The National Insurance Commission (NAICOM) has rejected allegations of N100 billion fraud linked to Nigeria’s recently concluded insurance recapitalisation exercise, describing the claims as false, misleading and unsubstantiated.
The commission also denied reports that its Commissioner for Insurance and a director were detained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over the exercise.
In a rejoinder to a September 9 publication titled “100 Billion Fraudulent Insurance Recapitalisation: EFCC Detains NAICOM Director and Commissioner, Both on Bail,” NAICOM said the report misrepresented facts and sought to undermine the integrity of the commission and its officials.
The regulator alleged that the publication was sponsored by promoters of NICON Insurance Plc and Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation, both of which are currently undergoing liquidation.
NAICOM said the recapitalisation exercise was conducted in line with the Nigerian Insurance Industry Reform Act (NIIRA) 2025 and regulatory guidelines, with the aim of strengthening insurers’ financial capacity, solvency and resilience.
It also rejected claims that the court order cited in the publication restricted it from carrying out its statutory duties.
NAICOM Explains EFCC Enquiry
The commission said the EFCC had requested information and clarification over allegations circulated in sections of the media, to which it responded by providing the requested information.
It said responding to such a request was a routine administrative process and should not be construed as evidence of wrongdoing.
“At no time did the Commission receive any finding of wrongdoing in relation to the matters on which clarification was sought,” NAICOM said.
The regulator also denied that its commissioner or any director had been detained, charged or found culpable of fraud.
Recall that this came against the backdrop of a wider dispute between NAICOM and two insurance companies, NICON Insurance Plc and Nigeria Reinsurance Corporation, over the implementation of the recapitalisation requirements.
The two companies have challenged aspects of NAICOM’s handling of the recapitalisation exercise, including issues surrounding their compliance with the new capital requirements and the treatment of funds raised during the process.
The dispute has subsequently spilled into the courts, with the companies contesting regulatory decisions affecting their operations.
NAICOM, however, said the existence of legal or regulatory disagreements did not justify the publication of unverified allegations against the commission or its officials.
