Interior Minister Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo has ordered an investigation into how Abuja-based realtor Rebecca Omokamo Godwin-Isaac obtained a second Nigerian passport while an earlier passport was reportedly still in the custody of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The disputed document, passport number B51450551, was issued on February 15, 2025, according to documents cited in petitions to the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS). Her earlier passport, B00485650, was reportedly surrendered in connection with her bail conditions and remains in court custody, according to lawyers representing the complainant in her ongoing legal case.
The Brandspur Politics Desk reports that the minister’s directive has shifted attention from the individual passport holder to the systems and officials responsible for issuing and recording Nigerian travel documents. A ministerial review led by Permanent Secretary Magdalene Ajani is expected to examine the relevant NIS records and establish how the second passport was processed.
The controversy centres on whether the immigration database properly identified the existence and status of the earlier passport before the second document was issued. Lawyers for the complainant have alleged that the new passport was processed through a “non-appearance” procedure, meaning Godwin-Isaac was not physically present for biometric capture, and have further alleged that her photograph and signature were digitally superimposed on the document. Those allegations have not been established by an independent investigation.
The NIS, however, has confirmed that it issued the second passport. In June, its spokesman, Akinsola Akinlabi, said the Service had issued the document and argued that passport applications are processed according to eligibility and documentation. The latest investigation is therefore expected to provide greater clarity on the records and procedures used in this particular case.
The issue has attracted wider attention because passports are not merely travel documents; they are government-issued identity documents tied to an individual’s biometric and personal records. Any confirmed ability to create or obtain an additional document without the appropriate records being reconciled could raise questions about the reliability of the controls designed to prevent duplicate or irregular identities.
The legal team representing the complainant has already escalated the matter. A pre-action notice dated September 7 and acknowledged by the NIS on September 8 gave the Service 30 days to respond to the complaint concerning passport B51450551. The lawyers said they had previously petitioned the immigration authorities on June 10, asking for an investigation into the circumstances of the passport’s issuance.
Among the demands is clarification of the status of the disputed passport, including whether it has been cancelled or revoked, as well as information on whether any watchlist or stop order has been placed against Godwin-Isaac. The lawyers have also indicated that they could approach the Federal High Court if the NIS does not address their demands within the stipulated period.
The case has also drawn attention to Section 59 of Nigeria’s Immigration Act 2015, which provides penalties for unauthorised alteration, production or reproduction of travel documents. The law provides for up to five years’ imprisonment, a fine of ₦1 million, or both upon conviction for the offence covered by the section. Whether that provision applies to the circumstances surrounding the disputed passport is a matter for the relevant investigation and, if necessary, the courts.
Godwin-Isaac is facing criminal proceedings in Abuja over allegations relating to land transactions and alleged forgery. Reports on the case state that the allegations concern properties in Guzape and Katampe and involve claims of more than ₦500 million. The defendants have denied the allegations, and those matters remain before the courts.
The passport controversy has nevertheless created a separate administrative question: how could a second travel document be issued when another passport was reportedly still valid and held under court arrangements?
That question is now central to the ministerial investigation. Investigators are expected to establish what information was available in the NIS database when passport B51450551 was processed, who handled the application, what verification checks were conducted and whether the earlier passport’s status was visible in the system.
For Nigerians who rely on passports for international travel, the outcome could have significance beyond this individual case. A passport application involves personal identity information and biometric records, making the accuracy of the underlying database important not only for travel but also for preventing identity-related abuse.
The lawyers’ 30-day notice means the NIS is now facing a defined deadline to respond to the allegations, while the ministerial investigation could determine whether the disputed passport resulted from an ordinary administrative process, a procedural failure or misconduct by officials.
Until the investigation is completed, allegations of database manipulation, insider involvement or deliberate circumvention of biometric safeguards remain allegations rather than established facts. The key issue before the authorities is to determine exactly how the second passport was issued and whether every required immigration control was followed.
