N206 Billion Scandal Rocks Nigeria: 16 MDAs Implicated in Massive Mandate Hijack

A recent analysis of Nigeria's 2026 Appropriation Act has revealed a significant and concerning trend: no fewer than 16 federal Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) have been allocated over N205.96 billion for projects falling outside their statutory mandates. This widespread practice has ignited fresh debates regarding the increasing utilization of government entities for constituency and infrastructure projects that bear no relation to their core responsibilities, raising serious questions about budget integrity and public accountability.

The detailed budget review conducted by Weekend Trust highlighted that these affected agencies collectively earmarked precisely N205,957,972,172 for a diverse range of projects, including road construction, solar electrification, building hospitals and schools, dam projects, motorcycle distribution, and various empowerment programmes. Critically, in numerous instances, these off-mandate allocations constitute a substantial portion of an agency's total budget, with some dedicating more than 70 percent of their appropriations to such unrelated activities.

Prominent among the MDAs engaged in this practice are the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), which allocated an astonishing N17.78 billion (91.98% of its budget) for projects like solar streetlights and classroom construction. The Nigeria Press Council (NPC) followed suit, dedicating N10.40 billion (87.47% of its budget) to roads, electricity, and school renovations. Similarly, the National Root Crops Research Institute (NRCRI) budgeted N59.12 billion (83.24%) for infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges, and health facilities, while NEPAD proposed N12.74 billion (71.9%) for similar off-mandate initiatives.

Other agencies with significant off-mandate allocations include the Oil and Gas Free Zones Authority (OGFZA) with N32.10 billion (47.71%), the Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP) with N14.24 billion (31.67%), the Centre for Management Development (CMD) with N12.56 billion (27.35%), and the National Commission for Almajiri and Out-of-School Children Education (NCAOOSCE) which allocated approximately N8.4 billion (nearly 29%) for road construction, despite its primary mandate of integrating out-of-school children into formal education. Even the Ministry of Defence, facing insecurity challenges, earmarked N1.9 billion for solar projects and roads, representing 0.06% of its N3.16 trillion allocation.

This trend is not isolated to the 2026 budget. Earlier analyses, including BudgIT’s GovSpend platform, indicated that in December 2024, three agencies under the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security spent over N810 million on projects unrelated to their statutory duties. Instances of the Federal Co-operative College, Oji River, and the Federal College of Horticulture, Dadin-Kowa, disbursing billions on constituency and infrastructure projects outside their mandates have also been previously reported.

In response to these revelations, several officials have defended the practice, describing these projects as National Assembly constituency initiatives. The NCAOOSCE clarified that such projects are incorporated into the Appropriation Act in line with a “long-standing budgetary practice” where MDAs implement projects assigned by the National Assembly. A senior official from the National Space Research and Development Agency (NASRDA) reiterated that these are “continuity projects of senators and members of the National Assembly,” routinely channeled through various MDAs, and do not signify a deviation from their core mandates. Sources within the Senate Appropriations Committee and former lawmakers, like Dr. Wunmi Bewaji, confirmed this as a common practice, even likening it to “special earmarks” in the US Congress, arguing that the ultimate goal is project execution, regardless of the implementing agency's mandate.

However, this justification faces strong condemnation from various quarters. Senator Abubakar Kyari, the Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, explicitly warned agencies under his ministry against executing projects outside their statutory responsibilities, emphasizing alignment with presidential priorities. Civil society organizations and economists have voiced profound concerns. Chief Dr. Omenazu Jackson of the International Society for Social Justice and Human Rights (ISSJHR) described the phenomenon as “budget padding” and “off-budget projects” that undermine constitutional governance, weaken democratic accountability, and erode public trust, citing constitutional provisions and the Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2007. He demanded transparency, a forensic audit, and legislative amendments to curb future abuses.

Friday Odeh, Country Director of Accountability Lab Nigeria, viewed this as a symptom of deeper structural problems in Nigeria’s budgeting process, where projects are inserted without originating from the implementing agencies' mandates. He called for every capital project to align with an MDA’s statutory role and for public disclosure of lawmaker-proposed projects. Economists Professor Ndubisi Nwokoma and Dr. Marcel Okeke unanimously labeled the practice as an anomality and pervasive corruption that makes “nonsense” of the entire budgetary process, stressing that agencies should focus on their core strengths. Dr. Umar Yakubu of the Centre for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity highlighted it as a critical governance issue leading to public financial mismanagement and systemic failure, compromising institutional integrity and public sector efficiency.

The deep-seated nature of this practice was vividly illustrated by Barr Solomon Dalung, a former Minister of Youth and Sports, who recounted being asked to “raise N200 million” during a budget defense session at the National Assembly. His refusal led to his exclusion from detailed budget discussions, which were then conducted with the Permanent Secretary behind closed doors. Dalung described this as an “entrenched culture of corruption” where oversight transforms into an avenue for extortion, diverting public resources and eroding governance integrity.

The debate surrounding these off-mandate projects underscores a significant conflict between an institutionalized political practice and the principles of sound public financial management and good governance. While proponents argue for flexibility in project execution, critics demand strict adherence to mandates, transparency, and accountability to prevent corruption and ensure public funds are utilized effectively for national development.