 |
| Nigerian soldiers and sailors train during Exercise Flintlock in Diffa, Niger, in 2014. File photograph. US Navy Lt j.g. Amy Forsythe / US Africa Command. Public-domain US government photograph. |
Retired Group Captain Sadeeq Shehu has called for changes to Nigeria’s defence budget, arguing that the concentration of funding on personnel leaves insufficient provision for training, equipment maintenance and military modernisation.
The former Nigerian Air Force spokesperson also urged the government to improve the release of approved funds, saying assessments of military performance should reflect the resources that actually reach the services.
Speaking on Arise News, Shehu said the central question concerned the allocation and management of available money.
He described the problem as “not necessarily how big you spend but how wise you spend, how effectively you spend”.
Prime 9ja Online reports that the discussion followed reports of ₦5.15 trillion in special security interventions between November 2023 and September 2026, alongside substantial annual allocations for defence and other security institutions.
Shehu focused his criticism on the composition of a ₦3.154 trillion defence provision for 2026. According to his analysis, personnel costs accounted for 75.9 per cent, or approximately ₦2.4 trillion.
Overheads received about ₦297 billion, representing 9.4 per cent, while capital expenditure accounted for approximately ₦464 billion, or 14.7 per cent.
A National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies analysis of the 2026 Appropriation Bill also identified a ₦3.154 trillion Ministry of Defence allocation, including approximately ₦464.47 billion for capital expenditure.
Shehu said personnel expenditure covered salaries and allowances, while overheads included activities such as travel, training and utilities. Capital provision, he explained, should support equipment acquisition and modernisation.
He argued that leaving less than a quarter of the allocation for overheads and capital spending constrained the military’s ability to meet requirements beyond payroll.
In his assessment, the executive and legislature needed to examine the balance between paying personnel, sustaining operations, maintaining equipment and preparing the armed forces for future demands.
Shehu proposed more detailed expenditure categories to make those choices clearer. He said the broad division into personnel, overheads and capital did not adequately reveal how much funding particular military functions required.
His suggested categories included personnel and welfare, operations and deployment, equipment maintenance, training and exercises, procurement and modernisation, infrastructure, and research and development.
Among the indicative shares he outlined were a personnel and welfare ceiling of about 30 per cent, 15 per cent for operations and deployment, and another 15 per cent for equipment maintenance.
He also suggested 10 per cent for training, 20 per cent for procurement and modernisation, five per cent for infrastructure and three per cent for research and development. He presented the figures as examples of how Nigeria could distribute resources more deliberately across military needs.
The presenters questioned how the government could accommodate those requirements while responding to calls for additional personnel and managing wider budget deficits.
Shehu said the answer required better planning within the country’s financial capacity. Asked how much more Nigeria should allocate to security, he said he considered the overall level broadly appropriate relative to national earnings.
His concern, he explained, centred on where the government placed the money and whether its expenditure plan addressed operational requirements.
He criticised what he considered inadequate scrutiny of defence budgeting by both the presidency and the National Assembly. He referred to the Inter-Parliamentary Union and regional parliamentary security frameworks as sources of guidance legislators could draw upon when examining military expenditure.
Shehu also distinguished legislative approval from the availability of funds, saying that “budgeting is different from releasing in Nigeria”.
An appropriation, he argued, could give an incomplete impression of military resources where the government released only part of the approved amount. He said evaluations of the armed forces should therefore account for actual disbursements.
Earlier reporting illustrates the importance of identifying the particular allocation and period under examination. Trust Radio reported that the Nigerian Army received ₦1.46 billion from a ₦20.56 billion provision for security equipment in its 2025 budget by 31 December that year—an implementation rate of 7.11 per cent.
That percentage concerned a specific Army equipment provision, rather than the entire defence allocation.
In an April interview addressing defence funding, presidential economic adviser Tope Fasua attributed some capital-release difficulties to budget rollovers and overlapping implementation cycles. He said the government was working towards a more orderly budget structure, according to Trust Radio’s account.
The special intervention figures discussed on ARISE News cover another funding stream.
A Galaxy Television report, citing The Punch’s examination of Federation Account Allocation Committee documents, said the dedicated account received ₦5.65 trillion, from which the government disbursed ₦5.15 trillion.
The records showed a ₦500 billion balance as of 14 October 2026. Funding came from the Federation Account, non-oil revenues and transfers from FAAC withholding accounts.
The report put releases during 2026 at ₦2.75 trillion, accounting for more than half of the cumulative disbursements. It said the records did not identify the individual operations, equipment purchases, personnel expenses or projects financed through the account.
Those reported releases sit alongside the government’s annual budget provisions. In his 2026 budget speech, President Bola Tinubu proposed ₦5.41 trillion for the broader defence and security sector.
The special-account releases across several years and the proposed annual allocation measure different categories of funding. The annual provision establishes planned expenditure; implementation depends on subsequent releases.
Tinubu’s stated priorities included modernising the armed forces, strengthening intelligence-led policing and joint operations, improving border surveillance, and supporting community-based conflict prevention.
The President also pledged to connect security expenditure to accountability for results.
Shehu argued that achieving those objectives required a clearer connection between budget preparation and the capabilities the military needed.
He said planners should identify essential requirements before assigning expenditure shares, warning that weak preparation could leave important functions underfunded while directing resources elsewhere.
He also called for reducing reliance on releases outside the ordinary annual budget framework and improving the process through which approved allocations become funds available for military operations.