Budget office breaks fiscal transparency law after missing three quarterly deadlines

…experts warn delayed reports fuel corruption, erode public trust

The budget office of the federation has again failed to publish budget implementation reports for three consecutive quarters, extending a pattern of delays that critics say violates the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) and weakens oversight of government spending under President Bola Tinubu’s administration.

The lapse comes despite earlier assurances by the budget office that it would resume the timely publication of the reports after admitting last year that it had breached statutory disclosure requirements.

Checks by BusinessDay show that the third quarter of 2025 remains the latest budget implementation report published on the budget office website, leaving a significant gap in public access to information on federal revenue performance, expenditure and project execution at a time of rising borrowing costs and fiscal pressure.

The budget office, headed by Director-General Tanimu Yakubu, who was appointed by President Tinubu in June 2024 to replace Ben Akabueze, attributed the delay to what it described as an ongoing review and verification process.

“The other quarters will soon be uploaded, just give us time, they are still working on the document since you can access the website and got the other ones, that means in the shortest time you will get the other ones too. But they are still working on it,” Afolabi Olajuwon, spokesperson for the budget office, told BusinessDay.

“There is no specific time for now because, you know, it takes a different group of people to work on it, both the contractors, the reviewers and the office. They will have to make a cross-check. We call it a fact-check so that you don’t give the wrong reports. It takes time but we are working on it,” he added.

The Fiscal Responsibility Act, enacted in 2007, requires the federal government to publish quarterly budget implementation reports to strengthen transparency and accountability in public finance management. Analysts say the continued absence of the reports represents a direct violation of the law and raises concerns over the government’s commitment to fiscal openness.

The delays also mark a reversal from commitments made by the budget office last year after BusinessDay reported that the agency had stopped publishing implementation reports following the second quarter of 2024.

Read also: $1.25 bn loan: Tinubu govt running ‘ponzi economy’ – ADC

At the time, the office acknowledged it had violated provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act and pledged to resume timely disclosures. It blamed the delays on an “exceptional budget cycle,” extended project verification exercises and the transition to a longer budget implementation framework.

The office had promised to publish the outstanding reports and return to a regular quarterly reporting schedule from the third quarter of 2025 onward. Instead, reporting gaps have persisted.

“This is a clear violation of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, 2007; specifically Section 50,” Vahyala Kwaga, deputy director at civic-tech organisation BudgIT, told BusinessDay.

“This means the federal government has broken its own laws on publication and transparency, completely closing the door for accountability. Because how can you hold the government accountable when you don’t know its financial position?”

Kwaga said the Tinubu administration had effectively rolled back gains in fiscal disclosure achieved under the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, where quarterly budget performance reports became more consistent.

“As it stands, we are in the dark on how well the government has executed its own budget. This behaviour is compounded by the fact that this administration has borrowed massively. The question then becomes: if the government is not publishing on its spending and revenue but borrowing more, how do we know what it is using the money for?” he asked.

The prolonged reporting delays come as the Tinubu administration seeks to position itself as pursuing macroeconomic reforms aimed at restoring investor confidence and stabilising the economy.

But analysts say the credibility of those reforms depends not only on policy adjustments but also on adherence to transparency laws governing public finance disclosures.

“This is unacceptable for a democratic republic such as Nigeria that not only has laws for publishing documents but that is part of global conventions such as the Open Government Partnership principles that recognise the importance of such,” Kwaga further stated.

“The President has been an advocate for macroeconomic reform that he has succeeded in a large part in implementing. Nigerians dare him to also be an advocate of transparency and accountability reform as well.”

Nigeria’s fiscal challenges have intensified over the past two years as the government grapples with weak revenue growth, elevated debt service obligations and the lingering impact of subsidy reforms and currency devaluation. The absence of current implementation reports has made it harder for investors, civil society groups and analysts to independently assess the effectiveness of public spending.

Another concern is that the delays are coming at a time when Nigeria’s fiscal pressures have deepened, with the government battling weak revenue growth, rising debt servicing costs and the lingering effects of subsidy reforms and currency devaluation.

The absence of up-to-date implementation reports has further complicated efforts by investors, civil society groups and analysts to independently assess government spending and fiscal performance.

Auwal Rafsanjani, executive director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, said the erosion of transparency in the budgeting process risks fueling corruption and public distrust.

“The budgeting process in this country and its implementation has a major challenge, in the sense that the usual openness that we used to see is no longer there,” Rafsanjani said.
“A major challenge is that when you have financial secrecy, it allows for corruption, manipulation and suspicion and mistrust within the Nigerian public.”

Rafsanjani said the lack of publicly available budget implementation data undermines Nigeria’s commitments under the Open Government Partnership initiative, which promotes transparency and citizen participation in governance.

“Nobody knows what is going on in terms of budget implementation. Nobody knows what is going on in terms of the actual financial spending in the country,” he said.

“And it is a sad development because we have made that progress in the past to have regular quarterly publication.”

Corroborating earlier views, Kabir Isah, an Abuja-based economist, emphasised that the missing reports have weakened independent monitoring of government expenditure and reduced public confidence in fiscal management.

“The absence of these reports eliminates the ability to monitor whether funds intended for vital sectors, such as education and healthcare, are being funnelled into unapproved initiatives,” Isah said.

“Furthermore, a perceived lack of transparency discourages civic participation, as citizens often withdraw from budget consultations when they feel their oversight is being undermined by hidden data.”

FG to release quarterly budget implementation reports, in weeks- Yakubu, DG, Budget Office

Tanimu Yakubu, Director-General, Budget Office of the Federation, while reacting to criticisms over the delays in the publication timeline of quarterly budget implementation reports, promised to release outstanding quarterly Budget implementation reports in phases over the coming weeks.

This is just as the government said, the fiscal years are not necessarily defined by the calendar, but rather by the laws enacted by the National Assembly

Yakubu said he considers it important to provide clarification within the broader constitutional and fiscal context governing public finance administration in Nigeria.

Citing examples from countries such as the United States and India, Yakubu argued that “fiscal year is not necessarily synonymous with the calendar year.

“The calendar year is a fixed chronological construct of twelve months running from January to December.

“The fiscal year, however, is a juridical and legislative creation whose duration, commencement, and terminal date are determined by the extant appropriation framework enacted by law.”

He noted that the distinction is well recognised in comparative public finance jurisprudence and constitutional practice.

“In the United States, for example, the federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30 pursuant to statutory prescription rather than the calendar year, while in India the fiscal year historically runs from April 1 to March 31”

He declared that the above examples demonstrate that fiscal years are policy and legislative constructs designed to accommodate macroeconomic management realities, budget implementation imperatives, and public finance administration.

“Nigerian constitutional practice equally supports this interpretation. Sections 80 and 81 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), do not constitutionalise a rigid twelve-month fiscal implementation cycle.

“Rather, they require that withdrawals from the Consolidated Revenue Fund be authorised by an Appropriation Act or other legislation duly enacted by the National Assembly.

“Consequently, where the National Assembly lawfully extends, reenacts, or preserves expenditure authority beyond a single calendar year, such authority remains legally valid and enforceable until its expiration under law

“Accordingly, where the prevailing Appropriation Act or related legislative instrument authorises expenditure, implementation, or validity beyond the ordinary twelve-month cycle, the operative fiscal year correspondingly assumes that legally extended character.

In the case of the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), Yakubu stated that the practical operation of fiscal administration has at various times departed from the strict January–December calendar cycle through statutory extensions, supplementary appropriations, continuing resolutions, rollover authorisations, and Appropriation (Repeal and Re-enactment) Acts.

He also cited the recent adjustment in the publication schedule, which he said ” arose principally from the Repeal and Re-enactment process of the 2025 Appropriation Act concluded in December 2025, together with the subsequent extension of the implementation period of the 2025 Budget to June 2026.

” These fiscal adjustments effectively extended the operational lifespan of the 2025 Budget beyond the conventional twelve-month calendar framework ordinarily associated with a fiscal year.
“In substance and in law, therefore, the fiscal year becomes not merely a chronological concept, but a legislatively sustained expenditure window.”

He also cited judicial authorities in Commonwealth public finance jurisprudence, which he said have consistently emphasised the supremacy of legislative authorisation in matters of public expenditure.

“In Attorney-General of Bendel State v. Attorney-General of the Federation, the Nigerian Supreme Court underscored the constitutional centrality of legislative control over public revenues and expenditures.

“Likewise, in Attorney-General v. De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Ltd, the principle was affirmed that executive expenditure powers are subordinate to statutory authorisation where Parliament has legislated comprehensively on the matter.

“During periods of economic disruption, including the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, several jurisdictions extended budget implementation windows to accommodate procurement delays, revenue shocks, and capital project continuity.

“Nigeria itself repeatedly extended the implementation period of capital components of appropriation laws to avoid the abandonment of ongoing projects, preserve contractor liquidity, sustain employment, and maintain macro-fiscal stability.”

He stated that such extensions did not create constitutional anomalies; rather, they reaffirmed the principle that the fiscal year derives its operative life from legislative authorisation and not from the immutable chronology of the Gregorian calendar.

“Following the Repeal and Re-enactment of the 2025 Appropriation Act and the extension of the implementation period, the Budget Office commenced comprehensive reconciliations involving revenue performance reviews, cash management adjustments, expenditure alignment, debt and financing updates, and enhanced inter-agency fiscal coordination processes to ensure the accuracy, integrity, completeness, and audit consistency of the Quarterly Budget Implementation Reports.

He assured that the Budget Office is strengthening its digital reporting architecture, data harmonisation systems, and institutional coordination mechanisms to support more comprehensive, timely, and analytically robust fiscal reporting in line with evolving international public finance reporting standards.

“The Federal Government remains firmly committed to the principles of open budgeting, fiscal discipline, transparency, constitutional compliance, and accountable public financial management in accordance with global best practices.”