A review published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control argues that Nigeria’s antimicrobial resistance (AMR) problem is rooted as much in law and governance as in microbiology. The study, led by Ademola Adetayo Olayinka and Anuoluwapo Mobolaji Afolayan and published on 16 October 2026, identifies and critically analyses the legal and regulatory barriers to AMR control in Nigeria, and proposes a structured reform framework grounded in One Health principles.
The paper sets out the scale of the challenge using national sentinel surveillance figures: ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae were documented in 60–80% of clinical isolates, MRSA prevalence exceeded 80%, and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae stood at 20–30%. The authors describe these figures as a reflection of a governance environment in which formal stewardship obligations are absent from statute and national AMR surveillance remains voluntary rather than legally mandated.
Methodologically, the study combined legal doctrinal analysis with a semi-systematic literature review. The authors searched PubMed, Scopus and African Journals Online for publications from 2000 to 2024; of 252 records identified, 57 met the inclusion criteria, comprising 34 peer-reviewed studies, 14 legal instruments or policy documents, and 9 international regulatory frameworks. Nigerian legislation was assessed using the Baldwin, Cave and Lodge regulatory compliance framework and benchmarked against the United Kingdom and South Africa.
The analysis identified five principal regulatory barriers. First, prescription-only requirements for antibiotics exist but are unenforced, facilitating non-prescription access. Second, the absence of antimicrobial stewardship legislation removes accountability for irrational prescribing. Third, veterinary antibiotic governance is inadequate, which the authors say sustains zoonotic resistance transmission. Fourth, there is no statutory surveillance mandate, preventing detection of emerging resistance trends. Fifth, jurisdictional fragmentation precludes coordinated stewardship responses across levels of government.
As a comparative benchmark, the review points to South Africa’s SAASP model, which the authors cite as evidence that structured stewardship governance is achievable under African resource constraints. Against Nigeria’s reported 13.5% institutional compliance, the South African model produced 59.5% institutional compliance in the figures reported by the review.
As its practical output, the study proposes the TRACE Reform Framework as a roadmap for regulatory strengthening. The authors conclude that strengthening regulatory enforcement and integrating legal frameworks into national AMR strategies are essential for improving antibiotic stewardship and surveillance in Nigeria. The article is published as an open access review, and the version released carries a permanent DOI as an accepted manuscript subject to further edits before the final Version of Record.
Subject of Research: Legal and regulatory barriers to antimicrobial resistance control in Nigeria
Article Title: Regulatory barriers to antimicrobial resistance control in Nigeria: implications for stewardship and surveillance
Article References: Olayinka, A. A., & Afolayan, A. M. (2026). Regulatory barriers to antimicrobial resistance control in Nigeria: implications for stewardship and surveillance. Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-026-01839-z
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.1186/s13756-026-01839-z
Keywords: antimicrobial resistance, Nigeria, antimicrobial stewardship, surveillance, regulation, One Health, ESBL, MRSA, carbapenem resistance, South Africa SAASP, legal reform, veterinary antibiotics
News Source: Kristina Jarvis. (October 28, 2026). Legal gaps leave Nigeria’s antimicrobial resistance controls unenforced, review finds. Scienmag.
