JamzNG Latest News, Gist, Entertainment in Nigeria
The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, in a landmark ruling, has declared the National Assembly’s controversial $110 billion vehicles and allowances plan illegal, ruling that spending $40 billion on 465 vehicles for lawmakers and $70 billion on support allowances for newly elected members violated procurement laws, constitutional obligations and public trust.
The court also ordered the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas “to ensure that all future procurement or expenditure of public funds by the National Assembly strictly complies with the requirements of due process and is also guided by the principles of transparency, accountability and value for money.”
The sentence was pronounced on Wednesday 6 May 2026 by Judge Yellim Bogoro in case no. FHC/L/CS/1606/2023 brought by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) against the National Assembly. A certified copy of the judgment was obtained last week.
SERAP filed a lawsuit in August 2023 against Akpabio and Abbas, for themselves and on behalf of members of their respective houses, over plans to spend $40 billion on 465 vehicles and $70 billion on allowances for new lawmakers amid worsening economic hardship across the country.
In his ruling, Judge Bogoro stated that: “The magnitude of the expenditure, combined with the absence of demonstrable due process, leads me to conclude that the procurement is arbitrary, disproportionate and inconsistent with legal procurement standards.”
Judge Bogoro further stated that: “The beneficiaries of the expenditure are the same officials who approve it, and the expenditure confers direct pecuniary and material benefits. This, in my opinion, constitutes a case of self-dealing and conflict of interest.”
“I have taken legal note of the economic reality of Nigeria and the widespread financial difficulties affecting Nigerian citizens. In this context, the allocation of 110 billion dollars for the benefit of legislators demonstrates the inability to give priority to the national interest.”
“Defendants urged the Court to decline jurisdiction on grounds of legislative autonomy. It should be noted that the separation of powers doctrine does not serve as a shield for illegitimacy. Interestingly, the Court is concerned with the legality and constitutionality of legislative spending.”
“The allocation of $110 billion for the benefit of legislators also undermines the fiduciary duty owed to the Nigerian people. Public offices must not be used for personal enrichment. Public officials must act within constitutional limits and in good faith. I believe that the conduct complained of is inconsistent with the oath of office.”
“The serious aspect of the SERAP case is that the planned use of $40 billion for vehicle procurement and $70 billion as support allowance under the Supplementary Appropriations Act, 2022 (signed into law in 2023) is illegal and violates section 57(4) of the Public Procurement Act, 2007; paragraph 1 part 1, fifth schedule (code of conduct for public officials) and oath ex officio under the Seventh Schedule of the Nigerian Constitution, 1999 [as amended].
“On the question of whether SERAP has standing to bring this lawsuit, I will state that the law has now evolved to recognize public interest litigation. NGOs (like SERAP in this case) can institute actions to protect the public interest.”
“From the facts set out and given the nature of the case, SERAP, being a public interest organization committed to transparency and accountability, has demonstrated sufficient interest. I therefore believe that SERAP has standing to act, as the matters are of undeniable public interest.”
“I agree with SERAP when it stated that the defendants, having admitted that any vehicle acquired is for official purposes and the use of the allocated funds is for judicious purposes, have admitted that a huge sum of money was allocated for the purchase of exotic cars and the funds were provided to the legislators in the supplementary law of 2022 for the inauguration expenses of the new members.”
“The defendants have failed to provide any credible evidence of compliance with the procurement process, competitive bidding and value for money assessment. The defendants have not refuted the specifically made allegations as such are deemed to be admitted.”
“I therefore consider that the proposed expenditure contravenes Section 57(4) of the Public Procurement Act 2007. On the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, paragraph 1 of the Fifth Schedule requires that public officers do not place themselves in a position of conflict, do not abuse their office to obtain special advantages.”
“In view of this, I find that the proposed expenditure violates the Code of Conduct for Public Officers. Under the Seventh Schedule, members of the National Assembly swear to faithfully discharge their duties and act in the interest of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
“Where the exercise of legislative power violates the Constitution or statutory provisions, the Court not only has jurisdiction but has a constitutional duty to intervene.”
“SERAP sought declaratory and injunctive relief, it is to be noted that declaratory relief is granted where the plaintiff establishes entitlement by credible evidence. Having found that the defendants acted in breach of the Public Procurement Act, the Code of Conduct Act and the Oath of Office, I am firmly satisfied that the plaintiff has successfully discharged this burden.”
SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare said: “This historic ruling is a great victory for transparency, accountability and responsible management of public resources in Nigeria.”
“We congratulate Judge Bogoro for his courage, independence and sound reasoning in reaffirming the principles of accountability, transparency, due process and value for money in public spending.”
Commenting on the ruling, Femi Falana, SAN, said: “SERAP deserves praise for this legal victory. It has confirmed that the decision of members of the executive and parliament to live in obscene opulence while people are forced to live in poverty cannot be justified.”
“The Fiscal and Revenue Mobilization Commission should carefully study the ruling and apply section 70 of the Constitution which gives it the power to fix the salaries and allowances of members of the National Assembly.”
Post views:
121
