SERAP and 20 others file lawsuit against Akpabio and Abbas for self-increase in budget.

In a bold move, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and 20 concerned Nigerians have launched a lawsuit against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House of Representatives Speaker Tajudeen Abbas. This legal action targets the unilateral and arbitrary increase in lawmakers’ allocation from N197bn to a staggering N344bn, marking the highest allocation since the advent of democracy in 1999.

 

The lawsuit, filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, puts forth a fundamental question – whether lawmakers, in wielding their powers over appropriation and money bills, can independently and unilaterally boost their own budget without the requisite re-presentation by the President, as mandated by the Nigerian Constitution. It challenges the recent move by the National Assembly to augment its budget without adhering to the democratic principles of separation of powers and checks and balances.

 

Central to the plaintiffs’ argument is a call for a judicial declaration that the National Assembly’s unilateral increase of its budget, absent the President’s re-presentation, constitutes a breach of democratic principles. They emphasize that such a move violates the essence of separation of powers and checks and balances, pivotal to the democratic fabric of the nation. 

 

Furthermore, the lawsuit seeks an order of perpetual injunction, aiming to restrain and prevent the National Assembly from independently increasing its budget without adhering to the constitutional requirement of re-presentation by the President. This legal action underscores the importance of preserving the democratic foundations and constitutional provisions that dictate the collaborative and balanced approach to budgetary matters.

 

In challenging the arbitrary augmentation of the National Assembly’s budget, SERAP and the concerned Nigerians exemplify a commitment to upholding constitutional principles, advocating for accountability, and ensuring that democratic processes are followed to safeguard the public interest. The lawsuit signals a strong stance against what they perceive as a deviation from established democratic norms in the allocation of public funds.