Last Wednesday, President Muhammadu Buhari signed the N9.1 trillion 2018 Appropriation Act. But the National Assembly’s substitution of 4,700 projects worth N347 billion with 6,403 projects valued at N578 billion in the budget has raised questions on how far the lawmakers can go in altering a budget proposal. ADEBISI ONANUGA writes.
Last November 7, President Muhammadu Buhari submitted an N8.6 trillion Appropriation bill of his administration to the National Assembly (NASS).
He had envisaged that by January, this year, the budget would have been ready. According to him, this would have begun the country’s return to the January – December budget cycle.
But when the NASS passed the budget proposal on May 16, and transmitted it to the Executive on May 25, the budget figure had risen to N9.1 trillion. The President was worried. Last Wednesday, he ‘reluctantly’ signed the 2018 budget into law.
The Executive’s concerns
President Buhari disclosed that “the National Assembly made cuts from the budget proposal amounting to N347 billion allocated to 4,700 projects, submitted to NASS for consideration and the legislators introduced 6,403 projects of their own, amounting to N578 billion” into the budget.
They also raised the total expenditure profile by N578 billion, from N8.6 trillion to N9.1 trillion.
According to President Buhari, many of the projects cut by the lawmakers are critical and may be difficult, if not impossible, to implement with the reduced allocation.
He also noted that the lawmakers hiked their budget to N139b from N125billion without consulting with the Executive and faulted many of the insertions made into 2018 budget by the lawmakers.
To him, “the logic behind the constitutional direction that budgets should be proposed by the executive is that it is the executive that knows and defines its policies and projects”.
The President said he would “seek to remedy some of the most critical of these issues through a supplementary and/or amendment budget to be able to execute the new projects inserted into the budget, ”, which he hoped the National Assembly will expeditiously consider and approve.
He explained that some of the new projects inserted by the NASS have not been properly conceptualised, designed and costed and will, therefore, be difficult to execute.
He pointed out that many of these new projects introduced by the NASS into the budget have been added to the budgets of most MDAs with no consideration for institutional capacity to execute them or the incremental recurrent expenditure that may be required.
According to him, some of these projects relate to matters that are the responsibility of the states and local governments, and for which the Federal Government should, therefore, not be unduly burdened.
Observers, who have been watching events between members of the Senate and House of Representatives, reasoned that both Senate President Bukola Saraki and House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara kept away from Aso Rock on the day the President signed the budget, but delegated Deputy Senate Leader Ibn Na’Alla and House Chief Whip Ado Doguwa, who stood in on their behalf, because of their frosty relationship with the executive.
To them, insertions made into the budget are bobby traps made to enable them declare the budget a failure in the nearest future.
Reactions from civil societies
For making changes into the budget without any consultation with the executive, observers, civil societies and other groups piqued with the development, said National Assembly’s action was nothing, but ‘self serving’.
They include the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), the Ijaw Youths Congress (IYC), and the Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI).
‘Budget cut is crime against humanity’
However, SERAP has described the lawmakers’ action as a crime against humanity for cutting funds for critical projects such as health, water, education, housing and security.
“Cutting funding for essential public services such as health, education and security constitutes a serious human rights violation and potentially rises to the level of crimes against humanity against the Nigerian people,” the organisation said.
The non-governmental organisation’s Deputy Director Timothy Adewale suggested that President Buhari should “instruct Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami (SAN) to open discussions with the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to establish whether substantial grounds and requisite elements exist to warrant Prosecutor’s intervention in this case.”
He added: “Indicting individual lawmakers suspected to be most responsible for the reduction of funding for critical projects would provide a much-needed measure of accountability for leaders, who have traditionally acted with impunity, assured that they will never be held to answer for their actions.”
SERAP said “the deliberate and systematic acts of alleged budget padding and cutting of funding by the lawmakers, coupled with the widespread negative consequences of such acts for millions of Nigerians across the country, point to not only allegations of corruption, but crimes against humanity, that is, deliberately withholding Nigerians’ access to essential and life-saving public services, which are triable at the International Criminal Court.”
It said the failure to decisively address allegations of ‘padding’ the 2016 budget allowed the practice to continue with almost absolute impunity, adding that “crimes against humanity invoke criminal responsibility”.
‘Insertions were self-serving’
The Ijaw Youths Congress (IYC) said it was self-serving and against the national interest.
A statement by its National President Eric Omare, the IYC took particular exception to the reduction of the initial funds earmarked by the take-off of the Nigerian Maritime University (NMU), Okorenkoko, and the all-important East/West Road, which are considered as key to peace sustenance in the oil-rich region.
According to the youths, the National Assembly’s action had depicted the lawmakers as insensitive.
“We consider the action of the National Assembly as insensitive and retrogressive to the development of the country. It is utter selfishness for the National Assembly to reduce the budget proposal for key developmental initiatives and increase the budget for their personal cost when they are supposed to reduce their recurrent expenses. We condemn this action by the National Assembly. The National Assembly demonstrated selfishness and arrogated their personal interest over and above the national interest which they were elected to serve,” the statement said.
The IYC urged President Buhari, to waste no time in sending a supplementary budget so as to make up for the mutilations.
The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), on its part, accused the lawmakers of selfishness.
Concerning President Buhari’s allegation that the NAss reduced some vital projects and replaced them with their own, NLC Secretary General, Comrade Peter Oso-Ezon said: “What the lawmakers did was not in the interest of Nigerians and the people they represent. They acted for their selfish interest. This is very bad for the nation and the economy. They were put there to serve the interest of their people, but unfortunately, they did not.”
According to him, there was nothing wrong for the lawmakers to amend the budget, but such amendments must be reasonable.
“We are not saying that they should not amend the budget. In fact, it is their primary assignment. There should be check and balance. However, looking at the budget critically, the amendment they made did not reflect the national interest,” he said.
Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry Director-General, Mr. Muda Yusuf, lamented that the challenges of the budgeting process have become a recurring decimal. According to him, the story has been the same since 1999, calling for an end to it.
He said there was need to clarify some constitutional issues with regard to the boundaries of authority and responsibilities of the executive and the NASS on the budgeting process.
“This will require an urgent interpretation of the relevant sections of the constitution. It is a matter that requires the urgent intervention of the judiciary to clarify. We need to know for instance whether the National Assembly has the powers to undertake the kind of alterations that was done to the 2018 budget,” Yusuf said.
He also stated that it was difficult to find justifications for the magnitude and character of the changes that were done and the decision to introduce federal character principle into the budgeting process, noting that this kind of mindset is surely not in the long-term interest of the country and the economy.
According to him, strategic projects need to be recognised and accorded the right priority in the budget irrespective of the geo-political location. He argued that it is in the overall interest of the national economy to do so.
“A national budget is not meant to address micro level issues; it is typically focused on big programmes and projects with impactful systemic effects,” Yusuf added.
The Manufacturers’ Association of Nigeria (MAN) has condemned the cut in the critical infrastructure provisions at this time when the country is confronted with dearth of basic infrastructure.
The association’s President, Dr Frank Udemba Jacobs described the cutting of N14.5 billion from the Special Economic Zones/Industrial Parks, which are key industrialization initiatives of the current administration as unfortunate.
He said: “It’s not only counterproductive and inimical to the economic diversification policy of this administration, but suggests that NASS did not fully understand the importance of those items on the growth of manufactured products export or were ill-advised. For many years, MAN had advocated for the reinstatement of the EEG, which was suspended in 2014, because it is critical to enabling manufacturers to produce for export and thus contribute to the foreign exchange earning of the country.
“The provisions for some nationally/regionally strategic infrastructure projects such as Counter-part funding for the Mambilla Power Plant, Second Niger Bridge/ancillary roads, the East-West Road, Bonny-Bodo Road, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway and Itakpe-Ajaokuta Rail Project were cut by an aggregate of 11.5billion Naira.”
Cracks in the Senate?
The cuts in the 2018 budget also indicated that there was a crack in the Senate as the Southeast Senate Caucus expressed shock over the reduction in the allocation for the Enugu Airport terminal. They expressed indignation that an allocation of N2 billion sustained by the two Aviation committees of the Senate and House of Representatives was slashed to “a mere” N500 million.
The development has forced Chairman of the caucus, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, to summon an emergency meeting of Southeast lawmakers to unravel at what point the cut was effected and by who.
They are agitated that for “a region that hardly receives a fair share of the national patrimony”, the little that came its way could be reduced as to make nonsense of the entire budget for the Airport Terminal.
He insisted that no right-thinking Igbo would support any cut in the allocation for projects in the Southeast.
Abaribe, who is also Chairman, Senate Committee on Power, Steel Development and Metallurgy, noted that N30 billion was smuggled into the Power budget without his committee’s knowledge.
National Assembly: We acted according to law
The National Assembly has insisted that it acted according to law. According to them, “adjustments and reductions in the locations, costs and number of projects approved were made in order to address geo-political imbalances that came with the Executive proposal”.
“The introduction of new projects was done to ensure the promotion of the principles of Federal Character as contained in Section 14, subsection (3) of the 1999 Constitution as amended which states that ‘the composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria…’
“The number of projects had to be increased in order to give a sense of belonging to every geo-political zone of the country to ensure socio-economic justice, equity, fairness, and to command National loyalty.
“Within the context of the provisions of Sections 4, 80 and 81 of the Constitution, everything that the National Assembly has done is within its powers.
“Furthermore, Chapter 2 of the Constitution emphasises the need for balance, inclusivity, and equity in the distribution of national resources. The annual budget, which symbolizes the distribution of these resources must reflect the aforementioned values, which we swore to uphold.
“These Constitutional provisions, in addition to a recent Court judgment have affirmed the fact that the budget process is a ‘joint effort’ that must reflect the input of both the executive and the legislature — the latter being the closest representatives of the people. However, we are fully aware that the Executive has the exclusive responsibility to execute all parts of the Appropriation Act once it is signed into law.
“It is our firm belief that if the President had been properly briefed by his appointees, he would not have raised most of the concerns that he did in his remarks at the budget signing.”
‘President was not forced to sign’
Senator Dino Melaye from Kogi State justified the National Assembly’s action, adding that the President was not bound to sign the budget if he had reservations.
He said the National Assembly was not an extension of the Presidency and the lawmakers were no rubber stamp.
Lawyers hold divergent views
Constitutional lawyers, including a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Dr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), Mr Ahmed Raji (SAN) and a law lecturer in the Faculty of Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG), Akoka, Lagos, Wahab Shittu, all expressed mixed views on the issue.
‘Law favours National Assembly’
Agbakoba said as things stand now, the law favoured the National Assembly for the alterations made into the 2018 budget. According to him, “a ruling has been delivered by Mr Justice Kolawole on an application lodged by Femi Falana (SAN), in a case of public interest, requesting the learned judge, to determine the scope of powers of the NASS, in relation to the appropriations, that is, the Budget, as to whether NASS, can add modifier or alter executive appropriations”.
The Judge, Agbakoba said, ruled that “yes, NASS, has constitutional authority to alter budgets laid by the executive. So, pending an appeal, and there is none, the law stands in favour of NASS altering and modifying executive appropriations”.
He argued that it necessarily follows that NASS has the right to have altered the figures and the President is wrong in declining to assent and, in any event, claiming to assent under duress to avoid a government shutdown.
“My final point is this: does the President not have access to basic legal advice first to see that there is judicial authority that he is bound to follow knowing that NASS was correct? And in any event his Attorney-General ought to have advised him that the Constitution empowers NASS, to alter and modify the budget in the manner they did. Even Trump follows Legal Advice.
“But I make no comment as to whether in the exercise of their undoubted power NASS acted properly fairly or in the public and not their personal interest. I have not studied the alterations enough to offer an informed view as to whether the modifications are in the public or private interest of the Nation or NASS,” Agbakoba said.
‘Presidential System root of the problem’
Raji saw “a lot of problems” in the whole process and in the relationship between the executive and the lawmakers.
He said: “Efforts at nation building is a continuous process with some challenges on the way. In a democracy, all the three arms of government are important, hence the need for constant dialogue and collaboration in the interests of the people and the system at large.
“Perhaps, it may be worthwhile to take a second look at the presidential system, which I think is the root cause of this debacle. The parliamentary system or its modified model will seem to be a perfect solution to the current problem as members of the Executive are from the parliament hence a better synergy, understanding and collaboration.
“It also reduces the criminal cost of elections which is a cause of the current crumbling system.”
Let the Supreme Court intervene
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Second Vice President Monday Ubani said only the court to resolve the impasse.
“I am angry that up till now, the executive and the legislature have engaged themselves by bickering unnecessarily over who has a right on what items to be put on the annual budget of the country without seeking proper interpretation on this very issue from the judiciary.
“May I suggest that any of the arms should immediately approach the Supreme Court or the final resolution of this impasse which has become an annual ritual,” Ubani said.
‘National Assembly cannot rewrite the Budget for Executive’
Shittu argued that the National Assembly is not vested with the constitutional responsibility of rewriting the Budget for the Executive.
He agreed with the President that the National Assembly “grossly exceeded” its mandate in the budgetary process by the “substantial amendments and modifications” to the estimates.
Shittu said: “The President may have exhibited uncommon maturity in signing same into law in spite of the constitutional provocation.
“My view, however, is that in order not to create a dangerous precedent, the Attorney-General of the Federation is advised to raise a constitutional question on the development before the Supreme Court to enable the court resolve the extent of powers of the National Assembly in tinkering with the budgetary process and determine whether the legislature is entitled to rewrite the budget by subtractions, additions and inclusions of projects outside the budgetary estimates.”
Shittu said the lawmakers erred by forcing their projects on the President to execute for them. “The relevant question to be asked are as follows: who has the constitutional responsibility to prepare the budgetary estimates? Whether the National Assembly is entitled to execute projects outside its mandate of representation, Law making and oversight? Whether the National Assembly is entitled to force its own independent projects on the executive to implement? ln my view answers to these questions are in the negative,” he added.
Summary of budget alterations
Lawmakers raised estimates presented by President Buhari by N578b cutting N347b allocated to 4,700 projects and introduced 6,403 projects
Counterpart funding for the Mambilla Power Plant, Second Niger Bridge/ancillary roads, East-West Road, Bonny-Bodo Road, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway and Itakpe-Ajaokuta Rail Project were cut by N11.5b
Projects in the FCT major arterial roads and mass transit rail was cut by N7.5b
Provision for rehabilitation for UN building cut from N4b to N100m. Estimate for health was also cut by N7.45 b while security vote for 104 Unity Schools was cut by N3b.
Funds for National Housing Programme was also reduced by N8.7bwhile N5b was cut from provisions for PRF and Public Service Wage Adjustment.
Funds for EEG and Special Economic Zones/Industrial Parks were cut by N14.5b and construction of Enugu Airport terminal building was slashed to N500m from N2b.
Take-off Grant for Maritime Varsity was equally cut from N5b to N3.4b
Insertions by lawmakers
Seventy new roads were inserted into the budget without consultation with the Executive
Statutory Transfers were increased by an aggregate of N73.96b (for recurrent expenditure) while the National Assembly’s budget was raised from N125b to N139.5b
