Tanimu Yakubu: Constitution, Fiscal, Legislative Practices Must Guide Budget Discourse

• Says budget repeal, re-enactment not a constitutional breach, extension of implementation timeline by N/Assembly legal

James Emejo in Abuja

Director-General, Budget Office of the Federation (BoF), Dr. Tanimu Yakubu, yesterday stated that despite legitimate public interest in fiscal governance, the country’s budget discourse must remain anchored on the constitution, applicable fiscal legislation, and established legislative practice.

Yakubu spoke against the backdrop of recent public commentary on the repeal and re-enactment of the 2024 and 2025 Appropriation Acts, and claims that these might have suffered a constitutional breach, fiscal illegality, and failure to provide access to budget documents, leading to calls for their repeal and re-enactment.

He said the constitution did not prohibit the National Assembly from repealing and re-enacting an appropriation act where fiscal circumstances, implementation realities, or reconciliation of fiscal instruments made such legislative action necessary in the public interest.

In a statement, Yakubu emphasised that the country’s public finance system rested on the rule of law, institutional responsibility, and the constitutional balance between the executive and the legislature.

He stated, “Where macroeconomic conditions and implementation realities require legislative adjustment, the proper response is lawful legislative action—not informal fiscal practice.

“The repeal and re-enactment process, having proceeded through the National Assembly and presidential assent, remains a constitutional and legislative instrument for budgetary oversight and alignment.”

Yakubu also reaffirmed the budget office’s commitment to fiscal discipline, transparency, and constructive engagement with all stakeholders in the national interest.

He pointed out that where the National Assembly passed a repeal and re-enactment bill and the president assented, the resulting act became valid law.

Yakubu added, “It is, therefore, incorrect to describe a duly enacted repeal and re-enactment as a ‘constitutional impossibility’”.

He further stressed that there was nothing unusual with the extension of budget implementation period, saying it is legal.

The director-general said, “While Appropriation Acts are commonly framed to operate within a fiscal year, the constitution does not impose an immutable expiry rule that forbids legislative extension for orderly completion of obligations, settlement of certified claims, and alignment of overlapping fiscal instruments.

“Where the National Assembly, in exercise of its legislative powers, extends the operational window of an Appropriation Act, such extension is an expression of legislative authority, not an illegality.”

He stated that the assertion that expenditure occurred without appropriation “conflates distinct concepts in public finance administration, including contractual obligations, cash releases, statutory transfers, debt service, and project commitments that may straddle fiscal periods”.

According to him, “The legal test is whether expenditure is supported by lawful appropriation or other constitutional/statutory charge, and whether any required legislative oversight is sought through recognised instruments (supplementary appropriation, virement where permitted, or repeal and re-enactment).

“The repeal and re-enactment process serves, among other things, to consolidate and regularise fiscal authority through an Act of the National Assembly, thereby reinforcing—not undermining—constitutional control of public funds.”

Yakubu said the budget office will maintain strict adherence to expenditure controls consistent with constitutional requirements and applicable fiscal regulations.

He said the budget office will work with relevant institutions to ensure that authenticated budget documents and enrolled acts were made accessible through official channels as soon as they were finalised for publication.

Yakubu said his office will continue to support citizen-friendly budget communication products to improve public understanding of fiscal policy choices.

He affirmed the budget office’s obligations regarding Section 48(1) of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, which required transparency, timely disclosure, and wide publication of fiscal transactions and decisions.

However, he said, “Transparency requirements must be implemented with due regard to document integrity, legislative authentication processes, and the need to avoid circulation of conflicting drafts while harmonisation and enrolment are ongoing.”