Blog Archives - Centre for Social Justice

Introducing Budgetpedia.ng

Center for Social Justice — Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:16:12 +0000

Budgetpedia is set up by Centre for Social Justice Nigeria (CSJ) as a single internet portal to serve as a primary and definitive source of information on budgeting in Nigeria containing and displaying all public sector budgeting information at all times.

It seeks to bridge the information gap between citizens and government and to make budget information easily available to all. Budgetpedia is based on a theory of change that access to economic and budget information is the currency for enhanced engagement, value for money interventions and demand for accountability by citizens on duty bearers.

Budgetpedia Contains the following information (1999 Till Date) at the Federal and State levels:

Approved Budgets: Appropriation Acts/Laws, approved estimates and revised versions where applicable.

Budget Implementation Reports: Implementation reports of approved budgets for each state and the federal level. This is in the form of monthly, quarterly, mid or full year reports as the case may be.

Other Budget Documents: Documents which accompany the proposed and approved budgets for each state and the federal level; for example, the budget speech presented by the President/Governor to the Legislature.

Accountant General’s Report: Yearly financial statements at the federal and state levels.

Auditor General’s Report: Yearly reports on the Accountant General’s financial statement at the federal and state levels.

Debt Management Reports: Debt Profile, Debt Sustainability Analysis, Annual Reports.

Budget Laws: Constitutional provisions on budgeting, Acts and Laws on Public Procurement, Fiscal Responsibility, Revenue, Taxation as well as subsidiary laws, regulations, guidelines, etc., at the federal and state levels.

Budget Policies: Policies, Plans and Principles relevant to budget formulation, implementation, reporting, monitoring and evaluation at federal and state level including Development Plans, medium term expenditure frameworks (MTEFs), medium term sector strategies (MTSS), Open Government Partnership Commitments, etc.

Case Law: Judgements of Superior Courts related to the budgeting process at federal and state level.

Budget Publications: Publications of reputable scholars, practitioners and organisations on the budgeting process.

The post Introducing Budgetpedia.ng appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

Where is the 2025 Appropriation Act, Fiscal Risk Appendix and Measures on Cost Control?

Center for Social Justice — Fri, 30 May 2025 16:34:23 +0000

The Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) is charged inter alia with the responsibility of ensuring transparency and accountability in budgeting and federal government’s fiscal operations. In accordance with the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA), the BOF is even at the centre of monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the annual budget, assessment of the attainment of fiscal targets and reporting thereon on a quarterly basis. However, the BOF seems to be abandoning the transparency aspect of its duties.

As at the 7^th day of May 2025, the BOF deliberately failed, refused and neglected to upload the 2025 Appropriation Act to its website. The only document on the 2025 federal budget available on the website is the schedule to the Act which contains the details of the allocations to the various ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) of government. But the legal authorization for the expenditure being the Appropriation Act has been kept away from the public. Two schedules of the Appropriation Act have been uploaded to the BOF website – https://budgetoffice.gov.ng. The stamp mark indicating the date of upload of the schedules to the website reads March 19 2025 while the second reads March 25 2025.

By a freedom of information request from the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ), the organization brought to the notice of the BOF the fact that the Appropriation Act is not on their website. Before the FOI request, a visit to the BOF to get the Act and to remind them that it is not available to the public was met with an affirmation by the BOF that the document is on their site. However, they refused to be a party to opening the site to show exactly where they posted the Act. In response to the FOI, they gave CSJ an electronic copy of the Act and still refused to upload same to their website. This raises the poser on the rationale for the decision to keep the Appropriation Act away from the Nigerian public. Did any law or policy grant a discretionary power to BOF to decide on whether to withhold fiscal information from the public? The author is not aware of any such law or policy.

It is important to understand the nature of an Appropriation Act and the reason why it should be in the public sphere. It is that law resulting from the appropriation process provided in sections 81 and 121 of the 1999 Constitution at the federal and state levels respectively. The bill leading to the Act is usually prepared by the executive and approved by the legislature. Ideally, between the preparation by the executive and approval by the legislature, there should be opportunities for popular participation and citizens input into the process. Legislative hearings, memoranda submission to the executive, etc., should be part of the process. Pray, the public that participated in the process leading up to the conversion of the bill into an Act have every reason to see the outcome of the process in which they participated.

What emerges from the appropriation process is an authorization to spend public funds, to raise revenue and the conditions and formalities precedent and contingent issues for the budget. Thus, there is a broad definition of the respective expenditure categories, details of the fiscal terms guiding the budget and sometimes, it contains the basic assumptions and key macroeconomic indicators. A typical Appropriation Act contains the following vis, authority to spend a specific sum of money within a specific tenure – usually the financial year stipulated by law, release of funds from the consolidated revenue fund, procurement and due process certification, virement, excess revenue, information to be submitted by the executive to the legislature on internally generated revenue, domestic or foreign assistance, etc. Furthermore, it contains the details of the fiscal framework in terms of sources of revenue, whether the budget is surplus or deficit, debts and borrowing, deductions, aids and grants. It therefore contains important information from the approved medium-term expenditure framework which undergirds the budget. The schedule(s) to the Act are the budget details which most Nigerians refer to as the budget.

In the light of the foregoing, this is not a document that should be hidden from the public because it is the basis of public revenue and expenditure and the authorization given by the legislature to the executive for resources to execute development projects, maintain law and order and take charge of issues that affect everyday life in a country.

Also, in accordance with the FRA, annual budget estimates and the Appropriation Bill from the executive to the legislature should be accompanied by measures on cost, cost control and evaluation of results of programmes financed with budgetary resources and a Fiscal Risk Appendix evaluating the fiscal and other related risks to the annual budget and specifying measures to be taken to offset the occurrence of such risks. Measures on cost and cost control should be prescribed in the Appropriation Act while measures to be taken to offset the occurrence of identified fiscal risks should also be part of the approved Appropriation Act. These measures re-echo now that the key assumptions of the 2025 budget and fiscal reality are at cross roads. The benchmark price and the daily production quota are at variance with the oil industry reality. From the Appropriation Act available to the author, no provision was made by either the executive or legislature on any of these demands of the FRA.

BOF is hereby called upon to immediately upload the Appropriation Act to its website. This deliberate attempt to deny Nigerians of their right to know is a gross violation of the provisions of the Constitution and the FRA and should not be allowed to continue for a day longer. If the individuals charged with the responsibility of pushing out this information to the public are unwilling to perform this duty, there is only one option left or them – they should resign.

The post Where is the 2025 Appropriation Act, Fiscal Risk Appendix and Measures on Cost Control? appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

Appropriation Act, 2025

Center for Social Justice — Fri, 30 May 2025 16:14:45 +0000

APPROPRIATION ACT, 2025

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

This Act authorises the issue from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation the total sum of N54,990,165,355,396 (fifty-four trillion, nine hundred and ninety billion, one hundred and sixty-five million,three hundred and fifty-five thousand, three hundred and ninety-six Naira) only, of which 3,645,761,358,925 (three trillion, six hundred and forty-five billion, seven hundred and sixty-one million, three hundred and fifty-eight thousand, nine hundred and twenty-five Naira) only is for Statutory Transfers, N14,317,142,689,548 (fourteen trillion, three hundred and seventeen billion, one hundred and forty-two million, six hundred and eighty-nine thousand, five hundred and forty-eight Naira) only is for Debt Service, N13,588,009,682,673 (thirteen trillion, five hundred and eighty-eight billion, nine million, six hundred and eighty-two thousand, six hundred and seventy-three Naira) only is for Recurrent (Non-Debt) Expenditure while the sum of N23,439,251,624,250 (twenty-three trillion, four hundred and thirty-nine billion, two hundred and fifty-one million, six hundred and twenty-four thousand, two hundred and fifty Naira) only is for contribution to the Development Fund for Capital Expenditure for the year ending on the 31st day of December, 2025.

Appropriation Act, 2025 (1149 downloads )

The post Appropriation Act, 2025 appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

CCB Enforces Commitment to Assets Declaration Compliance Enforcement

Center for Social Justice — Thu, 27 Mar 2025 12:36:56 +0000

The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) has restated its commitment to enforcing compliance to asset declaration by public office holders without fear of favour.

Chairman, Dr. Abdullahi Bello Usman gave the assurance on Wednesday in Awka, Anambra state during a Two-day Rule of Law and Anti-corruption (ROLAC 2) capacity building workshop on the On-line Assets Declaration System.

The engagement themed, “Improving the Effectiveness of Anti-corruption Processes and Reforms” was organized by Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) in collaboration with CCB.

Usman, represented by Head, Education Department, Koyonda Edward described assets declaration as not just a statutory obligation but a moral imperative.

According to him, asset declaration remained the bedrock of ethical governance which today’s reality could not ignore.

He however regretted that corruption remained one of the most formidable obstacles to nation’s development, which he said erodes public trust, stifles economic growth and perpetuates inequality.

He said, “The CCB, as a corner of Nigeria’s integrity framework, recognises that declaration of assets is not just a statutory obligation but a moral imperative. It is the bedrock of ethical governance. We cannot ignore the reality of our time.

“Manual systems are susceptible to inefficiently, opacity and abuse. This is why the transition to digital Assets Declaration Platform is not just an upgrade but a revolution.

Participants during a Two-day Rule of Law and Anti-corruption (ROLAC 2) capacity building workshop on the On-line Assets Declaration System.

“By leveraging technology we eliminate bureaucratic bottlenecks, reduce human interference and create an acceptable trail that deters malfeasance. This system will empower public officials to declare Assets seamlessly while enabling real-time monitoring by shareholders.

“Anti-corruption reforms are not sole responsibility of government agencies. They demand a societal movement. When citizens actively demand accountability, and public servants lead by example, we create an eco-system where corruption cannot thrive.

“CCB reaffirms its commitment to this cause. We shall continue to innovate, collaborate and enforce compliance without fear of favour. But we need – the Media, Civil Society, and every Nigerian – to be our allies in this fight.”

Participants During the workshop

While noting that the workshop was not merely about deploying tools, but building capacity, fostering ownership and nurturing collaboration, the CCB boss urged participants to approach it with openness, vigor and sense of urgency.

“Within these two days, we will demystify the technical and operational aspects of the on-line platforms; address challenges- cybersecurity, accessibility and compliance that may arise; strengthen partnerships between institutions, civil societies and citizens to ensure collective vigilance.

“Let us harness the power of technology to safeguard our Nation’s resources and restore public confidence. Your feedback is vital. The system must be user friendly, inclusive and resilient. Your insights will shape its success,” he added.

Appreciating the CSJ and ROLAC for their invaluable collaboration, generous funding and unwavering commitment to this cause, Usman said, “Your partnership underscores a shared vision: a Nigeria, where transparency, accountability and rule of law are not mere ideas but living principles guiding our nation’s progress.

“To our dedicated participants – Public Officials, Civil Society representatives and stakeholders, your presence here reflects your resolve to be at the forefront of the Nigeria’s anti-corruption journey.

“I urge everyone of us to approach this workshop with openness, vigor and a sense of urgency. Let us harness the power of technology to safeguard our Nation’s resources and restore public confidence. Together, let us build a legacy of integrity for generations to come”

Lead Director, Center for Social Justice (CSJ), Eze Onyekpere attributed increasing corruption in the system to public ignorance to asset declaration of public office holders, which he said the engagement was targeted at addressing.
He said, “The workshop is aimed at sensitizing and enlightening public servants and CSOs on the online asset declaration system.

“According to the law, both the President and cleaner in the local government are obliged to declare their assets.

“We’re also here to sensitize the public on the need to contribute to the verification process and that of entrenching accountability and transparency in the system.”

While hinting that the workshop was the maiden edition at the state level, Onyekpere, a lawyer assured cascading the training to grassroots through train-the-trainers approach.

Also speaking, Head, Information Communication Technology (ICT), John Sheshi said the workshop was intended to increase public awareness on importance and efficacy of assets declaration transition from manual to digital.

He listed core goals of cyber security to asset declaration to include Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability of information (CIA) as well as authenticity, non repudiation and trust.

Group photograph after the Two-day Rule of Law and Anti-corruption (ROLAC 2) capacity building workshop on the On-line Assets Declaration System.

The post CCB Enforces Commitment to Assets Declaration Compliance Enforcement appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

Mr. President: Recall the Declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State

Center for Social Justice — Wed, 19 Mar 2025 09:52:14 +0000

State of Emergency In Rivers State Download

Press Release

Mr. President: Recall the Declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State

Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) notes with regret President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, thereby suspending the executive and legislative arms of government for six months and appointing a sole administrator. This raises fundamental constitutional questions.

By the enabling S.305 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, the President’s power to declare a state of emergency is contingent on the following: (a) the Federation is at war; (b) the Federation is in imminent danger of invasion or involvement in a state of war; (c) there is actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security; (d) there is a clear and present danger of an actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof requiring extraordinary measures to avert such danger; (e) there is an occurrence or imminent danger, or the occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity, affecting the community or a section of the community in the Federation.

The first point of departure is that wording of the provisions in the above scenarios did not begin with “in the opinion of the President” or any other public officer. Therefore, these circumstances are not subjective but must be manifest, founded on credible evidence and can be clearly seen and perceived by all right-thinking persons. Nigerians are yet to see the circumstances warranting this extreme step.

The second point is that none of the above conditions have emerged in the case of Rivers State considering the judgement of the Supreme court which the parties were in the process of obeying through implementation. The unfolding scenario in Rivers State was not beyond what the courts and ordinary law enforcement agents could handle. The rush to short-circuit the implementation of the decision of the Supreme Court is not a democratic step. It is not in the interest of the rule of law, due process and democratic consolidation.

The third point is that the Constitution did not provide for the declaration of a state of emergency as a first step intervention in circumstances bordering or getting close to the above scenarios. It was provided as a matter of last resort when all other reasonable steps have been taken and probably failed to provide a meaningful solution. Pray, what steps did the President take beyond this declaration? If the President insists that he had intervened before the declaration, Nigerians would love to see the terms of the resolution of the parties based on his intervention. For the sake of transparency, the President should be bold enough to publish the terms of the resolution.

The fourth point is that the express provisions of S.305 or any other provision of the Constitution did not give the President powers to remove an elected governor or an elected legislature. So, the action of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is clearly unconstitutional and an affront of unimaginable proportions on the rule of law and democracy.

Do we call on the National Assembly not to approve Mr. President’s declaration of a state of emergency? It will be a great wonder and miracle if the National Assembly votes against the declaration considering the well-known rubber stamp disposition of the National Assembly.

Mr. President, it is still within your power to recall and withdraw this declaration of a state of emergency and allow the letter and spirit of the Constitution to prevail.

Finally, Mr. President, the architect of the present confusion in Rivers State is Nyesom Wike, your appointee and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory who insists on having political control of Rivers State after leaving office as governor. You should sanction him and call him to order. Otherwise, the confusion will continue.

Eze Onyekpere

Lead Director

The post Mr. President: Recall the Declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

TIMELINESS IN BUDGETING

Center for Social Justice — Tue, 26 Nov 2024 09:23:51 +0000

By Eze Onyekpere

Laws and policies fix times and schedules for the performance of public duties. These times and schedules are not fixed arbitrarily. They are based on reason, common sense and empirical evidence. Essentially, timing is attached to the purpose and objectives of the public duty to ensure that these objectives are achieved in the overall public interest. This aphorism is applicable to the budgeting process at federal, state and local government levels. Budgets by law are to be prepared and approved before the beginning of the financial year and fully implemented on or before the end of the financial year.

The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 199 as amended in the interpretative S.318 defines the Nigerian financial year to mean any period of twelve months beginning on the first day of January in any year or such other date as the National Assembly may prescribe. The Financial Year Act also defines the same as a period of twelve months commencing on January 1 and ending on December 31 of every year. It is clear that the provision is firm and unambiguous. The last part of the constitutional provision; ‘or such other date as the National Assembly may prescribe’ is a provision that allows the National Assembly to reset the financial year if the January to December period is found unsuitable for Nigeria based on empirical evidence. The timing can be amended for instance to run from July to June every year. It is about the power to legislate a new time frame. That provision did not contemplate that the legislature will be voting to extend the implementation of the federal capital budget every year to either the end of the first, second or third quarter of a new year. Such an exercise is an arbitrary exercise of legislative power which makes the financial year uncertain and changes it from year to year.

The Muhammadu Buhari administration restored the financial year to the January to December period before it left office. However, the Bola Ahmed Tinuu administration appears not mindful of timing in budget preparation, implementation and reporting. The 2023 federal budget and its supplementary version were extended to 2024 and no one is actually sure if the budgets have been fully implemented. The last budget implementation report (BIR) on the website of the Budget Office of the Federation is the third quarter 2023 BIR. The fourth quarter and full year BIR is not available. However, the Fiscal Responsibility Act provides that BIRS have to be prepared and published within one month of the end of every quarter.

There is a huge corruption challenge and risk involved in the implementation of four budgets at the same time viz, 2023 main budget and its supplement and 2024 main budget and its supplement. Implementing four budgets at the same time is a maze of confusion and ministries, departments and agencies will find it difficult to focus and account for project implementation. What about the procurement angle? It is also another level of chaos. Public procurement is planned, implemented and reported upon within the context of a financial year. There ought to be closure after the end of every year in terms of expenditure and reporting. Such level of disorder in purporting to be implementing four budgets at the same time lays a solid foundation for the mismanagement of available resources and grand corruption. There is a plethora of unanswered questions in this scheme of confusion. Did the federal government save the revenues that accrued in 2023 and put them in a special account so as to spend them in 2024? If we have not fully started the implementation of the 2024 capital budget, what happened to the revenues realised for the year and voted for these projects?

For 2024, not even the first quarter BIR has been prepared and the president has just requested and got legislative approval to borrow money for the implementation of the 2024 federal capital budget in the last days of November 2024. If we go by the natural sequence of events that the borrowing process starts after the legislative approval, the implication is that the money will not be available this year or at best, towards the last days of December 2024. This firmly sets the stage for the implementation of the 2024 federal capital budget in 2025. Furthermore, the medium-term expenditure framework which by law should have been presented to the National Assembly on or before September 2024 is about two weeks before NASS. The MTEF is the foundation of the appropriation proposals and it has not been approved by NASS. The 2025 federal budget estimates have not been presented to NASS just about a month to 2024-year end. The implication is that the 2025 federal budget will be enacted late, likely in the first quarter of 2025 and implementation will also be delayed.

The foregoing scenario creates the opportunity for the deployment of common sense, reason and human faculties. If we are still in the process of preparing the 2025 federal budget and the MTEF has not been approved, there is a wonderful opportunity to get back to the constitutional financial year in terms of budget approval, implementation and reporting. The recommendation is straight forward; all capital projects in the 2024 federal budget that are yet to be implemented and which the authorities consider to be still relevant should be the foundation of the 2025 federal budget. New relevant projects should also be part of the 2025 expenditure and revenue plan. With this approach, there will be only one budget available to implemented and reported upon and it will be the 2025 federal budget. This will clear the backlogs and restore sanity to the budgeting cycle. It is up to the executive and legislature to restore timeliness in budgeting.

The post TIMELINESS IN BUDGETING appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

July 2024 CPI and the Right to an Adequate Standard of Living

Center for Social Justice — Tue, 10 Sep 2024 09:31:15 +0000

National Inflation Profile

The recently published Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the month of July 2024 by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reveals a slight drop in the headline inflation rate by about 0.8% points from 34.19% in June to 33.40% in July 2024. The 12 months preceding the latest report had seen the inflation figures rise consistently. Comparing this with the same period last year, the headline inflation for July 2023 was 24.08% implying a 9.32% points inflation gap within 12 months. On a month on month basis, the headline inflation is 2.28% as against 2.31% in June 2024. This simply implies a reduction in the rate of increase of average prices.

Sub-nationals’ Contribution to Inflation Profile

Further disaggregation shows the contribution of state fluctuations to the overall national price index for the month of July 2024. On a year-on-year basis all item (prices of all items irrespective of classification) inflation rate was highest in Bauchi (46.04%), Jigawa (40.77%) and Kebbi (37.47%); whereas they were lowest in Benue (27.28%), Delta (28.06%) and Borno (28.33%). However, on a month-on-month basis the highest increases in inflation were recorded in Abuja (3.91%), Borno (3.84 and Enugu (3.76%); while the slowest rise was recorded in Taraba (0.17%); Kwara (0.62%) and Ondo (0.91%).

Similarly, food inflation in the country on a year-on-year basis is highest in Sokoto (46.26%), Jigawa (46.05%) and Enugu (44.06%). It is lowest in Adamawa (33.48%), Bauchi (35.10%) and Benue (36.41%). On the other hand, the month-on-month basis top 3 fastest rises in food prices is recorded in Borno (5.07%), Sokoto (4.99%) and Enugu (4.17%). It is lowest in Kwara (0.51%), Taraba (0.56%) and Ondo (0.68%).

Urban and Rural Inflation

Urban inflation contributes more to the high inflation figures. Urban inflation currently stands at 35.77%, while rural inflation is 31.26%. This may not be unconnected to the forces of demand and supply. Urban areas command more resources, hence higher demand. Naturally, prices will rise when available resources are chasing few/available goods/services. Relating this with the major drivers of inflation (food and non-alcoholic beverages, housing, water, electricity, gas, other fuel, clothing and footwear, transportation etc.); it is clear that their demand is higher in urban areas than in the rural. For instance, in the rural areas, people grow significant portions of the food they consume, they live in their own houses, their expenses on utilities like water and electricity is low because they have alternative sources for them, and in critical situations, they can do without them. More so, effective demand is want backed by resources (ability to pay) and in most cases, these resources are not available to rural dwellers. Several studies have shown that bulk of rural dwellers are poor.

The Right to Adequate Standard of Living

The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended (Constitution) in the “Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy” provides that the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.[1] In the S.16 (2) (d), the Constitution provides “that suitable and adequate shelter, right to food and food security, reasonable national minimum living wage, old age care and pensions, and unemployment, sick benefits and welfare of the disabled are provided for all citizens”. The Constitution also made provisions for objectives in promotion of education and health.

Furthermore, Nigeria has obligations under article 11 (1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) vis: “The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions..”.[2] This obligation is a reaffirmed in the standard setting Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control”.[3]

Clearly, these national and international standards emphasize the rights to adequate food, clothing and housing as continuous improvement of living conditions as critical elements of the right to an adequate standard of living. The empowering rights of education and health also feature in the detrmi9nation of the standard of living.

Driver(s) of Inflation in Nigeria

The greatest contributor (driver) of price increases within the period is Food and non-alcoholic beverages at 17.30%. Other top contributors include Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuel (5.59%); clothing and footwear (2.55%); transport (2.17%); and Furnishing and Household equipment and maintenance (1.68%). Education and health followed with 1.32% and 1% respectively. The month-on-month figures also follow similar pattern contributing 1.18%, 0.38%, 0.17%, 0.15%, 0.11% and 0.09% respectively. With food inflation reported as 39.53%, a reduction from 40.87% in the previous month further reaffirms food price inflation as a major force in driving general inflation in the country. On a year-on-year basis, food inflation as at July 2023 was 26.98%.

Essentially, food, housing and clothing – the critical components of the right to an adequate standard of living are the first three major drivers of inflation. This is followed by transport in the fourth position, furnishings and household equipment in the fifth while education and health take the sixth and seventh position respectively. Transport is like a cross cutting issue affecting all the other contributors to inflation while furnishing tracks back to the right to adequate housing considering that a house is not just four walls and a roof. Education as an empowering right and the fulcrum for the validation of other rights took a major hit while health which is inextricably tied to the right to life is negatively affected. The right to life will be extinguished by the denial of health supporting conditions to the point of abrogation. It has been reported that average Nigerians spend up to 60% of their income on food,[4] leaving them with 40% of their income for all other expenditure. When all these critical elements of an adequate standard of living are buffeted by inflation, the implication is an upsurge of poverty and misery.

The Gender Dimension

Nigerian women and girls are the face of Nigerian poverty. Their numbers were higher among the poor before the galloping inflation. In a period of rising prices, coupled with unemployment and stagnated economic growth, the likelihood of women and girls earning income or salaries that keeps pace with the inflationary spiral is remote. High food inflation exerts undue pressure on the physical and mental of women and girls who are the managers of family food. The most recent NBS Labour Force Reports show that more women are unemployed than men. Therefore, the Nigerian inflation crisis affects women and girls disproportionately. The inflation driving policies (fuel subsidy removal and floatation of the naira) appear to be gender neutral, but in actual fact, they are based on structural discrimination which denies the existence of apparent discriminations.

Implication of the Continued Rise in Prices

The implication of the continued rise in prices, which only dropped slightly in July 2024, is that the reform measures in fuel subsidy removal and floating of the exchange rate – the main pillars driving inflation, were not properly thought through. The removal of fuel subsidy and floatation of the naira were arbitrary and whimsical, without empirical simulation, projections and fall back positions for course correction. There were no policy measures designed at the inception of the removal and floatation inbuilt in the reforms to stem the tide of inflation. Furthermore, the poor sequencing of the reforms ensured that Nigerians felt the maximum pain from an otherwise manageable economic policy reform. For over a year, the Monetary Policy Committee of the Central Bank of Nigeria has engaged in trial and error policies of raising interest rates and increasing the cash reserve ratio to no avail.

Citizens Reaction

Only recently citizens embarked on a 10-day (August 1^st to 10^th) nationwide #Endbadgovernance protest in Nigeria in which they decried among other things hunger and hardship in the land. About a month earlier, the federal government had announced reopening of the nation’s borders for a 150 days duty-free importation of food materials into the country in response to the escalating food prices. This response which is both adhoc and temporal does not come without a cost – significant loss of revenue to the government as well as a disincentive to local farmers who may not be able to favourably compete with the foreign products. This low level of food production in the country has been attributed to several factors including insecurity occasioned by activities of bandits and herdsmen in especially farming communities. Others include very low state investment on agriculture and lack of prioritization of agriculture over several years. High transportation cost transportation (including transportation of food) as a result of the removal petroleum subsidy without adequate plan to cushion the impact further exacerbates high cost of goods (including food) to a near crisis level. Also, the floating of the exchange rate resulting in the erosion of the value of the local currency in an import-dependent economy meant an increased cost of importation.

Conclusion and Recommendations

As at 2022, the NBS recorded that 133 million representing about 66% Nigerians are multidimensionally poor, that is, they are poor in two or more key indicators. With a high level of inflation, the numbers have increased. While the revision of the minimum wage is commendable, it is like a drop of water in a mighty ocean. Less than 5% of Nigerians are employed by government, hence the impact of the new minimum wage will likely not be enough to assuage the hardship occasioned by high inflation among others.

The claim by the CBN that the little drop in prices is as a result of the tightened monetary policies holds no water. It has no empirical foundation. Monetary tightening in a period of stagflation has never produced a reduction in price levels. Rater it accentuates the stagflation. It is therefore time to stop increasing critical rates.

The following actions are recommended for government, especially as it relates to the standard of living: Incentivize food production/agriculture as a means of encouraging farming and farmers; prioritize agriculture in state planning and increase agricultural investment; in the medium term, start building food buffer stocks against inflation and famine; make conscious effort to tackle issues of insecurity; including banditry and activities of herdsmen. Other recommendations are: Invest in alternative and cheaper sources fuel for transportation such as Compressed Natural Gas (CNG); stop the propaganda of CNGI and start the work in providing conversion kits, new buses and incentivizing dispensing the proliferation of pumps and stations. Finally, undertake a gender analysis of the reforms leading to the galloping inflation.

[1] S.14 (2) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

[2] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Adopted 16 December 1966 by General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI); entry into force: 3 January 1976, in accordance with article 27

[3] Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III) of December 10,1948.

[4] See Buffer Stocks against Inflation. USDA (2023): Lower income countries spend much higher share of expenditures on food than higher income countries. Available online at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/gallery/chart-detail/?chartld=107494 (last accessed on 6 May 2024)

The post July 2024 CPI and the Right to an Adequate Standard of Living appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

ANY HOPE IN PRESIDENT BOLA AHMED TINUBU’S SPEECH?

Center for Social Justice — Mon, 05 Aug 2024 14:59:14 +0000

In times of grave national crisis as we find ourselves in Nigeria, presidential speeches are meant to be uplifting, re-assuring, offer and renew hope in the nation and its leaders and point to real silver linings amidst the hardship and prevalent gloom. Such speeches are opportunities for policy pronouncements, to change course in a course correction trajectory and to provide concrete and tangible alleviation measures not based on empty rhetoric. There are several posers; did the president address the systemic challenges and binding constraints that have accelerated the hardship? Any new policies and promises which are actionable or any re-modelling of existing policy measures in his speech? This discourse reviews the presidential speech made this 4th day of August 2024 and what it offered to Nigerians, especially the youth, who have lost hope in a government that states it came to renew hope in the nation and its institutions.

The president stated that the decisions leading to this untold hardship were necessary to reverse the decades of economic mismanagement. Everyone knows he is referring to the signature measures in the removal of fuel subsidy and floating of the naira. Majority of Nigerians seem to agree that these measures are necessary but what is missing is the pre and post measures and actions that should have preceded and followed the announcement of these two critical policy measures. Clearly what has happened is that the president, as a doctor started a surgery before remembering to administer the anaesthesia to numb the body and relive the pain. Even when reminded by the cry and wailing of the client who otherwise should have ben called a patient but now his victim, all he has are admonitions on the need for patience and enduring pain to enjoy good health later.

The above scenario is very critically demonstrated in the alternative fuel – compressed natural gas (CNG) initiative. It is still a promise to import and distribute the conversion kits, no sense of sequencing reforms and follow-up measures or need to hasten up the implementation of the policy, fourteen months after the infamous subsidy is gone pronouncement. Infamous in the sense that it was not properly planned. The same story we heard in 2023 is being retold in August 2024 and the story teller is convinced that enlightened citizens should take him seriously or he thinks we are babies who can be told everything and we have no capacity for reason based on available evidence.

The president reported that federal revenue has been in excess of N9.1trillion in the first half of 2024 meaning that FGN is on course to achieve the target revenue in the 2024 Appropriation Act considering that revenue projection is about N18trillion. This is a wonderful achievement. Pray, if this is true, why has there been little or no releases for capital expenditure across federal ministries, departments and agencies. The president claims to be blocking leakages at a time he is scandalously increasing the cost of governance in new ministries, jets and state of the art cars, being the first president to allocate votes for his wife in the budget. Furthermore, he states that our debt service obligation has reduced from 98% of revenue to 68% and thereby freed up more resources to be dedicated to education and health. But there is no evidence of increased spending on education or health. Rather, the 2023 budget figures are higher in real terms.

The president spoke about increases in oil production to 1.61mbpd, but his data is not supported by evidence from empirical sources which has put our production at far less than the figures he bandied. Again, he celebrates having attracted over half a billion-dollar foreign investment at a time a twenty-billion-dollar domestic investor in a refinery is almost being frustrated. The ministry of petroleum has mismanaged our petroleum resources under the ministerial leadership of our president. Nigerians expected PBAT to relinquish his ministerial position considering he has no competence and capacity to deliver in that ministry. He should have appointed a credible, competent and knowledgeable person to lead the ministry. The leadership of NNPC has no business continuing in office after their opaque, incompetent and derelict handling of our oil resources. Yet, the president was silent on all this scenario.

There was unbecoming silence on national security challenges which were complicating and compounding the economic hardship. Insecurity has played a central role in the hyper food inflation and our inability to meet basic food needs in grains, tubers, vegetables and fruits. No country imports its way out of a food crisis, especially countries that are experiencing foreign exchange scarcity. The expectation was that the presidents rejig the leadership of key security architecture or at least, give targets for the leadership, which should attract removal from office if the targets are not met. The president regaled us that tractors and planters have been imported from Brazil, Belarus and the United States of America. Celebrating imports as an achievement at a time this equipment could be fabricated locally is not a recipe for national development. The president alleges that fertilizers have been distributed and this raises the poser; who are the beneficiaries and what was the criteria for their identification?

The president spoke about a plethora of acronyms; Skill Up Artisans Programme (SUPA), Nigeria Youth Academy (NYA), National Youth Talent Export programme (NATEP), Digital and Creative Enterprises Programme (IDICE), etc. But these are not new and they are supposed to be ongoing and providing succour when the bulk of the proposed beneficiaries are the ones championing the protest. Evidently, these programmes are paper tigers. They are not working or at best, they are working for an elect few who are politically connected.

In conclusion, the president merely justified his position, which is a position of poor performance, offered nothing new, promised no course correction and insists on continued administration of a failed medicine. I see no hope as the tunnel is too dark.

The post ANY HOPE IN PRESIDENT BOLA AHMED TINUBU’S SPEECH? appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

2024 federal budget deserves a mid-year review

Center for Social Justice — Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:28:55 +0000

Revenue and expenditure provisions of budgets are crafted against the background of projections of underlying assumptions, which ideally should be founded on empirical evidence. These projections are made following a review of the national, regional, and international economic and political environment, the performance of previous forecasts and factors which may shape economic performance in the coming year. Indeed, the Fiscal Responsibility Act requires an evaluation and analysis of the performance of the macroeconomic projections for the preceding three financial years and the projections to be based on reliable and consistent certified data. This discourse reviews the macroeconomic assumptions underlying the 2024 federal budget, the extant performance, and the credibility challenges. It proffers suggestions on the consequences of the dissonance between projections and economic reality.

It is imperative at the outset to understand that macroeconomic projections and projections of revenue and expenditure in the 20204 federal budget could have been made based on certain further assumptions on the performance of other economic, social, administrative and political variables. These would in the Nigerian context include reduced insecurity to boost agriculture and other productivity, increased oil production and exports through reduction of industrial scale oil theft, domestic refining of petroleum from public and private owned refineries, full withdrawal of petroleum subsidy, reduction of the cost of governance through reform initiatives, blocking the leaking pipes of corruption, etc.

The inflation rate was projected at 21.40%. However, inflation was far higher than 21.4% at 28.20% in November 2023, being the time the budget estimates were prepared. Today, headline inflation stands at 33.69% with food inflation at 40.53%. Food and non-alcoholic beverages at the divisional level contributed 17.45% of the headline inflation index. Apparently, the projection was built on hope without a foundation. The implication of inflation missing its target by this wide margin include the fact that sums appropriated for projects will no longer be sufficient to implement them, lower purchasing power, higher interest rates, slower economic growth, etc. Higher intertest rates, as exemplified by the tightening stance of the Central Bank of Nigeria’s Monetary Policy Committee, mean that sums appropriated for capital expenditure through public procurement will need to be increased. It also implies that public debt instruments attract higher yields, leading to increased debt service sums than projected at the beginning of the year.

Allied to the inflation rate is the exchange rate of N800 to United States Dollar. The average exchange rate between January and May 2023 is in the neighbourhood of N1,300 to 1USD; imports have become more expensive and the living standard has fallen, weakening economic growth potentials and fueling inflation. In an import dependent economy like Nigeria, this will greatly distort budget execution. Although there is what is referred to as the “exchange rate gain” shared at the Federation Accounts allocation, it does not fully compensate for the losses and instability occasioned by missing the budget’s target. The fluctuating exchange rate has also impacted the private sector which can no longer plan their production and service delivery activities due to macroeconomic instability. This is most clearly reflected in imports of goods where the duties are benchmarked on the exchange rate which has been changing sometimes on a daily and weekly basis.

The next is the projection for crude oil production at 1.78million barrels per day. According to data from the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, Nigeria produced 159,158,191 barrels of crude oil in the first four months of 2024 averaging 1.31mbpd. This leaves a shortfall of 470,000 barrels per day. At $80 per barrel, this is a shortfall of $13.724billion in a year and this translates to N17.841trillion at 1USD to N1,300. Although not all the whole of this sum would have accrued to the Federation Account considering the take of oil companies and production costs, a sizeable portion of this would have been available to the federal government and the states. The oil price benchmark in support of the revenue profile seems to be performing creditably well. However, it has been reported that FIRS fell short of oil tax revenue target by N1.69 trillion in first four months of 2024. The projection is that FIRS should have collected N3.32 trillion in oil taxes between January and April. The actual collection represents 49% of the approved target implying another revenue shortfall.

Essentially, critical and major components of federal government’s projected revenue are missing the target. The import of this development is that the revenue projections are dead on arrival and cannot meet the expenditure profile. Furthermore, it implies a bigger deficit will be incurred than projected if the government insists on spending the full appropriated sum. This further implies increased borrowing leading to increasing outlays for debt service in subsequent years. The GDP growth rate was projected at 3.88% but the first quarter report from the National Bureau of Statistics is indicating a 2.98% year on year growth. The first quarter growth figure may not be the full year picture but when other macroeconomic fundamentals are headed south, it may be very difficult to meet the projected GDP growth rate.

From emerging information, the federal government is still paying fuel subsidy which is projected to hit N5.4trillion by year end, a fact not considered in any of the macroeconomic and expenditure projections for the year. The public refineries have not been fixed despite three years of promises, the last indicating it would come on stream in December 2023. Insecurity is still rampaging the land, especially preventing farmers from tilling and harvesting. The expectation that oil theft will become history has not materialized.

All the foregoing point to budget credibility challenges where government cannot be held to account to fulfil the commitments made in the budget. It should be recalled that the budget and its accompanying frameworks and assumptions are enacted as law. Fiscal responsibility requires that appropriations are spent in accordance with the tenor of the legislative mandate and deviations should be approved by legislative action. Fit and good practices do not support such large-scale deviations from projections as the 2024 budget has experienced in five months. A 5% deviation may be reasonable considering that humans do not operate in the realm of gods. But a deviation in excess of 40% is simply a fiscal disaster and needs to be rectified.

In the circumstances, the foundations for the 2024 federal budget have become very weak and the entire structure may sooner than later collapse. It is therefore imperative to re-engineer the federal budget through a comprehensive mid-year review, which takes account of the prevailing macroeconomic and revenue circumstances and deploys them to plan expenditure for the remaining part of the year. A revision of the macroeconomic projections is overdue. A re-ordering of priorities based on available resources and stock taking on the reasons that led to this situation is due, and the mid-year review offers a good opportunity to do this.

The post 2024 federal budget deserves a mid-year review appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .

Expenditure proposals in 2024 federal budget estimates

Center for Social Justice — Mon, 04 Dec 2023 10:42:31 +0000

The budget is an extremely important law and policy instrument of governance. Indeed, some scholars describe the budget as the second most powerful instrument of governance after the Constitution. The budget is contextualised within the law, policy and budget continuum. It provides the avenue for governments at all levels to provide resources for the realisation of the goals and objectives of high-level national and state policies. This discourse reviews the available 2024 federal budget proposals to analyse what hopes it portends for Nigerian citizens and the economy.

The overall expenditure is in the sum of N27.5tn. At the official exchange rate of N750 to $1, this is about $36.6bn. When this sum is divided over 220 million Nigerians, it amounts to N125,000 or $166 per capita. This is peanut compared to the development needs of the country. It does not position Nigeria on the same pedestal with her African peers of Egypt, South Africa and Algeria with lower populations, but have overall budgets of about $100bn. Yes, our overall budget may be more when you add state and local government budgets. At most, adding federal and state budgets to the federal proposal may attempt, but will not double the federal budget. This will still be less than the votes of our peers.

The growth figure is projected at 3.76 percent when the president is proposing a trillion-dollar GDP in four to eight years. There is a mismatch between the big picture of a $1tn economy and the growth proposal. The economy needs to grow by not less than between seven percent and 10 percent consistently to lift the binding constraints on growth as well as lift millions of Nigerians out of poverty. Indeed, the economy needs to grow at not less than 20 percent per annum to achieve this $1trn GDP feat. Currently, with the devalued currency, our GDP rating has nosedived and needs to be shored up.

In the N27.5tn expenditure proposal, N1.376tn (inclusive of N982.9bn capital expenditure) is for statutory transfers, N8.490tn is for debt service, N9.918tn is for recurrent non-debt expenditure while N7.717tn is for contribution to the Development Fund for capital expenditure. The proposals show that statutory expenditure is 4.9 percent of overall expenditure, debt service is 30.8 percent, recurrent non-debt is 36 percent and capital expenditure will be 28 percent of the expenditure. Salaries and overheads in recurrent non-debt expenditure take the highest share followed by debt service, capital expenditure and statutory transfers.

But this projection does not tell the whole story which will emerge from the actual expenditure during budget implementation. It distorts the actual picture as the forecasts are not cast in stone and have no relevance to the budget in practice. The fuller story is that statutory expenditure is a first-line charge (to the National Assembly, INEC, UBEC, National Judicial Council, etc.) which must be fully disbursed; salaries are also fully disbursed so that workers and officials of the government can continue to work while overheads are needed to ensure continuity of governance operations.

Debts must be paid as a priority so that our fiscal rating, which is already at a very low point, will not totally collapse. There is a very high negative price for sovereign debt default. For instance, out of an actual N12.5tn expenditure by the Federal Government as of September 30, 2023, the sum of N5.7tn has been spent on debt service. This is 44.8 percent of actual expenditure at the end of the third quarter. It is only after these aforementioned expenses are settled that implementing capital projects can arise. This point is validated by the 2023 federal capital budget expenditure report which the Minister for Budget and National Planning put at 25 percent as of the end of September 2023. Furthermore, if the expected revenue is not fully realised, the cuts will be mainly from the capital budget provisions, excluding the projects that are funded from dedicated borrowed funds.

The idea of capital projects raises citizens’ expectations of projects that can touch lives or improve livelihoods, ease business practices and positively grow the economy. However, capital expenditure is divided into two vis, administrative and developmental capital. The administrative capital is about projects related to facilitating governance in terms of directly being of benefit to the officials and the public service such as their cars, buildings, computers and accessories, etc. The justification is that they need these projects to be able to effectively serve the people. The second is developmental capital which is about the roads, bridges, schools, airports, hospitals, etc., that directly benefit the people. The implementation experience shows that administrative capital enjoys priority over developmental capital since the officials first take care of their comfort and working environment before remembering the citizens. When the full details of the budget are released, Nigerians will know the division between administrative and capital expenditure.

The votes for five critical sectors vis, education, health, security, infrastructure and social development, amount to N8.614tn. Comparing these proposals (some of which may not be released) with the debt service of N8.490tn (which must be fully released) paints the picture of the consequences of the reckless borrowing by previous administrations, especially the Muhammadu Buhari administration which got Nigeria into this debt hole.

The votes for the presidency are baffling. For recurrent expenditure, the presidency will be spending N85.413bn while it proposes to spend N60.535bn for capital expenditure, bringing the total to N145.948bn. This is an unprecedented vote in budgeting for the presidency, coming after the votes for cars, yacht, houses and other frivolities in the 2023 Supplementary Appropriation. It is difficult to fathom what exactly the presidency will be doing with such a huge vote, coming after other service-wide votes which may be at his discretion to manage.

There is a critical and worrying development. The details of the budget are not yet in the public domain – they are not available on the website of the Budget Office of the Federation. Therefore, the first thing is to demand that like in previous years, the detailed budget should be made available immediately. The budget is usually uploaded on the website of the Budget Office of the Federation immediately after the president presents the same to the National Assembly even before the budget breakdown by the responsible minister.

A dispassionate review of the broad expenditure proposals shows that it is a continuation of the old norm; a proposal to service the bureaucracy, especially high-level officials of state. Is there hope that the National Assembly will be dispassionate to right the wrongs proposed by the executive. This will be a very tall order considering that federal legislators were singing the campaign song of the president, standing on his mandate when he came to present the budget. Instead of the national anthem, they stood on the mandate of the president. The ninth National Assembly was called a rubber-stamp legislature. It is up to the 10th National Assembly to give itself a name. As of now, they have performed below the rubber-stamp status.

The post Expenditure proposals in 2024 federal budget estimates appeared first on Centre for Social Justice .