LAGOS — In a landmark judicial intervention, the Federal High Court in Lagos has declared the National Assembly’s controversial ₦110 billion vehicle and allowance scheme unlawful. Justice Yellim Bogoro’s judgment, delivered on May 6, 2026, serves as a sharp rebuke to the legislature, ruling that the expenditure breached procurement laws, constitutional obligations, and the public trust.
The Court’s Ruling
The lawsuit (Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1606/2023), filed by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), challenged the allocation of:
-
₦40 billion for the procurement of 465 luxury vehicles for lawmakers.
-
₦70 billion in "support allowances" for newly elected members.
Justice Bogoro’s ruling emphasized that the procurement process was arbitrary, disproportionate, and inconsistent with statutory standards. The court specifically highlighted two critical points:
-
Conflict of Interest: The judge characterized the scheme as "self-dealing," noting that the officials approving the expenditure were the direct beneficiaries of the funds.
-
Failure of Public Trust: Citing the severe economic hardship faced by ordinary Nigerians, the court held that the allocation demonstrated a failure to prioritize the national interest, undermining the fiduciary duty public officers owe to the citizens.
Mandate for Future Transparency
Beyond voiding the scheme, the court issued a direct order to Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas. They are now mandated to ensure that:
-
All future procurements and expenditures by the National Assembly comply strictly with due process requirements.
-
Spending must be guided by the principles of transparency, accountability, and value for money.
Significance of the Judgment
The ruling is being hailed by human rights advocates and legal experts as a major victory for public interest litigation. Justice Bogoro dismissed arguments from the National Assembly that legislative autonomy shielded them from judicial scrutiny, asserting that the doctrine of separation of powers does not operate as a shield for illegality.
The court also affirmed that civil society organizations like SERAP possess the legal standing (locus standi) to challenge such spending, establishing that the public’s interest in transparent governance outweighs procedural technicalities regarding pre-action notices in matters of urgent public importance.
