Politics
SERAP, 20 Others Sue Akpabio, Abbas, Against Increasing Own Budget
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and 20 concerned Nigerians have filed a lawsuit against the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas “for unilaterally and arbitrarily increasing the allocation for lawmakers from N197bn to N344bn, their highest since the return of democracy in 1999.”
Biztellers reports that the action was brought against Akpabio and Abbas for themselves and on behalf of all members of the National Assembly.
According to Deputy Director, SERAP, Kolawole Oluwadare, the lawmakers had last month raised their allocation from N197bn proposed by President Bola Tinubu to N344bn.
That meant that the lawmakers would in total draw N514bn from the 2024 budget. The lawmakers also in 2023 arbitrarily increased their own budget from the originally proposed N169bn to N228bn, he noted.
In the suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/68/2024 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court, Abuja, the Plaintiffs are asking the court to determine “whether the lawmakers, in the exercise of their powers over appropriation/money bills, can unilaterally increase their own budget without the re-presentation of the budget by the Executive.”
The Plaintiffs are asking the court for “a declaration that the National Assembly, in the exercise of its powers over appropriation/money bills, cannot unilaterally increase its own budget without the re-presentation of the budget by the President in line with section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”
The Plaintiffs are asking the court for “a declaration that the action of the National Assembly, unilaterally increasing its own budget from N197 billion to N344 billion, without the re-presentation of the budget by the President is a breach of the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances.”
The Plaintiffs are seeking “an order of perpetual injunction restraining and preventing the National Assembly from unilaterally increasing its own budget, in the exercise of its powers over all appropriation/money bills, without the re-presentation of such appropriation/money bills by the President in line with the Nigerian Constitution.”
In the suit, the Plaintiffs are arguing that: “Allowing the National Assembly to continue to unilaterally and arbitrarily increase its own budget would fundamentally undermine the letter and spirit of the Nigerian Constitution, public trust, and the rule of law.”
The Plaintiffs are also arguing that, “The arbitrary and self-serving increase by the lawmakers of their own allocation offends the Code of Conduct for Public Officers [Fifth Schedule Part 1] of the Nigerian Constitution, oath of office, and the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances.”
According to the Plaintiffs, “Unless the reliefs sought are granted, the National Assembly will continue to breach the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution and the rule of law, and at the expense of millions of Nigerians living in poverty.”
The suit filed on behalf of SERAP and 20 concerned Nigerians by their lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare and Andrew Nwankwo.
The petition read in part, “Members of the National Assembly are public officers who have sworn the constitutional oath of office to perform their respective duties in the interest of Nigerian citizens.
“The members of the National Assembly, by unilaterally and arbitrarily increasing their own budget in the Appropriation Bill 2024, without the re-presentation of the budget by the President has violated the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.
“Paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers which provides that ‘a public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities.’
“Members of the National Assembly have put their interest above the public interest and ‘well-being and prosperity of the Federal Republic of Nigeria’, contrary to their oath of office.
“It is a necessary implication of the rule of law that, except where the law gives a discretion to a public functionary, he can only act in accordance with the law, as to do otherwise may enthrone arbitrariness.
“The increase and insertion of line items in the Appropriation Bill 2024 by the National Assembly is not commensurate with the constitutional commitments to public services and goods; decreasing public revenues and increasing level of public debts, and the poor economic and social realities in Nigeria.
“The President presented the Appropriation Bill 2024 made up of N27.5 trillion Naira to the National Assembly on 29 November 2023. The National Assembly on 30th December, 2023 passed the Appropriation Bill 2024 in the sum of N28.7 Trillion.
“That while exercising its legislative powers, the 1st and 2nd Defendants increased the Appropriation Bill by N1.2 Trillion, wherein the 1st and 2nd Defendants unilaterally increased allocations made to the National Assembly in the Appropriation Bill 2024 presented by the President from N197,932,625,616 Billion Naira to N344.85 Billion.
“The President signed the ₦28.7 Trillion Appropriation Bill 2024 into law on 1st January, 2024. The 2024 Budget is in deficit of ₦9.18 Trillion.
“The Budget/Appropriation Act 2024 is yet to be gazetted as at the time of filing this suit and public access to the gazetted 2024 Budget/Appropriation Act is restricted.
“The National Assembly after inserting new line items to the Appropriation Bill 2024 and altering the budgetary allocation to already inserted line items did not submit same to the President for re-presentation by the President before going ahead to present the Appropriation Bill to the President for assent.”
The SERAP and 20 concerned Nigerians are also asking the court for the following reliefs:
“A DECLARATION that the action of the National Assembly, unilaterally increasing the budget of the National Assembly from 197 billion Naira to 344 billion Naira, in the exercise of its powers over Appropriation Bill 2024, without the re-presentation of the budget by the President is a breach of section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the Code of Conduct for Public Officers [Fifth Schedule Part 1] of the Nigerian Constitution, Oath of office [Seventh Schedule] and section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution.
“AN ORDER OF PERPETUAL INJUNCTION OF THE HONOURABLE COURT restraining and preventing the National Assembly from unilaterally increasing the budget of the National Assembly, in the exercise of its powers over all appropriation/money bills, without the re-presentation of such appropriation/money bills by the President in compliance with section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances.”
And, “AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE COURT directing, compelling and mandating the National Assembly, in the exercise of its powers over all appropriation/money bills, to comply with section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] by sending such appropriation/money bills to the President for re-presentation before the National Assembly in compliance with section 81 of the Nigerian Constitution and the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances.”
The court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the suit.
A chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party, Dan Ulasi, has warned that the party stands little chance of defeating President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the 2027 general elections if Nyesom Wike continues to play a leading role while allegedly supporting the ruling government.
Ulasi, who spoke during an interview on Arise TV on Thursday, expressed deep concern over what he described as a “contradictory situation” within the PDP, stressing that such internal inconsistencies could weaken the party’s credibility and chances at the polls.
ALSO READ: ‘I Didn’t Mean It Literally’ — Nyesom Wike Clears Air as Atiku Abubakar Fires Back
“I don’t see my party as presently constituted challenging Tinubu with Wike as national leader,” Ulasi said, warning that he may be forced to leave the party if the issue is not addressed.
The PDP stalwart argued that Wike cannot effectively serve as a leader in the opposition while maintaining close ties with President Tinubu, describing the situation as “unconstructive” for a party seeking to reclaim power at the national level.
He further questioned what role Wike would play if another candidate emerges as the PDP’s presidential flag-bearer ahead of the 2027 election, asking whether the former Rivers State governor would actively participate in party rallies or align with the ruling party’s activities.
Ulasi warned that the party’s next meeting could be his last if its leadership fails to provide satisfactory explanations, insisting that he cannot continue to be part of a process riddled with contradictions.
In a related development, Ulasi revealed that Peter Obi had visited him several times this year, including a recent meeting following an appearance in Enugu.
He spoke positively about Obi’s vision for Nigeria, noting that the former presidential candidate offers a sense of hope for the country’s future, although he stopped short of declaring any political alignment.
Reflecting on his longstanding ties to the PDP, Ulasi recalled his role during the party’s formation alongside late former Vice-President Alex Ekueme and other founding members.
Despite his deep connection to the party, he maintained that he would rather step aside than remain in a system he considers inconsistent.
He added that if he eventually exits the PDP, he has no plans to join another political party, stating that he would instead operate as a private consultant.
There was tension within the Ogun State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) on Monday after former Governor and Senator representing Ogun East, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, alleged that he was barred from attending a stakeholders’ meeting of the party held in Ijebu Ode.
The meeting, which took place at Adeola Odutola Hall, was reportedly convened to bring together key party stakeholders, including current and former local government chairmen, councillors, and serving as well as former lawmakers from both state and national levels.
However, the senator, in a viral video circulating online, claimed he was denied entry into the venue despite being part of the expected attendees.
ALSO READ: “APC Failure in Disguise?” — Dickson Tears Into ADC Coalition
Speaking from his branded campaign bus parked at the venue, Daniel expressed disappointment over the situation, saying he and his team were stopped from accessing the meeting.
He further questioned the legitimacy of any resolutions reached at the gathering, suggesting that the outcome of the meeting should not be considered valid.
As of press time, the Ogun State APC leadership had yet to issue an official response to the allegation.
The lingering leadership crisis within the African Democratic Congress (ADC) is set for a crucial legal test as the Supreme Court of Nigeria prepares to hear an appeal filed by former Senate President, David Mark.
Mark is challenging a legal action brought by a former Deputy National Chairman of the party, Nafiu Bala, over the control and leadership structure of the ADC.
The case, scheduled for hearing on Tuesday, is expected to determine the direction of the party amid deepening internal divisions.
SEE MORE: 2027: Why ADC, Opposition Leaders Stormed INEC in Abuja
Through his lawyer, Realwan Okpanachi, Mark is seeking an order to stay the execution of a Court of Appeal judgment delivered on March 12, pending the final resolution of the matter.
He also urged the apex court to restrain the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from making any alterations to the party’s leadership as currently constituted under his faction.
In addition, Mark is asking the court to suspend further proceedings in a related suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Emeka Nwite.
The dispute dates back to a September 4, 2025 ruling by the Federal High Court following an ex parte application filed by Bala, which has since fueled competing claims to the party’s leadership.
The ADC has, in recent months, been embroiled in a bitter factional crisis, with rival camps asserting legitimacy.
The situation has been worsened by conflicting court orders and administrative uncertainty surrounding who truly leads the party.
Tensions escalated after INEC reportedly removed Mark as the party’s national chairman from its official records, sparking protests by his loyalists.
The demonstration drew prominent political figures, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, ex-Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola, former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi, and former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi.
In response, the Bala-led faction staged a counter-protest, insisting on recognition by INEC as the legitimate leadership of the party.
As the battle shifts to the Supreme Court, political observers say the outcome could decisively shape the future of the ADC, particularly as political alignments begin to take form ahead of upcoming elections.
NNPC Ltd Denies Selling Refinery Scrap
Why Osun is Tapping into $2 Trillion Global Creative Industry Economy
Adeleke Justifies Osun Security Trust Fund
Dangote Refinery Showcases Power of Domestic Value Addition – Prof Ike‑Muonso
NNPC Foundation Wins CSR Champion Award (Health)
Dangote Refinery Exports 1.1bn Litres of Aviation Fuel to Europe, Supplies 95% of Nigeria’s Jet A1 – AON
Trump’s Family Unveils New Cryptocurrency Platform
Senate Denies Receiving Petitions Against Tinubu’s Ambassadorial Nominees
Dangote Cement Lights Up Benue Host Communities With CSR Initiatives
Reps Recommend 3-year Jail Term For Aviation minister
Tems Sets New Record On Billboard Hot 100 Chart
