Another fiscal year has begun with the running of a new budget, but one phenomenon that still poses threats before the Country is the culture of financial recklessness, mismanagement, misappropriation, and diversion of funds within the public sphere of administration. These funds which largely would be meant to finance projects have always fallen short of expected outcomes, following hiccups borne by administrative deficiencies and corrupt dispositions. Cases of unaccounted funds and breaches of remittances by revenue generating Agencies have been on the top burner recently. The National Assembly by law has the oversight function to summon defaulting Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) as well as public officials to appear before it for probe. However, it becomes a controversial subject of concern when the body expected to be at the height of oversight function is also cut in the web of recklessness.
In its norm of protesting against suspected cases of financial recklessness, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has recently filed a lawsuit against the leadership of the National Assembly including the Senate President, Dr. Ahmad Lawan and the Speaker of House of Representatives, Mr Femi Gbajabiamila over “their failure to probe, and to refer to appropriate anti-corruption agencies fresh allegations that N4.1bn of public money budgeted for the National Assembly is missing, misappropriated or stolen.” The suit followed the publication of the annual audited report for 2016 in which the Auditor-General of the Federation raised “concerns about alleged diversion and misappropriation of public funds and sought the recovery of any missing funds.” In the suit number, FHC/ABJ/CS/1609/2021, filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel Dr. Lawan and Mr. Gbajabiamila to perform their constitutional oversight functions to promptly probe the allegations that fresh N4.1bn budgeted for the National Assembly may be missing.” In its argument contained in the suit, SERAP maintains that “the National Assembly has legal and constitutional duties to prevent and combat corruption, as well as promote transparency and accountability in the management of public resources.”
The arguments of SERAP purviewing why the Parliament has to be up to its task as a law making institution read: “The National Assembly can only effectively perform its anti-corruption role if it can demonstrate exemplary leadership to probe the allegations of corruption and mismanagement involving the legislative body. Transparency and accountability in the management of public resources and wealth is essential for promoting development, people’s welfare and well-being, and their access to basic public services, as well as good governance and the rule of law. The failure of the National Assembly to promptly and thoroughly investigate, and to refer to appropriate anti-corruption agencies the allegations documented in the annual audited report for 2016 is a fundamental breach of the oversight and public interest duties imposed on the legislative body.
“The National Assembly has no legally justifiable reason to refuse to investigate the allegations documented by the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation,” the suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare and Kehinde Oyewumi, partly read. Recall that SERAP had earlier in a letter to Lawan and Gbajabiamila requested them to “use their good offices to urgently probe and refer to appropriate anti-corruption agencies allegations that fresh allegations of missing N4.1bn of public money.” The letter had read partly: “These fresh allegations are not part of the disclosure by the Auditor-General in the audited reports for 2015, 2017 and 2018 that N4.4 billion of National Assembly money is missing, misappropriated or stolen. According to the Auditor-General report for 2016, N4,144,706,602.68 of National Assembly money is missing, diverted or stolen. The National Assembly paid some contractors N417,312,538.79 without any documents. The Auditor-General wants the Clerk to the National Assembly to ‘recover the amount in question from the contractors.’ The National Assembly reportedly spent N625,000,000.00 through its Constitution Review Committee between March and June 2016 but without any document. The Auditor-General wants the Clerk to the National Assembly to ‘recover the amount from the Committee.’ The National Assembly also reportedly spent N66,713,355.08 as ‘personnel cost’ but ‘the payees in the Cashbook did not correspond with those in the Bank Statement’. The Auditor-General wants ‘the irregular expenditure recovered from the officer who approved the payments.’
“The National Assembly also reportedly paid N116,162,522.60 to some contractors between April and June, 2016 without any document. The National Assembly deducted N56,985,568.55 from various contract payments in respect of Withholding Tax and Value Added Tax but without any evidence of remittance..
“The National Assembly also reportedly paid N126,264,320.00 as cash advances to 11 staff members between March and December, 2016 to procure goods and services but failed to remit the money. The Senate reportedly paid N747,286,680.00 as personal advances to staff members between February and December, 2016 for various procurements and services but failed to retire the money. The Senate also deducted N118,625,057.48 as Withholding and Value Added Taxes but failed to show any evidence of remittance to the Federal Inland Revenue Service. The Senate also spent N109,007,179.73 from the Capital Expenditure vote but without any document.
“The House of Representatives reportedly deducted N821,564,296.48 from staff salaries but failed to remit the money to tax authorities. The House also paid N254,059,513.70 as advances to staff members to procure goods and services between January and December, 2016 but failed to retire the money.
“The National Institute for Legislative Studies reportedly spent N375,867,000.00 to buy 11 motor vehicles in April 2016. But the Institute also paid the same contractor N36,610,000.00 in September 2016 under the same contract without approval. The Institute also reportedly paid N10,927,768.80 to 7 members of staff who were redeployed from the National Assembly to provide specialized services but without details about the staff paid, and without any justification. The National Assembly Service Commission reportedly approved N109,995,400.00 to train some officers in Dubai, United Arab Emirates but spent N127,629,600.00 as Estacode Allowances to participants, and fees for two consultants engaged for the training. The Commission also spent N9,975,000.00 as course fees for 34 officers but it also paid a consultant N4,987,500.00 for the same course fees.The Legislative Aides Section earned N12,274,587.77 as interests on Bank accounts in a commercial bank between January and December 2016 but failed to remit the money to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.”
Narratives of administrative deficiencies have not ceased from the calculus of the patterns of governance character in Nigeria. The clusters of interlocking deficiencies have loudly given the character of public administration in the Country the nomenclature of corruption over time. The misgivings have borne the classification of public administration in the Country within the corridor of bad governance loudly tingling with disconcerting effects on growth and development.
Recently, the disclosure of administrative lacuna reflecting non-remittance of large sums of revenue over time has been taking toll of nauseating records. In 2021, a number of cases had taken course with probes set up by the National Assembly to call affected MDAs nailed in the discrepancies to give account. The joint efforts of the two chambers of the National Assembly to probe the Agencies whose records have revealed lacunas with suspicion of financial recklessness in the light of apparent skewing of proper accountability had raised concerns, particularly on revenue generating Agencies. The discoveries have led to Agencies falling under such category appearing on invitation by either of the Chambers or a joint committee formation to defend alleged cases of financial discrepancies. Records have shown how some of the representatives of the affected MDAs fumbled during summon to answer to the discrepancies.
While the National Assembly has been known to be given to the oversight function of summoning MDAs for probes to answer to questions of financial recklessness and suspected diversions, it is demeaning to the Institution as a lawmaking organ bestowed with the sanctity of such oversight function, if it is cut itself in the mess of such recklessness without explanations. To clear its perceptions from a degrading appellation in the sight of Nigerians, it only behooves the leadership of the Parliament to probe the alleged misgivings and give explanations to Nigerians with all openness and sense of accountability and responsibility.