The Budget Office of the Federation (BOF) has stated that no funds appropriated for the Presidential Economic Advisory Council/Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PEAC/PFIPC) were ever released or spent, insisting that Nigeria’s expenditure control system prevented the appropriation from becoming public expenditure.In a media statement issued on Friday by the Assistant Director and Head of Information and Public Relations (BOF) Afolabi Falilu Olajuwon, the office said the issue was never whether the National Assembly appropriated funds for the council, but whether the legal conditions required for expenditure were fulfilled.According to the statement, “an appropriation is not expenditure; it is only the beginning of a legal process,” stressing that public funds can only be spent after conditions such as Financial Clearance, lawful recruitment, payroll enrolment, Treasury warranting, cash backing and, where applicable, procurement approvals have been met.The Budget Office said none of those conditions arose in the case of PEAC/PFIPC, adding that “the appropriation therefore remained an appropriation. It never became expenditure.”The statement explained that the council was included in the 2026 Budget after the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation assigned it an administrative code, while the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation approved an authorised establishment and recruitment waiver.It said the council later submitted a personnel estimate of ₦3.85 billion, but the Budget Office disregarded the figure and independently calculated a personnel provision of ₦802.98 million using the authorised establishment, approved recruitment waiver, applicable public-service salary structure and extant costing methodology.The office further stated that although the amount was included in the Executive Budget proposal and subsequently appropriated, Financial Clearance was never issued because the required conditions remained incomplete.According to the statement, after the 2026 Appropriation Bill received Presidential Assent on March 31, 2026, another outstanding requirement remained, as the National Salaries, Incomes and Wages Commission had not confirmed that the proposed staffing and remuneration arrangements complied with the approved public-service compensation framework.“There was therefore no Financial Clearance. There was no lawful recruitment. There was no payroll enrolment. There was no salary payment,” the statement said.The Budget Office also clarified that the personnel provision of ₦802.98 million was never money placed under the council’s control, noting that personnel appropriations are paid monthly into the accounts of verified employees on the Federal Government payroll after all legal requirements have been met.“Not one kobo of the personnel provision could lawfully have been drawn. Not one kobo was drawn. There is no personnel expenditure to recover because there was no personnel expenditure,” it stated.On the ₦200 million overhead provision, the Budget Office explained that overhead releases are made monthly only after Treasury warrants and cash backing are issued.It disclosed that in June 2026, following doubts over the council’s legal status, it formally notified the Federal Ministry of Finance and the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to withhold every instrument that could support payment.“That instruction closed the route to release. The ₦200,000,000.00 remained a provision in law. It did not become money in the hands of the Council,” the statement added.The office also said the ₦300 million capital provision never reached the procurement stage, as no procurement plan, Ministerial Tenders Board approval, Certificate of No Objection, Treasury warrant or cash backing was issued.Summing up the matter, the Budget Office said the personnel provision stopped at Financial Clearance, the overhead provision stopped before warranting and cash backing, while the capital provision stopped before procurement approval and release.“The law did not recover money after it had gone. It prevented the money from going,” the statement said.The Budget Office maintained that the case demonstrates the distinction between appropriation and expenditure, stressing that “appropriation gives authority subject to conditions” while expenditure only arises after all statutory requirements have been fulfilled.It reaffirmed that “not one kobo” of the personnel provision was drawn, the overhead provision never matured into a lawful release, and the capital provision never became procurement or expenditure because “the conditions for spending were not met and were not close to being met.”The office added that it would continue to cooperate with every lawful inquiry and provide all records, computations, correspondence and system evidence required to establish the facts. See full media statement below: THE MONEY THAT NEVER MOVED How
Don't miss out on breaking stories and in-depth articles.
