segment already approved Ensure sanctions, PEP, adverse media, and local list coverage matches the population admitted through onboarding, rather than relying on a generic post-onboarding screen.
Bottom line: Nigeria's reforms create a layered compliance environment where the same customer may be subject to different obligations depending on sector and licence type.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
04/07/2026 10:19 pm
Layered AML/CFT regulation creates a governance translation problem, not just a policy update. When multiple statutes and sector rules apply at once, the real risk is that teams map obligations to documents instead of to operational controls. Compliance leaders need a single interpretive model that tells them which sector rule governs which customer path, or they will build fragmented exceptions into the programme.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should firms prioritise sector-specific EDD or broad screening first?
A: They should prioritise sector-specific EDD when the business serves categories with different source of funds, PEP, or reporting obligations, because the wrong review path creates more risk than a missing list entry. Broad screening still matters, but it cannot correct a misrouted case.
👉 Read our full editorial: Nigeria AML/CFT compliance shifts raise the bar for regulated firms