The Federal High Court in Lagos has declared unlawful the National Assembly’s controversial ₦110 billion expenditure on sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and support allowances for lawmakers, delivering a landmark judgment on public spending and accountability.
Justice Yellim Bogoro delivered the ruling in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1606/2023, a case filed by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) against the leadership of the National Assembly.
The certified true copy of the judgment became public on Sunday.
The court specifically ruled against the expenditure of ₦40 billion earmarked for the purchase of 465 vehicles for lawmakers and principal officers, as well as ₦70 billion approved as support allowances for newly elected members of the National Assembly.
According to the judgment, the spending breached procurement laws, constitutional obligations, and principles of public trust.
Justice Bogoro further directed Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas to ensure that future procurement processes and public expenditures by the National Assembly strictly comply with due process requirements.
The court emphasized the need for transparency, accountability, and value for money in the management of public resources.
The legal dispute originated in 2023 when SERAP challenged the National Assembly’s decision to allocate ₦40 billion for luxury and bulletproof vehicles and ₦70 billion in allowances for newly elected lawmakers.
The organization argued that the spending was excessive and inconsistent with the economic realities facing millions of Nigerians.
At the time, critics questioned the justification for the expenditure, particularly amid widespread economic hardship, rising inflation, and growing poverty levels.
Several civil society organizations and public policy advocates maintained that the funds could have been redirected toward critical sectors such as healthcare, education, infrastructure, and social welfare.
The court’s ruling is expected to intensify discussions around legislative spending, fiscal responsibility, and accountability in public office.
Legal analysts say the judgment reinforces the principle that government institutions must remain subject to procurement regulations and constitutional standards when utilizing public funds.
Observers also note that the decision could influence future debates on budget allocations and welfare packages for elected officials, particularly during periods of economic strain.
The judgment highlights growing demands for greater transparency in government expenditure and stronger oversight of public institutions.
While the National Assembly has yet to formally respond to the ruling, the judgment represents a significant development in the ongoing conversation about public accountability and the prudent management of national resources.