From the April 24, 2026 There is a new legal framework between Spain and Nigeria: the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the Kingdom of Spain and the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, signed «ad referendum» in Madrid on June 1, 2022, and published in the BOE on May 19, 2026 (BOE-A-2026-10741). Until now, requests between the two countries moved in a more uncertain terrain; from this moment on, there are written rules, specific deadlines, and—this is the important part—enforceable guarantees.

For those with business activities, investments, or personal ties between Europe and West Africa, this treaty is not abstract diplomatic news. It's a real shift on the risk map: extradition requests will be more streamlined, provisional detention can be channeled through INTERPOL, and—a detail almost no one reads—the treaty also applies to offenses committed before its entry into force.

In this article, we explain in clear language what the treaty establishes, what guarantees it protects, where the practical risks lie, and what specialized defense can do at each stage.

The essential data of the treaty

• Company Madrid, June 1, 2022.
• Effective date: April 24, 2026.
• Post: BOE No. 121, of May 19, 2026.
• Central Authorities: The Spanish Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor's Office of the Federation and the Ministry of Justice of Nigeria (Article 6). Requests are transmitted directly between them, without the need for diplomatic channels unless necessary.
• Authentic texts Spanish and English.

What facts permit extradition?

Article 2 establishes the principle of dual criminality with two thresholds:

• For to prosecutethe offense must be punishable by imprisonment in the legislation of both countries At least one year.
• For carry out a sentencemust still be fulfilled at least six months It's a shame.

A decisive technical nuance: it doesn't matter that the two countries call the crime the same name nor that they classify it in the same category. What is compared is the overall behavior. This means that defenses based on purely nominal differences between criminal offenses have little traction; serious analysis is done on the facts.

The treaty also includes a specific clause for Tax, customs, and foreign exchange control offensesExtradition cannot be denied solely because Spain and Nigeria do not have the same taxes or the same foreign exchange regime (Article 2.3). This is a provision specifically intended for transnational economic crime.

Guarantees: Mandatory Denial Grounds

Article 3 is the defensive heart of the treaty. Spain—or Nigeria— must deny extradition, among other grounds, when:

• The request refers to a political crime related (expressly excluding homicide and terrorism).
• There are well-founded reasons to believe that the request seeks to punish the person for their race, sex, religion, social status, nationality, or political opinions, your legal situation could be jeopardized for those reasons.
• The offense may be punishable in the requesting country with a forbidden penalty in the required country.
• There are well-founded reasons to believe that the person has been or will be subjected to a procedure without basic guarantees of defense, to one cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, or violations of the rights recognized in the Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; also when the conviction was handed down In rebellion without guarantee of a new trial.
• It already exists final judgment in the country required by the same factsnon bis in idem), or the crime is pardoned, reprieved, or prescribed.
• This is a crime exclusively military.
• The required country has granted political asylum to the person claimed.
• delivery would compromise the sovereignty, security, or public order, or would violate fundamental principles of the legal order of the required country.

These reasons are in addition physicians from article 4: own jurisdiction over facts, reasons humanitarian (age, health, personal circumstances) and, notably, the death penaltyif the offense is punishable by the death penalty in the requesting country, extradition shall be refused unless an assurance is given that, if imposed, it will not be carried out.

For defensive practice before the National High Court, these precepts turn the debate into something very different from a formality: each of these grounds is a line of opposition that must be constructed with evidence, not with generic assertions. Spanish constitutional jurisprudence demands precisely that: specific allegations and a serious judicial verification process, not boilerplate phrases.

Extradition of Nationals: Right to Deny, Not Obligation of Impunity

Article 5 recognizes each State's right to refuse the extradition of their nationals. Now, if they deny it, they will have to submit the matter to their own authorities for eventual internal prosecution (Either hand over or judge), with the evidentiary material submitted by the requesting country.

Practical translation: Spanish nationality can prevent extradition, but it does not guarantee dismissal. The strategy must anticipate the scenario of criminal proceedings in Spain with evidence originating abroad, a terrain where the chain of custody, documentary authenticity, and guarantees of obtaining evidence become paramount.

Provisional Detention: The Most Critical Moment

Article 12 allows, in cases of urgency, requesting the provisional detention before formal extradition request, channeling it through central authorities or INTERPOL. Here two worlds connect: a red notice can, overnight, turn into an arrest in Barajas or Lagos.

Deadlines matter:

• Pre-trial detention is void if within 60 days The formal extradition request has not arrived.
• Let the arrest be overturned it does not prevent a subsequent formal request.
• once extradition is granted, the delivery must be produced within 40 days (Article 14.2), and the period of detention—including house arrest— it is computed in the requesting country as provisional detention (article 14.6).

A good part of the proceedings is played out in this initial phase: the hearing regarding precautionary measures before the Central Investigating Court determines whether the person will await trial in prison or on provisional release with alternative measures (passport withdrawal, appearances, exit ban). A prepared defense before the arrest—with documented ties and a defined strategy—that outcome changes substantially.

Principle of specialty and re-extradition

Article 10 enshrines the principle of specialtyThe extradited person may only be prosecuted for the facts that motivated the extradition, unless there is consent from the requested State, voluntary return, or remaining for more than 45 days after being able to leave the territory. Article 11 prohibits, with the same exceptions, the re-extradition to a third state without the consent of the country that delivered.

These clauses are not theoretical; they are the shield that prevents a delivery on a specific fact from turning into an open persecution for any other. Monitoring their compliance after delivery is part of the defense.

The detail that almost no one reads: retroactivity

Article 24.3 states that the treaty applies to any application filed after its entry into force, even if the crimes were committed before. Anyone who believed that facts prior to 2026 were excluded from the new framework should revise that premise as soon as possible. It is, probably, the most urgent reason to conduct a preventive risk diagnosis.

How is a Nigerian application processed in Spain?

treaty coexists with the Law 4/1985, of March 21, on Passive Extradition, which regulates the internal procedure: initial governmental phase, judicial phase before the Central Court of Instruction and the Criminal Chamber of the Audiencia Nacional, and the Government's final decision, which may not proceed with extradition even with a favorable court ruling. The judicial phase specifically debates the guarantees of Articles 3 and 4 of the treaty, with the heightened standard of justification required by the Constitutional Court when fundamental rights are at stake.

Frequently asked questions

• Does the treaty make it easier for Nigeria to claim individuals residing in Spain? It facilitates the process and deadlines, yes. But it also sets forth in writing demanding guarantees—due process, humane treatment, no discriminatory persecution, control of the death penalty—that legal counsel can assert before the National High Court.
• Can an alert on my passport stop me at the airport? INTERPOL linked to Nigeria? Yes. The treaty itself provides for INTERPOL as the channel for urgent provisional arrest. If there is any sign of a warning, preventive diagnosis is a priority before traveling.
• I'm Spanish, can I be extradited to Nigeria? Spain has the right to deny the extradition of its nationals, but in such a case, it can assume prosecution in Spain. Nationality protects against surrender, not against prosecution.
• And tax or foreign exchange crimes? The following are expressly covered: the difference between tax regimes is not, in itself, grounds for denial.
• Does it apply to facts prior to 2026? Yes. The treaty covers new applications concerning facts occurring before or after its entry into force.

Conclusion: a new framework demands a new strategy

The treaty between Spain and Nigeria coming into effect professionalizes the cooperation between the two countries and, with it, raises the standard required for defense. Procedures will be faster; guarantees, more precise; and early mistakes, more costly. In matters with an African, European, and often American component—investment flows, energy trade, correspondent banking—early coordination between jurisdictions is usually key to building a defense before the case reaches the National High Court.

At VENFORT Lawyers, we confidentially analyze our clients' exposure to new conventional frameworks from our offices in Madrid and Caracas, in coordination with allied firms in Europe, the Americas, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. If you have interests between Spain and Nigeria, you can request a Preventive review of your extradition risk.

This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Each matter requires an individualized and confidential analysis.

Alan Aldana

Founding partner and Director of the International Criminal Law Department at VENFORT Lawyers. Lawyer accredited before the International Criminal Court, with over twenty years of practice in extraditions, INTERPOL proceedings, economic criminal law, and international sanctions, assists entrepreneurs, executives, institutions, and families with interests in Europe and the Americas.