A Federal High Court in Lagos has ruled that the National Assembly’s N110 billion expenditure on official vehicles and support allowances for lawmakers was unlawful, holding that the spending violated procurement regulations, constitutional provisions, and principles of accountability.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Yellim Bogoro in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1606/2023, followed a case instituted by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) challenging the planned allocation of N40 billion for the purchase of 465 vehicles and N70 billion as support allowances for newly elected legislators.
According to the court, the scale of the expenditure, coupled with the absence of evidence showing compliance with due process, rendered the procurement arbitrary and inconsistent with statutory procurement standards.
Justice Bogoro further held that the lawmakers who approved the spending were also its direct beneficiaries, describing the arrangement as a case of self-interest and conflict of interest.
The court consequently directed Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas to ensure that all future spending and procurement by the National Assembly strictly comply with due process, transparency, accountability, and value-for-money principles.
In her ruling, the judge noted that the prevailing economic hardship facing Nigerians made the allocation difficult to justify, stating that public resources should be managed in a manner that prioritises national interest over personal benefits for public officials.
She rejected the argument that legislative autonomy prevented judicial intervention, stressing that the doctrine of separation of powers cannot be used to shield unlawful conduct. According to the court, it possesses the authority to examine the legality and constitutionality of legislative spending.
The judgment also stated that the N110 billion allocation undermined the fiduciary responsibility owed by public office holders to citizens, adding that public office should never serve as a vehicle for personal enrichment.
SERAP had argued that the planned expenditure breached provisions of the Public Procurement Act 2007, the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, and the constitutional oath of office. The organisation also alleged that about 465 bulletproof vehicles were to be purchased at an estimated cost of roughly N305 million each, making the overall expenditure excessive.
The National Assembly, however, maintained that the funds were lawfully appropriated and dismissed the claims as speculative, arguing that the expenditure had already been implemented and that the suit had become academic. It also contended that SERAP failed to issue the required pre-action notice.
The court disagreed, ruling that SERAP had the legal standing to institute the case as a public interest organisation committed to transparency and accountability. It further held that the absence of a pre-action notice was not fatal because matters involving urgent public interest constitute an exception to the requirement.
Justice Bogoro ultimately declared that the vehicle procurement and support allowances contravened the Public Procurement Act, the Code of Conduct provisions, and constitutional obligations, while ordering strict adherence to due process in future public spending by the National Assembly.
Reacting to the decision, SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare described the ruling as a significant victory for transparency and accountability, saying it reinforces the principle that public office is a public trust.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) also welcomed the judgment, commending SERAP for pursuing the case and arguing that lavish benefits for lawmakers cannot be justified amid widespread economic hardship. He further urged the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission to fully exercise its constitutional responsibility regarding lawmakers’ remuneration.