On The Frontline With Boma
Every nation tells its story through its budget. More than a compilation of figures and projected expenditures, a budget is a moral document. It reflects the priorities of government, reveals the direction of public policy and, perhaps most importantly, demonstrates how leaders understand the needs of the people they govern. In periods of economic prosperity, governments may enjoy some latitude in financing projects that are desirable but not immediately essential. However, in moments of national hardship, every allocation must answer one fundamental question: Is this truly what the people need now?
That is why the recent disclosure by Tracka, the public accountability initiative of BudgIT Foundation, has stirred widespread public concern. According to the organisation, over ₦30 billion has been earmarked in the Federal Government’s capital budget for projects relating to churches, mosques and traditional rulers’ palaces. Of this amount, about ₦8.04 billion is reportedly allocated for the construction and rehabilitation of worship centres, solar power installations, boreholes, musical equipment for churches, carpets for mosques, imam residences and facilities for Islamiya schools. Another ₦22.15 billion is reportedly budgeted for the renovation and furnishing of 106 traditional rulers’ palaces across the country.
Expectedly, the revelation has provoked serious questions about government priorities and accountability. Nigerians are asking whether these projects passed through the normal budgetary process, whether they were proposed by the appropriate ministries and agencies, and whether they received the approval of the National Assembly in the form now being reported. These are legitimate questions in every constitutional democracy where public funds belong to the people rather than to those temporarily entrusted with power.
The debate, however, extends beyond procedure. It goes to the very philosophy of governance. At a time when millions of Nigerians are confronted with rising food prices, persistent inflation, crushing energy costs, worsening insecurity, youth unemployment and declining purchasing power, should the Federal Government be committing billions of naira to projects that many consider peripheral to its constitutional responsibilities?
Across the country, families are making painful choices. Parents struggle to pay school fees. Patients are turned away from hospitals because they cannot afford treatment. Small businesses are folding under the weight of multiple taxes and unstable electricity. Farmers are abandoning their farms because of insecurity. Graduates roam the streets in search of jobs that do not exist. Every day, ordinary Nigerians are forced to choose between feeding their families and meeting other basic needs.
Against this background, the proposed allocations naturally appear disconnected from the realities confronting the average citizen. Budgets are expected to respond to pressing national challenges, not create the impression that government has become detached from the suffering of its people.
It is important to state that this is not an attack on religion. Nigeria is one of the most religious countries in the world. Churches, mosques and other faith-based organisations have continued to provide education, healthcare, humanitarian assistance and moral guidance where government institutions have often fallen short. Their contributions to national development cannot be denied.
The issue, therefore, is not religion. The issue is whether public resources should be deployed in a manner that could blur the constitutional boundary between the Nigerian state and religious institutions.
Section 10 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), provides that “The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.” Section 38 equally guarantees every citizen the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Together, these provisions seek to preserve religious neutrality in a country blessed—and sometimes challenged—by extraordinary religious diversity.
Admittedly, the Constitution does not expressly prohibit every form of government assistance to religious bodies. Indeed, successive administrations have supported pilgrimages, constructed worship centres within government institutions and occasionally assisted faith-based organisations. Yet constitutional scholars continue to debate whether such expenditures fully reflect the spirit of Section 10. That debate becomes even more compelling when billions of naira are involved.
Beyond the constitutional questions lies an equally troubling issue of fairness. Tracka’s report indicates that allocations are unevenly distributed among different religious projects. Whether or not there are explanations for those figures, such disparities risk creating unnecessary suspicion in an already fragile society. Government must not only be fair; it must also be seen to be fair. Public confidence suffers whenever budgetary decisions appear capable of fuelling perceptions of religious preference.
Equally deserving of scrutiny is the reported allocation of over ₦22 billion for renovating and furnishing traditional rulers’ palaces. Traditional institutions remain respected custodians of culture, history and community values. Their contributions to peace-building and conflict resolution are well recognised. However, one must ask whether the renovation of palaces should rank among the Federal Government’s highest spending priorities at this difficult moment in the nation’s history.
Would those billions not make a greater impact if invested in primary healthcare centres, public schools, rural roads, agricultural support, flood control, potable water or electricity projects? Could they not provide medical equipment for hospitals where patients still purchase gloves, syringes and medications before receiving treatment? Could they not support security agencies confronting terrorism, kidnapping and violent crime?
A government demonstrates its priorities not by the speeches it delivers but by the cheques it signs.
Another question deserves careful consideration. If the Federal Government begins financing church buildings, mosque facilities, musical instruments, carpets, imam residences and similar projects, where should the line be drawn? Tomorrow, will every denomination, every congregation, every traditional institution and every religious association become entitled to budgetary allocations? If not, what criteria determine who benefits and who does not?
Transparency demands answers. Citizens deserve to know how beneficiaries were selected, who recommended the projects, the agencies responsible for implementation and the measurable public interest each project is expected to serve.
Democracy flourishes where governments welcome scrutiny rather than resist it. Organisations such as Tracka perform an invaluable public service by examining budget documents and drawing citizens’ attention to issues requiring explanation. Their work should not be dismissed simply because it generates uncomfortable conversations. Accountability is strengthened when informed citizens ask informed questions.
Unfortunately, Nigerians are no longer silent because hardship has removed the luxury of indifference. They are speaking out against hunger that has become almost weaponised. They are speaking against insecurity that has turned farming communities into battlefields. They are speaking against inflation that erodes salaries before they are earned. They are speaking against electricity tariffs that continue to rise while power supply remains unreliable. Their voices reflect not political hostility but genuine frustration.
Government would do well to listen.
This is not the time for expenditures that can easily be interpreted as political patronage. With the 2027 general elections gradually approaching, every controversial budgetary allocation will inevitably attract political interpretation, whether justified or not. The surest way to avoid such suspicion is to ensure that public spending remains firmly anchored on projects whose benefits are obvious, measurable and accessible to all Nigerians irrespective of religion, ethnicity or political affiliation.
No government possesses unlimited resources. Every naira allocated to one project is a naira unavailable for another. Budgeting therefore requires discipline, courage and the wisdom to distinguish between what is desirable and what is indispensable.
The Federal Government should remember that citizens judge leadership less by promises than by priorities. Roads that reduce travel time speak louder than ceremonial projects. Functional hospitals inspire greater confidence than renovated halls of worship financed with public money. Well-equipped schools create hope more effectively than political symbolism. Safe communities, reliable electricity and affordable food remain the expectations of ordinary Nigerians.
Perhaps this controversy offers an opportunity for a broader conversation on budget reform. Citizens should have greater opportunities to participate in budget formulation. Every constituency project should be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny. Every capital expenditure should clearly demonstrate measurable economic or social value. Transparency should become the rule rather than the exception.
Ultimately, governments come and go, but institutions endure. Budgets should therefore strengthen institutions instead of deepening public distrust. Leadership is not measured by the number of projects inserted into appropriation bills; it is measured by the positive difference those projects make in the lives of citizens.
Nigeria deserves budgets that restore hope instead of raising eyebrows. It deserves budgets that heal rather than divide, that inspire confidence rather than suspicion and that place the welfare of the people above every other consideration.
For when budgets lose their soul, governments gradually lose the confidence of the governed. And once that confidence begins to fade, restoring it becomes infinitely more expensive than any line item ever inserted into a national budget.
On the Frontline, facts remain sacred. Truth, no matter how uncomfortable, eventually finds its voice. The duty of responsible journalism is not to inflame passions but to illuminate public issues with honesty, fairness and courage. In the final analysis, Nigerians deserve a budget that speaks first to their survival, their security and their future—not one that leaves them wondering whether the people’s priorities have quietly been replaced by politics.
.
On The Frontline With Boma is published by The Port Harcourt Telegraph Newspaper authored by the managing editor.
