Reps doesn’t need Tinubu to explain budget implementation, Says Deputy Spokesperson

The Nigerian House of Representatives has asserted its constitutional authority to scrutinise the implementation of the national budget, stating that the direct presence of the President is not a prerequisite for its oversight functions. This assertion, made by the Deputy Spokesperson of the House, Rep. Philip Agbese, underscores the legislature's role in ensuring accountability and transparency in government expenditure. The development comes amidst ongoing concerns regarding budget implementation and the need for robust legislative oversight to prevent waste and inefficiency. This article examines the legal framework empowering the National Assembly in this regard, drawing on constitutional provisions and relevant statutes that define the scope of parliamentary control over public funds.

The Nigerian political landscape is once again highlighting the delicate balance of powers between the executive and legislative arms of government, particularly concerning fiscal accountability. Recently, the Deputy Spokesperson of the House of Representatives, Rep. Philip Agbese, affirmed that the House possesses the inherent constitutional authority to scrutinise the implementation of the national budget without requiring the direct presence of President Bola Tinubu. This statement emerged in the context of the House's ongoing efforts to ensure judicious use of appropriated funds, specifically in relation to the 2025 national budget.

The powers of the National Assembly, comprising the Senate and the House of Representatives, to oversee public funds are deeply entrenched in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). Sections 80 to 84 of the Constitution establish the framework for public expenditure, stipulating that no money can be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund without appropriation by the National Assembly. This constitutional mandate vests the National Assembly with the fundamental "power of the purse," making it the ultimate authority in authorising government spending. The President is constitutionally required to lay estimates before the National Assembly, which then considers and authorises expenditure through an Appropriation Act.

The assertion by the House of Representatives is firmly rooted in the investigative and oversight powers granted to the National Assembly under Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution. Section 88(2)(b) explicitly empowers the National Assembly to investigate any matter within its legislative competence for the purpose of exposing corruption, inefficiency, or waste in the execution or administration of laws and in the disbursement or administration of funds appropriated by it. This power is exercisable independently and does not require the direct involvement or presence of the President. Furthermore, Section 89 grants the National Assembly the power to summon any person to give evidence or produce documents during such investigations.

The assertion by the House of Representatives regarding its independent oversight powers is a critical reminder of the constitutional checks and balances essential for democratic governance. For legal practitioners, this reinforces the importance of understanding the robust framework of legislative oversight in Nigeria. Clients, particularly government agencies and contractors, must be advised on the National Assembly's extensive powers to summon, investigate, and demand accountability for public funds, irrespective of direct presidential involvement. The ongoing scrutiny of the budget, exemplified by the House's actions concerning the alleged phantom agency, signals a renewed commitment to fiscal discipline and transparency. Practitioners should anticipate increased legislative activism in budget monitoring and be prepared to guide their clients through rigorous oversight processes, ensuring compliance with the Appropriation Act, the Fiscal Responsibility Act, and the Public Procurement Act.