Who Protects the Money Entrusted to INEC?
By Solomon Dalung, Esq.
The Auditor-General has reportedly questioned more than ₦112.15 billion spent by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on ballot boxes, electoral devices and other materials, with the audit reportedly finding no sufficient evidence that the items were actually procured.
And that, reportedly, is only one part of the story.
The audit also raised questions over expenditure allegedly made without competitive bidding or a Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) Certificate of No Objection. It reportedly questioned ₦1.06 billion spent on Toyota Prado vehicles, ₦3.14 billion allegedly paid to four contractors before their contracts were awarded, and another ₦9.25 billion involving 22 contracts that were allegedly split in a manner designed to circumvent procurement procedures.
These are not minor accounting discrepancies that should simply disappear beneath layers of administrative correspondence. They concern billions of naira in public funds committed to an institution whose constitutional responsibility is to protect the integrity of Nigeria's elections.
That is why the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP)'s demand that INEC account for more than ₦126 billion reportedly flagged in the Auditor-General's report deserves serious public attention.
The issue should not be reduced to whether SERAP's position is politically convenient to one side or another. The fundamental question is simple: Can INEC properly account for the money entrusted to it?
If the funds were properly spent, INEC should have no difficulty producing the relevant records—procurement documents, approvals, contracts, evidence of delivery, beneficiaries and proof of utilisation.
If there were procurement irregularities but the materials and services were nevertheless delivered, that should be clearly established.
And if investigations ultimately establish that public funds were paid for goods or services that were never supplied, or that funds were diverted, then the appropriate authorities must act in accordance with the law.
What Nigerians should not accept is a situation in which billions of naira can be questioned by the nation's supreme audit institution, only for the matter to eventually disappear into the familiar fog of administrative silence.
INEC is preparing for another general election. It will ask political parties, candidates and millions of Nigerians to trust its processes.
But electoral trust cannot begin on election day.
It must be earned long before the ballot is cast.
There is therefore nothing partisan about demanding that INEC account for public funds. Indeed, turning accountability into a partisan issue would defeat the very purpose of accountability.
The same standard must apply regardless of who occupies the presidency, controls the National Assembly or dominates the political space.
Government money is not APC money. It is not PDP money. It is not Labour Party money. It is Nigerian taxpayers' money.
And public institutions must be accountable for every naira entrusted to them.
If INEC is responsible for protecting the sanctity of the ballot, then Nigerians are entitled to ask:
Who protects the money entrusted to INEC?
Let the documents answer that question.