Digital trade relies on trust. Because parties rarely meet and transactions move quickly across platforms, borders, and payment channels, the ability to verify who you are dealing with is fundamental. Without it, cross-border trade becomes riskier, more costly to police, and harder to scale. The AfCFTA Digital Trade Protocol recognises this, requiring State Parties to adopt or maintain digital identity systems for both individuals and businesses. In this instalment, we assess whether Nigeria's current identity infrastructure is in line with what the Protocol envision.
Digital trade relies on distance and trust. Because parties often do not meet and transactions move quickly across platforms, borders, and payment channels, a functioning digital identity system, issued by one State and recognised by another, helps answer the basic questions behind almost every cross-border transaction.
Who is the buyer? Who is the seller? Is this business real? Beyond that comfort, digital identity reduces fraud and impersonation. It also helps platforms, payment providers, and logistics operators link transactions to real people and real businesses, and deliver goods to the right person or address.
Article 14 of the Digital Trade Protocol recognises this and requires State Parties to adopt or maintain digital identity systems for both natural persons and juridical persons, in line with their domestic laws. Without reliable identity and verification, digital trade becomes riskier, more expensive to police, and harder to scale.
Understanding digital identities and what the Digital Trade Protocol expects
Digital identity, in simple terms, is a way to prove “this is really me” or “this is a real business”, without needing to show up physically. It usually has three parts. A unique identifier, like a number. Identity data, like names, dates, and sometimes biometrics, and a way to verify that identity when it needs to be used.
Across Africa, there are already recognisable examples of this. In Ghana, the National Identification Authority issues the Ghana Card and also provides identity verification services for institutions that need to confirm who they are dealing with. In Rwanda, the National Identification Agency has launched a Digital ID (e-ID) programme as part of its move towards a modern digital identity system.
For digital trade under the Protocol, there are two categories of users. The first is people, because buyers, sellers, and service providers still need to be verified even when the transaction happens entirely online. The second is businesses. A practical digital identity for a juridical person is the digital equivalent of being able to confirm that a company is properly registered, who controls it, and how it can be reached.
The standard the Protocol is pushing towards is fourfold. Countries should have digital identity systems for people and for businesses. Those systems should be capable of reliable authentication. They should be able to work with other African systems through common standards and technical interoperability. And they should support mutual recognition, so an identity issued in one State can be treated as legally valid in another, with a clear mechanism for certification, assurance levels, and trusted lists of recognised systems.
Finally, the Annex on Digital Identities also signals a longer-term continental direction which will be a collective project for State Parties and African institutions. It provides for an AfCFTA Digital Identity to make it easier for natural and juridical persons to move and do business under the African Continental Free Trade Area.
Where Nigeria is today
Nigeria’s strongest digital identity pillar is for natural persons. The National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) issues the National Identification Number (NIN), which ties an individual’s biometric and demographic data to one digitally accessible 11-digit number on the National Identity Database. The NIN also serves as a foundational ID for all Nigerians. With the passage of the 2017 Mandatory Use of the National Identification Number Regulation, the use of the NIN is now mandatory in Nigeria to access essential services such as banking, passport application, SIM registration, driver's license, among others.
The National Identity Management Commission has rolled out National Identification Number Authentication (NINAuth) as a government-backed service for secure identity authentication and verification.
As at 31 October 2025, NIMC reported 123.9 million unique National Identification Number records. To put that in context, the current unofficial public estimate of Nigeria’s population is 223 million in 2025, 123.9 million unique records suggests Nigeria has captured roughly 56% of the population into the National Identification Number system. NIMC has also acknowledged the inclusion gap this creates. Enrolment tends to climb fastest where people already interact with formal systems, while underserved communities can be left behind. In response,
NIMC has pushed a more grassroots model, including a ward-level enrolment drive supported by trained National Youth Service Corps members, aimed at taking registration closer to communities that are harder to reach through conventional enrolment centres.
For juridical persons, Nigeria does not currently operate an equivalent “National Identification Number for companies”.
Instead, business identity is built through existing registries and identifiers. Companies, businesses, and nonprofit registration in Nigeria are handled by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), and upon registration, a unique registration number is issued, which is used as a means of identification (RC Number for companies, Business Numbers (BN), and IT numbers for nonprofits). The Corporate Affairs Commission provides a public search and verification pathway for registered entities using identifiers such as the RC number, and this remains the most official starting point for proving that a business exists.
There is also a separate but widely used identity layer in the financial system. The Central Bank of Nigeria describes the Bank Verification Number (BVN) as a single identity in the banking system, introduced to address the absence of a unique identifier across banks. As a parallel identity layer, the Bank Verification Number (BVN) is best treated as part of the digital payments story rather than the core digital identity pillar. The Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS) reported that the BVN database reached 67.8 million enrolments by December 2025, which is materially lower than the NIN database.
This gap matters because BVN coverage is largely driven by participation in the formal banking system. So while BVN supports stronger verification within financial services, it does not serve as a universal identity rail in the same way the NIN is designed to, and it should not be treated as Nigeria’s primary answer to the Protocol’s requirement for digital identity for all natural persons and juridical persons.
Another key question is how interoperable Nigeria’s digital identity system is in practice. At the moment, Nigeria is not operating within a shared African mutual-recognition framework of the kind the African Continental Free Trade Area Protocol on Digital Trade is designed to enable. In practical terms, a regulator or service provider in another African country cannot yet routinely rely on Nigeria’s NIN for verification in a consistent, standardised way. Where it happens, it is usually indirect, through private compliance processes rather than a formal cross-border recognition arrangement.
There are, however, early technical building blocks that could make integration easier over time. The Open Standards Identity Application Programming Interface, known as OSIA, is an International Telecommunication Union standard for interoperability of identity management systems, and the NIMC has been linked to OSIA-led interoperability efforts. Even with that, the current reality is that the National Identification Number remains primarily a Nigerian-issued identity. What is still missing is the cross-border trust framework, shared assurance levels, and formal recognition arrangements that would allow other State Parties to rely on Nigeria’s identity outcomes with confidence.
What Nigeria needs next
Nigeria’s next step is to move from having a strong domestic identity system to having one that can be relied on across borders. That starts with turning verification into a recognised public trust service. NIN authentication should be usable in a way that other African regulators and service providers can rely on, through clear assurance levels, security standards, auditability, and agreed liability rules.
Nigeria also needs a digital business identity layer for juridical persons that can be authenticated and recognised, not just company registration as a static record. Practically, that means linking CAC identifiers to reliable verification and e-Know Your Customer for businesses, so other countries and platforms can confirm that a business is real and accountable.
Third, Nigeria needs to enter structured mutual recognition arrangements under the African Continental Free Trade Area approach. Interoperability will not happen by goodwill. It requires agreed standards, trusted lists, certification or assessment mechanisms, and a clear decision on which foreign identity systems Nigeria will accept and under what conditions. Nigeria should also actively plug into regional workstreams that are already building towards cross-border recognition, so it is not building in isolation.
Finally, inclusion still matters. A cross-border-ready system is only credible if it is widely adopted at home. The grassroots enrollment push should continue, but with equal attention to quality of records, authentication reliability, and fraud controls, because those are the features other countries will look for when deciding whether to trust Nigeria’s system.
Readiness rating
We rate Nigeria a 3/5 (Developing). Nigeria has a strong domestic foundation for people and improving authentication, but business identity is still developing, and cross-border mutual recognition and interoperability are not yet operational in the manner that the AfCFTA DTP envisages.
You can read part [0] on the Digital Trade Protocol series [here]
Diana Uzor / Research Analyst, Technology and Digital Economy | d.u@borg.re