Court Faults N110bn NASS Spending, Cites Self-Dealing

The Federal High Court in Lagos has declared unlawful the National Assembly’s N110 billion vehicle and allowance schemes, holding that the planned spending of N40 billion on 465 vehicles for lawmakers and N70 billion in support allowances for newly elected members breached procurement laws, constitutional obligations, and the public trust.

Justice Yellim Bogoro delivered the judgment on Wednesday, May 6, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1606/2023, filed by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project against the National Assembly. A certified true copy of the ruling was sighted on Sunday.

SERAP filed the suit in August 2023 against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas, following plans to spend N40 billion on 465 vehicles and N70 billion in allowances for new lawmakers amid worsening economic hardship. The proposed spending was apparently on top of the N281 billion already provided for the lawmakers in the 2023 National Assembly budget.

In her judgment, Justice Bogoro held that “looking at the magnitude of the expenditure, coupled with the absence of demonstrable due process, leads me to conclude that the procurement is arbitrary, disproportionate and inconsistent with statutory procurement standards.” She added that “the beneficiaries of the expenditure are the very officials approving it,” describing this as “a case of self-dealing and conflict of interest.”

The judge said she took judicial notice of widespread financial hardship in the country, noting that the allocation “demonstrates a failure to prioritise national interest.” SERAP had argued the budget increase came at a time when over 137 million poor Nigerians are living in extreme poverty exacerbated by the removal of fuel subsidy.

Rejecting the lawmakers’ jurisdictional objection, Justice Bogoro stressed that “the doctrine of separation of powers does not operate as a shield for illegality.” She held that legislative autonomy cannot bar courts from examining “the legality and constitutionality of legislative spending,” and that the conduct complained of was “inconsistent with the oath of office.”

The court found that SERAP, as a public interest organisation, had locus standi to sue, and ruled that the absence of a pre-action notice under Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act 2017 was not fatal because the matter involved urgency and public interest.

SERAP grounded its case on alleged breaches of Section 57(4) of the Public Procurement Act 2007, the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, the constitutional Oath of Office, and the remuneration framework of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission. The defendants had denied the claims, arguing the funds were lawfully appropriated and already expended, rendering the suit academic.

Justice Bogoro ordered Akpabio and Abbas “to ensure that all future procurements or expenditure of public funds by the National Assembly comply strictly with due process requirements” and are guided by “transparency, accountability and value for money.”

SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare called the ruling “a major victory for transparency, accountability and responsible management of public resources,” stressing that “public office is a public trust.” Senior lawyer Femi Falana said SERAP “deserves commendation,” adding that lawmakers’ choices amid hardship “cannot be justified.”