BudgIT, a civic-tech organisation promoting budget transparency and accountability in Nigeria and other African countries, says it has uncovered 11,12
BudgIT, a civic-tech organisation promoting budget transparency and accountability in Nigeria and other African countries, says it has uncovered 11,122 projects worth N6.93 trillion that were inserted by the National Assembly into the 2025 national budget.
The figure, according to an 18-page report released by the organisation on Tuesday, represents 12.5% of the N54.99 trillion budget signed into law by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on February 28.
In December 2024, President Tinubu presented a proposed budget of N49.7 trillion for the 2025 fiscal year to a joint session of the National Assembly. The budget, titled Budget of Restoration: Securing Peace, Rebuilding Prosperity, was presented at the House of Representatives chambers in Abuja.
Tinubu said the 2025 Appropriation Bill was designed to ensure macroeconomic stability, reduce poverty, promote economic growth, enhance human capital development, and address insecurity.
In February 2025, the President requested an upward review of the proposed budget from N49.7 trillion to N54.2 trillion. The increase, he said, was due to additional revenue generated by key federal agencies: N1.4 trillion from the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, N1.2 trillion from the Nigeria Customs Service, and N1.8 trillion from other government-owned agencies.
On February 13, 2025, the National Assembly passed a revised budget of N54.99 trillion for the 2025 financial year, further raising the president’s revised proposal by N700 billion. The budget passage followed the presentation of reports by the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations during separate plenaries at the National Assembly Complex in Abuja.
A detailed analysis of the BudgIT report revealed that 238 projects—each valued above N5 billion and totalling N2.29 trillion—were inserted into the budget with little or no justification.
“Also, 984 projects worth N1.71 trillion and 1,119 projects within the range of N500 million to N1 billion, totalling N641.38 billion, were indiscriminately inserted into the budget,” the report stated.
Further analysis showed that 3,573 projects worth N653.19 billion were directly assigned to federal constituencies, while 1,972 projects valued at N444.04 billion were allocated to senatorial districts.
The report also highlighted numerous questionable projects, including 1,477 streetlight installations worth N393.29 billion, 538 borehole projects totalling N114.53 billion, and 2,122 ICT-related projects valued at N505.79 billion. Additionally, N6.74 billion was earmarked for the “empowerment of traditional rulers.
“Shockingly, 39% of all insertions—4,371 projects worth N1.72 trillion—were forced into the Ministry of Agriculture’s budget, inflating its capital allocation from N242.5 billion to N1.95 trillion,” BudgIT said.
The Ministries of Science and Technology, and Budget and Economic Planning, also had their capital votes inflated by insertions to N994.98 billion and N1.1 trillion respectively.
More findings on MDA projects
BudgIT’s findings also revealed that many Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) were allocated projects outside their statutory mandates, calling them frivolous and of no tangible value to national development.
It identified the Federal Co-operative College, Oji River; the National Centre for Agricultural Mechanisation, Ilorin; and the Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute, Lagos, as among the agencies saddled with projects outside their core responsibilities.
For example, the National Centre for Agricultural Mechanisation, Ilorin, was allocated N400 million for scholarships and educational grants in Bayelsa West Senatorial District, and another N350 million for a community health insurance scheme in the same district.
BudgIT called on President Tinubu to assert stronger executive leadership to ensure that the national budget aligns with Nigeria’s medium- and long-term development strategy.
“This includes initiating a reform-oriented dialogue with the National Assembly to establish a transparent, equitable, and accountable process for including constituency projects. The current practice—where lawmakers independently insert projects without coordination with national priorities—undermines the credibility of the budget and weakens the impact of public expenditure,” the organisation stated.
“Although unofficial claims suggest that senators and members of the House of Representatives receive N1 billion and N2 billion respectively for constituency projects, our analysis reveals that actual allocations are often significantly higher.
“These discrepancies underscore the urgent need for budgetary reform anchored in data transparency, independent verification of project costs, and a standardised mechanism for tracking the implementation and impact of constituency projects.
“Without such reforms, the budgeting process risks being dominated by political patronage rather than national development goals,” BudgIT added.
How budget padding began
Budget padding is not news in Nigeria’s political space. Since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999, the National Assembly has repeatedly been enmeshed in budget padding controversies—often through project insertions disguised as constituency or zonal intervention projects. Analysts say these practices have consistently undermined fiscal discipline, transparency, and public trust in governance.
During the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo, he rejected the 2000 Appropriation Bill, accusing the National Assembly of inflating the budget by about N2 billion. A major flashpoint was the legislature’s unilateral increase of its own allocation from N22.7 billion to N24 billion without executive approval.
Similarly, in 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan declined to assent to the budget over what he described as an unjustified increase in the National Assembly’s allocation—from about N120 billion to N232.74 billion. The standoff was eventually resolved through closed-door negotiations, resulting in a compromise figure of N150 billion.
In 2016, Abdulmumin Jibrin, then Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations, accused Speaker Yakubu Dogara and three other principal officers of inserting N40 billion into the budget for personal benefit. Jibrin alleged widespread padding through fictitious constituency projects. Although he was suspended by the House, his revelations sparked nationwide attention and exposed deep-rooted anomalies in the budgeting process.
Under President Muhammadu Buhari, similar concerns were raised. In 2019, he accused the National Assembly of unilaterally increasing the budget by about N90 billion and distorting funding allocations for critical infrastructure in favour of projects with limited national value.
In the 2020 fiscal year, he decried insertions totalling N264 billion made by lawmakers many of which were deemed not feasible or irrelevant to national development priorities.
The 2021 budget saw another escalation in padding. President Buhari criticised lawmakers for inserting over N500 billion in projects, often under vague subheads or duplications of previously listed programmes.
In 2022, the president flagged further unjustified insertions amounting to N36.59 billion, noting that many of the projects had not been submitted by ministries nor aligned with the government’s economic recovery strategy.
By 2023, allegations of padding had intensified. Lawmakers reportedly inserted new projects worth about N770.72 billion into the budget. In addition, budget lines for several MDAs were increased by N58.55 billion without the knowledge or approval of the executive.
In 2024, Senator Abdul Ningi alleged that the national budget was padded to the tune of N3.7 trillion. He claimed this amount could not be traced to any specific line item in the approved document. Although the Senate dismissed his allegations and suspended him, the controversy triggered a national debate over legislative fiscal misconduct and the persistent abuse of budgetary powers.
National Assembly reacts
While the senate calls the report handiwork of dark angels of falsehood bent on stirring controversy and sowing disaffection in the polity, the House of Representatives chose to keep mum.
