尼日利亞的加密貨幣監管之旅：進展和持續存在的錯誤

如果尼日利亞要使其加密法規與全球標準保持一致並在蒂努布政府領導下實現其渴望的大陸領導地位

The Federal Government of Nigeria recently filed a lawsuit against a group of crypto traders for engaging in unlicensed trading operations. This move, though unsurprising given the government’s historically tense relationship with cryptocurrencies, raises critical questions about the coherence of regulatory efforts. The link between USDT, a popular stablecoin, and the formal exchange rate between the US dollar and the naira has long been a subject of contention, driving much of the government’s caution.

尼日利亞聯邦政府最近對一群加密貨幣交易商提起訴訟，指控他們從事未經許可的交易業務。考慮到政府與加密貨幣歷來緊張的關係，此舉並不令人意外，但也引發了監管工作一致性的關鍵問題。 USDT（一種流行的穩定幣）與美元與奈拉之間的正式匯率之間的聯繫長期以來一直是爭論的話題，導致政府保持謹慎態度。

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charged the traders with carrying on “the specialized business of another financial institution without a valid license” and “not being an authorized dealer in the Nigeria Autonomous Foreign Exchange Market, [they] negotiated United States Dollar Tether (USDT) against Naira with the public.”

經濟和金融犯罪委員會（EFCC）指控交易員“在沒有有效許可證的情況下從事另一家金融機構的專業業務”，並且“不是尼日利亞自主外匯市場的授權交易商，[他們]通過談判美元Tether（ USDT）與公眾對抗奈拉。

While USDT is pegged to the US dollar and is designed to mirror its value, it is fundamentally different from the USD. USDT is a digital token issued by the Tether Foundation and backed by a reserve of USD-denominated assets, including US treasuries, corporate bonds, precious metals and even other cryptocurrencies. However, the stability of USDT is based entirely on trust in the Tether Foundation’s ability to maintain this reserve.

雖然 USDT 與美元掛鉤並旨在反映其價值，但它與美元有本質上的不同。 USDT 是由 Tether 基金會發行的數位代幣，由美元計價資產儲備支持，包括美國國債、公司債、貴金屬甚至其他加密貨幣。然而，USDT 的穩定性完全基於對 Tether 基金會維持這項儲備能力的信任。

The government’s heavy-handed approach to cryptocurrency regulation has been criticized by stakeholders, who argue that it stifles innovation and drives activity underground, making it harder to regulate. A regulatory framework that clearly defines the interaction between regulators and the industry was sorely needed.

政府對加密貨幣監管的嚴厲手段受到了利益相關者的批評，他們認為這扼殺了創新並推動了地下活動，從而加大了監管的難度。迫切需要一個明確定義監管機構與產業之間互動的監管框架。

There were high hopes that the new administration would usher in a more pragmatic approach, and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) under Olayemi Cardoso took a promising first step. In December 2023, the CBN issued guidelines recognising virtual asset service providers (VASPs) as financial institutions under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 and acknowledged the SEC’s authority to regulate them.

人們對新政府採取更務實的態度寄予厚望，奧拉耶米·卡多佐領導下的尼日利亞中央銀行（CBN）邁出了充滿希望的第一步。 2023 年 12 月，CBN 發布了指導方針，承認虛擬資產服務提供者 (VASP) 屬於《2022 年洗錢（預防和禁止）法》規定的金融機構，並承認 SEC 有權對其進行監管。

This shift allowed banks and financial institutions to engage with VASPs, provided the latter complied with SEC licensing requirements. This development was seen as a breath of fresh air, marking a significant step forward in the country’s crypto regulation journey. Under Dr Emomotimi Agama’s leadership, the SEC moved to provisionally license two local VASPs, signaling progress toward formalising the crypto landscape.

這項轉變允許銀行和金融機構與 VASP 合作，前提是後者遵守 SEC 的許可要求。這一進展被視為一股新鮮空氣，標誌著該國的加密監管之旅向前邁出了重要一步。在 Emomotimi Agama 博士的領導下，美國證券交易委員會 (SEC) 向兩家當地 VASP 頒發了臨時許可，這標誌著加密貨幣格局正式化取得了進展。

Despite all of the positive movements above, there are still some fundamental errors that expose a lack of robust understanding of the asset class, or a lack of coherence in or cooperation between regulatory and enforcement authorities on the subject. In the recent lawsuit by the EFCC filed against some traders of USDT, the charge sheet had the language below:

儘管採取了上述所有積極舉措，但仍存在一些根本性錯誤，暴露出對資產類別缺乏深入了解，或者監管機構和執法機構之間在該問題上缺乏一致性或合作。在近期 EFCC 對部分 USDT 交易者提起的訴訟中，指控單中有以下文字：

“That you, …  and …, between January 2021 and December 2021, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, carried on the specialized business of another financial institution without a valid license, and thereby committed an offense contrary to Section 57(1) and (2) of the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act, 2020, and punishable under Section 57(5) of the same Act. That you… not being an authorized dealer in the Nigeria Autonomous Foreign Exchange Market, negotiated United States Dollar Tether (USDT) against Naira with the public, and thereby committed an offense contrary to and punishable under Section 29(1)(c) of the Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act.”

「您…和…在2021 年1 月至2021 年12 月期間，在本法庭管轄範圍內的阿布賈，在沒有有效許可證的情況下從事另一家金融機構的專門業務，從而犯下了違反第57 條的罪行（ 2020 年《銀行及其他金融機構法》第 1) 和 (2) 款，並可依該法第 57(5) 條予以處罰。您…並非尼日利亞自主外匯市場的授權交易商，與公眾就奈拉進行了美元Tether (USDT) 談判，因此犯下了違反《尼日利亞自治外匯市場法》第29(1)(c) 條的罪行並應受處罰。

This section of the charge sheet seems to suggest that the authorities conflated USDT with the US dollar, despite the clear distinction between the two assets. This error could have significant implications for the case and highlights the need for greater technical understanding among those involved in regulating and enforcing cryptocurrency laws.

指控單的這一部分似乎表明當局將 USDT 與美元混為一談，儘管這兩種資產之間存在明顯差異。這項錯誤可能會對案件產生重大影響，並凸顯出參與監管和執行加密貨幣法律的人員需要加強技術理解。