Beatrice Godnye
The Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) has firmly asserted that due constitutional and legislative processes were followed in the recent repeal and re-enactment of the 2024 and 2025 Appropriation Acts, directly countering public allegations of a constitutional breach and fiscal illegality.
In a detailed press statement released Tuesday, the BOF, under Director-General Tanimu Yakubu, addressed what it termed “key misconceptions” in ongoing public commentary, describing the national budget discourse as one that “must remain anchored in the Constitution, applicable fiscal legislation, and established legislative practice.”
The Office provided a point-by-point clarification to defend the legislative action taken by the National Assembly and assented to by the President.
Constitutional Grounds for Re-enactment
The BOF clarified that while Sections 80–84 of the Constitution establish the framework for expenditure, “the Constitution does not prohibit the National Assembly from repealing and re-enacting an Appropriation Act.”
It stated that such action can become necessary due to “fiscal circumstances, implementation realities, or reconciliation of fiscal instruments.”
Crucially, the Office emphasised that once the National Assembly passes and the President assents to such a bill, “the resulting Act becomes valid law.” It is therefore “incorrect,” the BOF argued, to label the duly enacted process a ‘constitutional impossibility’.
On Expenditure and Transparency
Responding to claims of ‘expenditure without appropriation’, the BOF stated that the assertion “conflates distinct concepts in public finance administration,” such as contractual obligations and debt service that may span multiple fiscal years. The legal test, it noted, is whether spending is backed by lawful appropriation, with the re-enactment process serving to “consolidate and regularise fiscal authority.”
Regarding transparency, the BOF affirmed its commitment to obligations under the Fiscal Responsibility Act for “timely disclosure and wide publication.” However, it added that this must be balanced with “document integrity” and the need to avoid circulating unauthenticated drafts during legislative harmonisation.
Commitments and Conclusion
The Office pledged immediate administrative actions to strengthen public access, including working to ensure “authenticated budget documents and enrolled Acts are made accessible through official channels as soon as they are finalised.”
Concluding its defence, the BOF stated that Nigeria’s public finance system rests on the “rule of law, institutional responsibility, and the constitutional balance” between government arms. It characterised the repeal and re-enactment as a “constitutional and legislative instrument for budgetary oversight and alignment,” necessary where “implementation realities require legislative adjustment.”
“The repeal and re-enactment process, having proceeded through the National Assembly and presidential assent, remains a constitutional and legislative instrument for budgetary oversight and alignment,” the statement read, reaffirming the Office’s commitment to “fiscal discipline, transparency, and constructive engagement.”
Discussion about this post