Continued from yesterday
Self-serving expenditure by people in government (as revealed in annual budgetary allocations) constitutes a betrayal of the well-meaning intent of the 22 sections of the ‘Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy.’

Where persons entrusted with, and on oath, to ‘perform my functions honestly…faithfully… in accordance with the Constitution…and the law’…and always in the interest of the sovereignty, integrity, solidarity, well-being and prosperity of the Federal Republic of Nigeria…and to preserve the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy…’ there would be no money for frivolities or pandering to the large egos and excessive comfort of public officials. One burning example will suffice in this respect.

The education sector, to equip Nigeria’s human capital for competitiveness in an increasingly knowledge-driven world, requires a huge allocation of funds. The long-standing UNESCO recommendation is between 15 and 20 per cent of the annual national budget to fund the sector. If the Nigerian state adhered to this organisation’s proposition to which it is a signatory, the education sector would receive N3.52 trillion of the 2026 federal budget of N34.33 trillion.

Transparently administered, debt to teachers will be cleared, schools will be rebuilt, better equipped for purpose, made safer, and existing staffers of all categories will be better incentivised, and more will be attracted into the profession. Schools made more conducive to teaching and learning cannot but deliver on their respective mandates as provided in the National Policy on Education.

The world body goes so far as to suggest that countries allocate 4 – 5 per cent of annual GDP for the education sector. If the Nigerian government had bought into this, the 2025 GDP of N441.5 trillion would have devoted N17.66 trillion to education.

Justice Yellim Bogoro further declared that the N110 billion spending violated the principle of public accountability, holding that the beneficiaries were the very approving authorities, thereby creating a clear case of conflict of interest. No one can fault this.  The intendment of section 22 of the Constitution is that Government –and all its functionaries- must be responsible and accountable. Section 23 also includes ‘integrity’ as part of the ‘national ethics’. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds the federal assembly wanting in public accountability, then it stands to reason that the body betrayed the constitution its members swore to uphold.

It is to the eternal credit of the civil society organisations that, in fulfilment of their mandate to hold state officials to account, they keenly interrogate breaches of the law by public officials entrusted with upholding it, and also persistently challenge misdemeanours by lawful means. In 2023, when it became public knowledge, the Human Rights Writers Association (HURIWA) spoke against the NASS spending as provocative in the face of food-deficient citizens.

SERAP went even further to institute a suit against what it found unjustifiable and wasteful spending. The various agencies of mass media, in line with their Section 22 constitutional obligation, also spoke up and argued eloquently against the NASS action. Alas, as historian and essayist Barbara Tuchman would put it, government is one place that people seek control over others but lose it over themselves.

Sunday Karimi, senator and spokesperson for the upper house, said then that the legislators needed such vehicles ‘because our roads are bad’. Forgetting so insufferably their unique role to make laws for good governance and also obey them, he even went so far as to argue that since “a minister has more than three Land Cruisers, Prado and other vehicles and you are not asking them questions, why us?” He did not consider that one hundred and nine 2023 model (the latest then) of Toyota Land Cruiser for senators and 2023 Toyota Prado for 360 members of the House of Representatives was an unwise application of public funds in the face of far more pressing national needs.

Legislators in Japan, a country that manufactures the Toyota brand of vehicles, are not allocated all-expense-paid and maintained official vehicles for their public service work. Neither do legislators in the United States, where Nigeria copied the presidential system of government. These are very rich countries that can far more comfortably afford to do this. Regrettably, the sense of discipline, propriety, and public-interest service that prevails in these climes is absent here.

Justice Bogoro did his duty to forthrightly say it as it is. In these times, that is some ‘fresh air’ from the Bench.  But the ruling in mid-2026 on a case filed in 2023 is not good enough for justice. It should have come much earlier. Nonetheless, since, as reported, declaratory reliefs remain valid, particularly in matters constitutional even where contested actions had been concluded, it remains to be seen how this case will end.

The one locus of power that can discourage frivolous spending in government is the executive branch. President Tinubu, as chief executive of the federation, can do this by moral suasion and more, including leading by example. By this fact, he is responsible for, among other roles, judicious allocation of state resources; but he has not been seen to have acted appropriately. This lapse is contrary to his documented commitment in the ‘Renewed Hope 2023’ manifesto, in which he pledged to ‘fight corruption, inefficiency and waste in government’. He promised to ‘reform the civil service to fight corruption, reduce bureaucracy, streamline agencies, and decrease inefficiency and waste’.

He added: ‘We will streamline the amount that government spends on itself. A cap will be placed on fiscal expenditure for the construction of government buildings and on the salaries and related compensation packages of elected officials and senior personnel in the executive branch [of government]’. There is nothing to show that this very important promise is being kept at the highest level of government.

This being so, it does not surprise any discerning mind that other arms of government have no example of financial prudence to follow. Senator Karimi’s allusion to the ministers of the republic is relevant in this context.

Therefore, President Tinubu should recall the counsel of former American president F.D. Roosevelt that the Presidency is much more than an administrative position; it is, he said, ‘pre-eminently a place of moral leadership’. Prudence is an important aspect of moral leadership that the president should be seen to preach and practise. It is also not too late for the leadership of the National Assembly to atone for the violations of the Procurement Act, as well as the accountability required of them under the constitution, and in line with the dictates of the court.
Concluded.