In a recent clash over the integrity of Nigeria’s 2025 budget, a heated dispute has emerged between the National Assembly and BudgIT, a civic organisation that monitors government spending and promotes transparency. BudgIT raised serious concerns regarding the insertion of 11,122 projects, with an estimated value of N6.93 trillion, into the 2025 Appropriation Bill. The organisation contended that these insertions lacked alignment with Nigeria’s Medium-Term National Development Plan (2021–2025) and undermined national priorities. In response, both chambers of the National Assembly – the Senate and the House of Representatives – denied any wrongdoing, insisting that they acted within their constitutional mandate to amend the national budget.

BudgIT’s accusations centered on what it described as a systematic pattern of budget manipulation by legislators, suggesting that what were once occasional irregularities have now become a standard practice of inserting projects for political gain. The organisation claimed that legislators have used the national budget to pursue personal and political interests, thereby weakening public finance integrity and undermining strategic development efforts.

According to BudgIT, a large portion of the inserted projects were included without proper justification or alignment with national objectives. Among the most concerning statistics highlighted were 238 projects each exceeding N5 billion, collectively worth N2.29 trillion, and another 984 projects valued at N1.71 trillion. Additionally, 1,119 projects ranging between N500 million and N1 billion, amounting to over N641 billion, were also identified as questionable. These insertions, the group argued, appeared to have been designed more for personal enrichment and political patronage than for the public good.

BudgIT further provided examples of project types that raised red flags. These included over 1,400 streetlight projects worth almost N400 billion, hundreds of borehole initiatives valued at more than N114 billion, and over 2,000 ICT-related projects totaling over N500 billion. Perhaps most glaring was the revelation that nearly 40 percent of all inserted projects—over 4,300 of them, valued at N1.72 trillion—were crammed into the Ministry of Agriculture’s budget. This resulted in the Ministry’s capital budget ballooning from N242.5 billion to N1.95 trillion. Similarly, significant increases were noted in the Ministries of Science and Technology, and Budget and Economic Planning, suggesting an overarching trend of disproportionate allocations.

BudgIT also pointed out instances where agencies were misused to execute projects far beyond their mandates. For example, the Federal Cooperative College in Oji River, meant to be a training institution, was assigned N3 billion for distributing vehicles, and billions more for rural electrification and solar lighting projects. These diversions, according to BudgIT, reflect a misuse of institutional frameworks and a betrayal of sound fiscal management principles.

Despite submitting letters detailing their findings to the Presidency, the Budget Office, and the National Assembly, BudgIT claimed that none of the institutions responded. This silence, they argued, suggested a troubling level of complicity or apathy within the government.

Gabriel Okeowo, BudgIT’s Country Director, called for urgent reform. He argued that the growing trend of inserting large numbers of politically motivated projects into the budget has eroded public trust and diverted critical resources from genuine development needs. He stressed the necessity for evidence-based planning and transparency, urging President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to spearhead reforms in the budgeting process. BudgIT also called on the Attorney-General to seek a constitutional interpretation of the legislature’s appropriation powers and on anti-corruption agencies like the EFCC and ICPC to monitor these projects.

In swift rebuttals, the National Assembly dismissed the allegations. Senator Yemi Adaramodu, who chairs the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, maintained that the legislature only passed the exact budget figures proposed by the executive after thorough scrutiny. He accused BudgIT of spreading misinformation and engaging in unfounded propaganda aimed at discrediting the National Assembly.

Clement Jimbo, Deputy Chairman of the House Committee on National Planning and Economic Development, also rejected the budget padding accusations. He emphasised that the legislature is constitutionally empowered to review, amend, and approve budget proposals, stating that the budget submitted by the executive is merely an estimate until passed into law. He argued that lawmakers have the right to alter budget proposals to better reflect the needs and aspirations of the Nigerian people.

Jimbo explained the detailed process through which the budget is reviewed, noting that nearly 200 committees in the House engage in rigorous budget defence sessions with relevant ministries and agencies. He also refuted claims that lawmakers can unilaterally allocate funds to specific regions, calling such suggestions baseless and misleading. From his perspective, the legislative adjustments made to the budget are both constitutional and necessary for effective representation.

In conclusion, this budget controversy has sparked a broader conversation on governance, transparency, and the balance of power between Nigeria’s executive and legislative arms. While BudgIT has raised significant concerns about fiscal mismanagement and political manipulation of the budget, the National Assembly has stood firmly behind its actions, asserting its constitutional rights. The ongoing debate underscores the urgent need for reforms that restore credibility and align budgetary processes with the nation’s developmental goals.