In August 2023, the federal, state, and local governments shared 1.26
trillion Naira from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), the
highest in our history. In July, they shared N966 billion, and from June till
date, FAAC has distributed almost 3 trillion Naira. By Nigerian standards,
this can be described as jumbo allocations. Compared to many West
African states’ revenue, the allocation to many states surpasses their
annual budget. Can these jumbo allocations translate to concrete
developments devoid of transactions for personal benefit? How can citizens
ensure a higher level of fiscal and financial discipline, responsibility, and
accountability? Knowing that the problem of monstrous bad governance is
real and present at the state and LGA levels, how do citizens hold state
and LGA chief executives to account for these resources?
There are two broad areas in which public accountability at the level of
state governments is concerned. The first and most apparent assumption is
that the completion of some infrastructure projects necessarily ‘accounts’
for funds budgeted for capital expenditure. Accordingly, governors go
ahead to build flyovers, roads that lead to no economic destinations and
other structures. It becomes challenging for a mesmerised public to
question the governor’s accountability as he becomes the ‘action governor’.
Yet these ceremonial commissions say little about the accountability issues
involved. The public cannot know the actual costs, how much borrowing
supports the projects, or how much funds were misappropriated.
The second aspect concerns the development of public accountability as
integral to democratic culture. In a proper democracy, public officers are
responsible for accounting to the public through regular periodic audits.
They also have an ethical responsibility to account for their private life
expenditure as a function of their statutory income. In the US, public
officers are barred from receiving favours from private interests, either cash
or kind above $20. Our States are far from this type of transparency and
accountability.
We may be deceiving ourselves if we think that physical resource increase
will automatically translate to increased public goods and services by the
various states and local governments. History does not support this
thinking. We have seen the contrary, where more resources translate to
more opportunities for squandering resources with impunity. This sudden
revenue flow can create a significant appetite for corruption or
mismanagement without institutional control and checks. Some of our
elected leaders are ill-equipped to handle this kind of fund. Lacking vision,
experience, and managerial capacity, the tendency to channel the
resources to things that do not serve the public interest is high.
The matter is even worse due to the lack of robust public scrutiny and
surveillance of state resources. The existing public trust and intelligence
infrastructure seem inadequate for such scrutiny, or they have been
encumbered by legalistic and mundane practices that make up the Nigerian
factor. Our media seem not to be doing enough on this, too. As the
watchdog to society, they have looked the other way from holding public
servants accountable for managing public resources and instituting
transparency in the system.
Past governments have put a few measures to provide transparency in
revenue allocation. Former Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
introduced the publication of details of monthly allocation to states. This
practice of publishing FAAC revenue distribution details to the three
government tiers has been sustained by subsequent administrations. The
aim is to keep Nigerians abreast with the revenue generation and
distribution effort of the Federal Government and help them
balance government performance with revenue inflows at all levels. This
measure is insufficient to curb corruption in the government revenue
regime.
Many extrapolated states and LGAs will publish details of all they receive
monthly and their expenditure profile by now. But that is not the case. State
revenue and expenditure are still shrouded in secrecy. Only 10 of 36 states
have their detailed budget on their website, another measure of
transparency. None has its budget performance report on the state website.
Less than 20 states publish their audited annual financial statements. To
publish monthly financial inflows and outflows is wishful thinking at the state
level. The infrastructure and framework for transparency and accountability
are just not there.
The second measure implemented by the last administration is the
Treasury Single Account. The government brought in this system to
harmonise the revenue and payment system. Sadly, only about 20 of 36
states operate the whole bouquet of Treasury Single Account (TSA),
meaning others are averse to financial accounting reforms. Some analysts
also think implementing the TSA should be followed by the passage of a
“Fiscal Sunshine Bill”, which will open up the government’s financial
activities in the budgetary process and its implementation. There have also
been calls for solid legal sanctions where money is being spent outside its
appropriated purpose.
The rot of fiscal and financial abuse in the system runs deep. This is a
different time for business than usual. We must challenge the status quo
and fight for a new financial accountability and transparency regime. I will
advocate for a renewed zeal by state and LGA chief executives to be
transparent and accountable. It is not enough to profess to encourage
public participation and accountability, which to the average officeholder is
a PR stunt, but matching words with actions is more critical. Notably, most
public officeholders today loathe accounting for public resources or even
their decisions. This is anathema to growth and development.
We need to strengthen the existing infrastructure of accountability and
transparency in the state. The quality of most state legislature could be
better. This is because the executive arm has hijacked the state legislature.
Most legislators at the state level are handpicked, and often, they do the
bidding of the state’s chief executive. The annual budget is a mere ritual,
and the state legislature’s oversight functions are almost non-existent in
most cases. Virtually all the state institutions are weak and seem fascicle in
the face of the mighty chief executives who bestrides the states like a
colossus without accountability. The state of the state judiciary leaves much
to the imagination.
The phenomena of state capture by godfathers and “polititractors” is
prevalent and a new elephant in the room. Budgets, project selection and
initiation, contractors, approvals, and payments are all made outside the
routine government processes. Some chief executives are more symbols of
power than a source of authority, more like furniture in the state house. The
chief accounting officer in the state is only accountable to his godfather
and no one else. How can there be transparency and accountability when
chief executive officers are mere puppets in the hands of selfish, self-
centred puppeteers who see the states as their extended estates for
plundering?
Elections which citizens could use to punish lousy behaviour are few and
far between, and even when they occur, there is no guarantee that chief
executives with bad records of transparency and accountability will be
voted out. Our electoral system is still maturing, and we hope it comes to a
point when state leaders will fear losing the election because they cannot
stand public scrutiny and demand for accountability. However, there is a
need to construct other forms of continuous enforcement of accountability
by which the elected and appointed government officials can be held
accountable or even punished for abuse of office.
While there is a growing awareness of the need for accountability, civic
engagement and participation in governance processes remain relatively
low in many Nigerian states. Citizens are not fully engaged in demanding
accountability from their elected representatives. A panoply of reasons
suffices for this anomaly.
First, some citizens have become disgruntled and disenchanted with the
political system and have lost hope. An average Nigerian believes that
corruption is still deeply rooted in our system, so the possibility that their
commonwealth will be fretted away is real. It is unreal how it has become
normal that citizens have given up fighting for accountability.
The second is the structural lacuna in our constitution that has made it
impossible for citizens to hold their leaders accountable for their socio-
economic rights. The non-justiciability of Section 6(6)C of the Nigerian
constitution makes it difficult for a successful judicial challenge to hold
leaders accountable for not providing citizens with their socio-economic
rights. In plain language, citizens cannot sue the government for not
providing them with socio-economic rights, therefore shielding the leaders
from the public challenge of accountability for the state’s resources. This is
our albatross!
