The commission itself identifies its main problems in practice as the failure of some government authorities to respond promptly or at all to enquiries from the commission, and the lack of powers in the enabling legislation to compel compliance with such requests; the lack of trained investigative officers, and insufficient funding to cover the high cost of investigation of complaints from all over the country.180 Human rights NGOs agree that the commission lacks the powers and authority to deal effectively with many human rights problems from a protection standpoint, but add that, though useful work to promote respect for human rights has been done, commissioners have seemed to lack the will to speak out clearly against abuses and investigate individual complaints effectively. While Justice Nwokedi, the chair of the commission, who also heads the Nigerian Law Commission, has respect in human circles, he is also regarded as cautious and not very forceful. Several commissioners are members of government departments and lack independence; others had no track record on human rights of any kind before they were appointed, and have not developed any profile since they were appointed.

Clement Nwankwo, director of the Constitutional Rights Project, noted that "the commission has been very active in promotional work, but as a protective agency it has been a failure. It was not given enough legal powers to deal effectively with human rights problems, and really needs to be reconstituted under new legislation if it is to achieve anything."181 Ndubisi Obiorah of Huri-Laws agreed, commenting to Human Rights Watch that "the National Human Rights Commission is doing valuable work in terms of the promotion of human rights. However, in terms of human rights protection, it requires strengthening of its powers, capacity and finances. To date the commission has seemed-maybe understandably under military rule-frightened to criticize the government publicly. It will have to be more outspoken on government policies and on individual cases if it is to be effective in future."182

Despite these problems and despite very low expectations, given its origins, the commission did form a useful bridge between government and the NGO sector under military rule. For example, by its sponsorship of seminars and workshops the commission gave important cover to human rights NGOs wanting to hold meetings that might have been disrupted while General Abacha was in power had it not been for the endorsement of an official body. Equally, many government officials invited to human rights training seminars by NGOs working in collaboration with the commission would in all likelihood have failed to turn up, had the invitation been only from the NGO. Nigeria's vibrant and sophisticated nongovernmental human rights community, has, in turn, provided the commission with financial and, especially, human resources without which it would have achieved much less: a large part of the commission's promotional activities have in fact been mostly organized and the funds raised by national NGOs, and the commission has been able to take partial credit for this work. As Festus Okoye of the Kaduna-based Human Rights Monitor commented, "the commission is working with NGOs on certain projects, but they have yet to set up their own individual initiatives."183 The NGO movement has been much more active than the commission in making proposals for legal and other reform to the incoming civilian government.

Although its status was, to its disappointment, not entrenched in the 1999 constitution, the commission has the potential to become a much more effective body under the civilian government that took office on May 29, 1999. Its long term success will depend on new legislation to give it the powers it needs, the appointment of new commissioners with independence of mind and a genuine track record in human rights, political support and understanding for its role as a guarantor of constitutional rights, and adequate funding to achieve its mandate. The commissioners themselves will have to take seriously their role as a government-funded but autonomous human rights body, and have the courage and determination to criticize government where necessary.