In late 2023, the Federal Government of Nigeria presented its ₦27.5 trillion budget for 2024, aptly titled the “Budget of Renewed Hope.” With projected revenues of ₦18.32 trillion and a deficit of ₦9.18 trillion, this fiscal plan seeks to address the country’s security, infrastructure, education, and health challenges while attempting to reduce poverty and stimulate economic growth. But beneath the hopeful messaging lies a complex web of sectoral prioritization, state-level disparities, and constitutional concerns.
This article offers a holistic and legal analysis of the sectors and states receiving the highest allocations and whether those allocations are justified both practically and legally.
A breakdown of the federal budget shows that the top sectors receiving allocations are:
• Defense and security – ₦3.68 trillion (13.38%)
• Education – ₦2.26 trillion (8.21%)
• Infrastructure – ₦1.82 trillion (6.63%)
• Health – ₦1.41 trillion (5.15%)
• Agriculture – ₦960 billion (3.51%)
• Social development and poverty reduction – ₦632 billion (2.30%)
The high allocation to defense and security reflects ongoing insecurity across the nation. However, education and health, which are core development pillars continue to lag behind international benchmarks.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recommends 15–20% of national budgets be allocated to education, and the World Health Organization (WHO) advises 15% for health. Nigeria allocates barely half of those targets.
Among Nigeria’s 36 states, these received the largest planned budgets for 2024:
• Lagos State – ₦2.27 trillion
• Akwa Ibom State – ₦850 billion
• Rivers State – ₦793.5 billion
• Delta State – ₦725 billion
• Ogun State – ₦703 billion
These allocations are justified in part by the states’ economic and industrial relevance especially Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital. Oil-producing states like Rivers, Delta, and Akwa Ibom also command large budgets due to environmental remediation costs and developmental pressures. Yet, budget size does not always equate to developmental impact, what matters is prudent spending and legal accountability.
While some sectors are underfunded, others raise concerns for being overfunded or misaligned with their statutory roles:
Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation – ₦534.4 billion
Despite its noble purpose, the ministry has faced repeated corruption scandals, including ghost beneficiaries in the school feeding and conditional cash transfer programs. There is duplication with other ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) like the Ministry of Labour and Social Development.
Under the doctrine of ultra vires, the ministry cannot lawfully execute tasks outside its legal mandate, and funds spent without clear appropriation or contrary to budget laws may violate the Appropriation Act and Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007.
Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) – Over ₦200 billion
ONSA is primarily advisory. Yet, its budget often surpasses that of some active security agencies. It receives significant funds for “intelligence,” which lack transparency and are difficult to audit.
ONSA must comply with the Public Procurement Act 2007. The National Assembly may invoke its powers under Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution to investigate possible abuse.
Service-Wide Votes – ₦7.78 trillion
Known as “contingency funds” under the Presidency’s control, this line item is not tied to any ministry and lacks detailed breakdowns.
Section 80(3) of the Constitution prohibits withdrawals from the Consolidated Revenue Fund except as appropriated. The lack of specificity here is constitutionally questionable and susceptible to Freedom of Information Act 2011 challenges.
Ministry of Communications and Digital Economy – ₦360 billion+
Though innovation is crucial, this ministry now spans ID verification, cybersecurity, digital funding, and satellite projects—roles handled by other specialized agencies.
Administrative overreach without legal reforms could open the ministry up to litigation. The duplicative functions undermine the principle of efficiency and statutory clarity.
Nigeria’s 2024 federal budget reflects a country at a crossroads—torn between ambition and institutional weaknesses. While the allocations to security and infrastructure seem warranted, the education and health sectors remain critically underfunded. Simultaneously, massive allocations to loosely defined entities raise legal and ethical concerns about transparency and accountability.
Going forward, there is a pressing need to:
- Align allocations strictly with the legal mandates of MDAs
• Curtail duplicative budgeting
• Strengthen legislative oversight and audit compliance mechanisms
• Promote constitutional compliance in budget implementation
This legal-financial scrutiny must not be confined to annual reports. It should become a standard of governance—where every naira is accounted for, every ministry operates within its powers, and every Nigerian citizen enjoys the dividends of budgetary justice.
