Michael Olugbode in Abuja
Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN) has demanded full disclosure of the agreement between the federal government and global meat-processing giant, JBS, over its proposed $2.5 billion investment in Nigeria.
ERA/FoEN warned that the project must not proceed without rigorous environmental and multi-sectoral scrutiny.
The environmental rights organisation said it was not opposed to foreign investment, job creation, or industrial development, but insisted that the proposed JBS project must be subjected to transparent negotiations, independent environmental assessments, and effective regulatory oversight to ensure that Nigerians and host communities do not bear the cost of the investment.
Deputy Executive Director of ERA/FoEN, Mariam Bassey-Olson, said the controversy surrounding the proposed investment should not be framed as a choice between development and opposition to foreign capital.
Bassey-Olson said the critical issue was the nature of the investment, its terms, the resources it would require, and its potential consequences for Nigeria’s farmers, communities, environment, and food system.
She stated, “When people hear a company is coming to Nigeria and is bringing $2.5 billion, our first reaction is fantastic jobs, investment, infrastructure and development. But before we celebrate the numbers, we need to pause and ask a fundamental question: what exactly is this investment?”
The proposed project reportedly involves the establishment of six facilities — three poultry, two beef and one pork processing plants — a scale ERA/FoEN said demands comprehensive scrutiny because of its potential implications for land ownership, livestock production, water resources, biodiversity, agriculture, local markets, and food security.
Bassey-Olson said the debate was fundamentally about Nigeria’s control over its food system and whether local farmers and communities would retain meaningful economic opportunities as large-scale industrial production expanded.
“This is about our land, our livestock, our people, our communities, our biodiversity, our farmers, our feed, our water, our markets, our food security and our food sovereignty,” she said.
She stressed that ERA/FoEN was not opposed to investment, stating that foreign capital can support development when governed by policies that prioritise public interest.
Bassey-Olson said, “We are not against investment. We are not anti-investment. We are saying investment must have a people’s face. Investment must protect public interests.”
ERA/FoEN consequently demanded the immediate publication of the agreement or Memorandum of Understanding between JBS and the Nigerian government, saying the public should be able to examine the conditions attached to a project of such magnitude.
Bassey-Olson said ERA/FoEN had sought details of the proposed investment since 2024 but the agreement had remained outside the public domain.
She stated, “We want to know the terms of this investment. What does it mean for our people? What lands have been allocated? Have Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) been done? What will happen to our water? What will happen to the economy? Where will the land be sourced from?
She stressed that making the agreement public would not undermine the investment but would, instead, strengthen confidence in the government’s handling of the project.
“If you have something and you are coming to help the people as you claim, you should be very open in sharing whatever you have with the people,” she said.
ERA/FoEN also raised concerns over the possible regional consequences of a large-scale industrial meat operation in Nigeria, stating that pollution, emissions, wastewater management, and other environmental impacts could affect communities and ecosystems beyond the immediate project locations.
Bassey-Olson urged the African Union and other regional institutions to pay attention to major investments of this nature, warning that decisions taken by Nigeria could influence investment and environmental standards across Africa.
“If something is organised in Nigeria, other countries will pick up and say, since Nigeria is our big brother, we should do it,” she said.
She questioned the implications of JBS’ reported changes to previous climate commitments, insisting that Nigeria should assess the company’s environmental record and commitments before approving operations on such a large scale.
“If a company can backtrack, what does that mean for Nigeria?” she asked, stressing that enforceable environmental safeguards should take precedence over corporate assurances.
Similarly, Director of Programmes at the Health and Modern Health Foundation, Joyce Brown, said concerns over the investment were informed partly by reports and controversies surrounding JBS’ environmental and socioeconomic record in some countries where it operated.
Brown said Nigeria should learn from experiences elsewhere and establish strong regulatory mechanisms capable of ensuring that the proposed investment generated broad-based economic benefits without imposing disproportionate costs on local communities, farmers or the environment.
“We want a situation where there are policies in place, there are structures in place that ensure that these sorts of investments are beneficial to the people,” she said.
Brown expressed particular concern over the absence, to the organisation’s knowledge, of evidence that Environmental Impact Assessments had already been conducted for the proposed facilities.
“So far, there is no evidence of any EIA conducted already,” Brown said.
She acknowledged reports that land had already been allocated in Niger State, but insisted that comprehensive environmental assessments should precede construction and large-scale operations.
According to her, EIAs would enable regulators and affected communities to identify potential effects on land, water, ecosystems, and livelihoods, and establish appropriate mitigation measures before irreversible damage occurs.
Brown also demanded publication of the government-JBS agreement, saying experts in agriculture, environment, health and other relevant fields should be given access to the document for independent assessment.
She stated, “The agreement that JBS has signed with the Nigerian government is not in the public domain. This is something that should be available for experts across the various sectors to review, to ensure that we are not at the receiving end of any negative implications such a large-scale investment can have.”
She maintained that the campaign was a demand for due diligence rather than a rejection of foreign capital, urging the government to examine JBS’ international track record and incorporate lessons from other jurisdictions into Nigeria’s regulatory framework.
Brown called for a coordinated review involving all ministries, departments and agencies whose mandates could be affected by the project.
She questioned whether the approval process had adequately involved the ministries responsible for agriculture, environment, health, and other relevant sectors, given that the project would extend beyond livestock production.
“This is something that different ministries and departments of Nigeria should come together to review before it is endorsed,” she said.
Brown also expressed concern that the process appeared to be driven largely by the Ministry of Livestock Development, stating that the scale of the proposed investment warranted broader government participation.
“We do not know if the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Health and other relevant agencies are involved in the approval for JBS to start operations in Nigeria,” she said.
ERA/FoEN and its partners, while leading a march on the National Assembly, called on the legislature to exercise legislative oversight over the investment, insisting that the project should be examined against its implications for land, water resources, public health, agriculture, food security, and the livelihoods of host communities.
Brown said, “This is an investment that will take large expanses of land, that will affect water resources, that will affect the local communities and the people who live and depend on these environments, and it must be taken very seriously.”