Investment immigration schemes, where individuals gain residency or citizenship in exchange for economic contributions, have grown into a multibillion-dollar industry.
For many emerging market citizens, especially Nigerians facing travel restrictions and currency instability, a second passport offers mobility, business opportunities, and a hedge against domestic uncertainty.
Yet the rapid proliferation of these programmes has also exposed regulatory gaps, ethical dilemmas, and, in some cases, outright abuse.
A second passport has become synonymous with freedom: freedom to travel, conduct business, and secure one’s family. Citizenship by investment programmes in countries such as Malta, Portugal, and various Caribbean nations give high-net-worth individuals (HNIs) access to European markets and other economic hubs.
The benefits go both ways: host countries receive capital inflows that can stimulate real estate, tourism, and infrastructure. Specialized firms act as intermediaries, guiding clients through complex legal and bureaucratic processes. However, this commercial success has brought intensified scrutiny.
Governance and Scrutiny of Investment Immigration Firms
Critics argue that selling citizenship commodifies a status that should be earned, and that lax oversight invites money laundering, tax evasion, and the admittance of undesirable actors. Recent events illustrate the risks vividly.
Grenada’s Investment Migration Agency (IMA) has taken several disciplinary actions in 2025 against marketing agents and applicants who violated Citizenship by Investment (CBI) rules. In March 2025, the agency issued Circular No. 2 after uncovering an illegal “owner-financing” scheme in which a marketing agent and subagents offered loans to CBI applicants.
In April 2025, following a national investigation, the government of Saint Kitts & Nevis revoked the citizenship of some individuals and their dependents. During the same review, authorities blacklisted some major marketing agents—for promoting discounted investment options below legal thresholds and misleading applicants. The government also terminated an investment agreement after finding multiple contractual breaches.
The scandals in St Kitts expose a deeper issue: the reliance on unregulated or poorly vetted agents. In some jurisdictions, such as Nigeria, agents have marketed CBI options at cut-rate prices, misled clients about eligibility, and diverted client funds for purposes other than the services they were meant for.
In response, several Caribbean governments have started publishing official lists of authorized agents and tightening licensing requirements. Some Caribbean countries, for example, now allow only government-approved agents to submit applications and have permanently blacklisted firms that marketed citizenship outside the statutory regulations.
For potential applicants and especially for emerging African programmes, such cases underscore the need for transparent, enforceable rules governing agents and consultants. Without strong oversight, unscrupulous intermediaries can tarnish a country’s reputation, jeopardise visa-free agreements, and expose the programme to international sanctions.
Balancing Profit with Principles
Not all news is grim. Some countries have proactively enhanced their citizenship programmes. Grenada has introduced comprehensive reforms such as mandatory interviews, enhanced due diligence procedures, and regional cooperation initiatives.
Others, like Antigua and Barbuda, use CBI revenues to rebuild infrastructure after natural disasters; Portugal’s Golden Visa has revitalized the real-estate sector and spurred local businesses. On the corporate side, leading firms have invested in better vetting processes and technology, such as blockchain, to ensure tamper-proof application records.
African nations considering investment immigration, including Nigeria, must learn from these examples. Crafting laws that mandate high thresholds of integrity, empower independent regulators, and punish violators will help protect both citizens and national reputations.
A Call for Accountability
Done right, investment immigration can deliver tangible benefits for both investors and host countries. Funds from CBI schemes have financed schools, hospitals, and renewable-energy projects. Such stories illustrate that citizenship programmes can be vehicles for shared prosperity when coupled with transparency and strong public governance.
The future of investment immigration rests on credibility. Emerging technologies like blockchain can aid by providing immutable application records, while mandatory interviews and enhanced due diligence deter fraud. Ultimately, firms that prioritise ethical conduct and governments that enforce rigorous standards will be the ones to thrive in a market that is increasingly global but also increasingly wary.
Investment immigration holds immense promise for Africans seeking mobility and economic diversification. Yet that promise is hollow without robust governance.
As St Kitts’ crackdown illustrates, failure to enforce the rules can lead to revoked passports, blacklisted agents, and reputational damage. Nigeria and other African nations exploring similar programmes should embrace accountability as a foundation, not an afterthought. By instituting clear laws, rigorous vetting, and transparent agent licensing, they can protect applicants, safeguard national interests, and ensure that investment immigration becomes a tool for inclusive growth rather than a magnet for scandal.
Dr Nduneche Ezurike, an opt-in member of the Harvard Business Review Advisory Council, writes from Lagos
