The Federal High Court in Lagos has declared unlawful the National Assembly’s controversial N110 billion expenditure on official vehicles and allowances for lawmakers, ruling that the spending violated procurement laws, constitutional provisions, and the public trust.
In a judgment delivered on May 6, 2026, Justice Yellim Bogoro held that the proposed N40 billion expenditure on 465 vehicles for federal lawmakers and N70 billion in support allowances for newly elected members failed to meet statutory procurement requirements and amounted to self-dealing.
The court also directed Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas to ensure that all future procurement and expenditure by the National Assembly strictly comply with due process, transparency, accountability, and value-for-money principles.
The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/1606/2023, was filed by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) in August 2023 following reports that lawmakers planned to spend N110 billion on vehicles and allowances amid worsening economic hardship across the country.
In her judgment, Justice Bogoro held that the scale of the expenditure, coupled with the absence of demonstrable compliance with due process, rendered the procurement arbitrary and inconsistent with the provisions of the Public Procurement Act.
She further ruled that the expenditure created a conflict of interest because the beneficiaries were the same public officials responsible for approving the spending.
“The beneficiaries of the expenditure are the very officials approving it, and the expenditure confers direct pecuniary and material benefits. This, to my mind, constitutes a case of self-dealing and conflict of interest,” the judge held.
Justice Bogoro also took judicial notice of the prevailing economic challenges facing Nigerians, noting that the allocation of N110 billion for lawmakers’ benefit reflected a failure to prioritise the national interest.
“The doctrine of separation of powers does not operate as a shield for illegality,” she said, stressing that legislative autonomy does not prevent courts from reviewing the legality and constitutionality of public spending.
According to the judgment, the expenditure breached provisions of the Public Procurement Act 2007, the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, and constitutional obligations requiring public officials to act in good faith and in the public interest.
The court rejected objections raised by the National Assembly, including claims that SERAP lacked the legal standing to sue, that the matter had become academic because the funds had already been spent, and that pre-action notice was not properly served.
Justice Bogoro held that public interest organisations such as SERAP have the right to institute actions aimed at promoting transparency and accountability in governance.
“NGOs can institute actions to protect public interest,” the court ruled, adding that the issues raised in the case were matters of undeniable public concern.
Reacting to the judgment, SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare described the ruling as “a major victory for transparency, accountability and responsible management of public resources in Nigeria.”
He said the decision reaffirmed the principle that public office is a public trust and must not be used for personal enrichment.
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) also commended the judgment, arguing that lawmakers’ spending choices amid widespread economic hardship could not be justified. He urged the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission to fully exercise its constitutional responsibility regarding the remuneration and benefits of public office holders.
The court ultimately declared the vehicle procurement and allowance scheme unlawful and ordered the National Assembly leadership to ensure strict compliance with procurement laws and constitutional standards in all future expenditures.
