Former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Babachir Lawal, has described the alleged budgeting for a non-existent presidential council as evidence of a major institutional breakdown within the federal government.
Speaking during an interview, Lawal argued that public funds cannot legally be appropriated to an agency or council that has not been formally established through the required legal and administrative processes.
According to him, every government agency must have a legal foundation before it can be included in the national budget.
He pointed out that while the executive arm may propose the creation of a new agency, such a body must undergo the necessary approval process before it can receive government funding.
“There has to be a legal basis for its existence,” Lawal said, noting that the executive is expected to initiate the process before seeking the necessary approvals from the Attorney General and the legislature.
Babachir Lawal: Dead end of ‘politics of perpetual exits’
He questioned how a body without legal recognition could have secured budgetary allocation, insisting that multiple layers of scrutiny should have detected the anomaly long before the appropriation bill was passed.
“If the agency was created by just one person, how was a budget assigned to an agency that doesn’t exist? Agencies defend budgets; if they didn’t exist, how was the budget allowed to pass?” he asked.
Lawal maintained that the development points to a wider institutional problem rather than an isolated administrative error.
“There are different steps taken that would have flagged this before the budget was passed. There is an institutional compromise; a big racket is going on,” he alleged.
His comments come amid growing public scrutiny over reports that funds were allegedly appropriated for a presidential council whose legal status has been questioned, prompting calls for greater transparency and accountability in the federal budgeting process.
