Lavish, hidden earnings of Nigerian legislators, hardship and poverty. By Amarike Akpoke
Special to USAfrica magazine (Houston) and USAfricaonline.com, the first Africa-owned, US-based newspaper published on the Internet
Amarike Akpoke Is a Contributing Analyst to USAfricaonline.com
‘I get N21m monthly as take home” revealed the Nigerian Senator Sumaila Kawu.
This recent disclosure by Kawu, who represents Kano South senatorial district, that his monthly take-home package as a federal lawmaker amounts to a staggering N21 million, has again highlighted the glaring disconnect between Nigeria’s political elite and the citizens they are elected to serve.
This revelation is even more jarring when juxtaposed with the recent clarifications made by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), which stated that each senator officially earns N1.06 million monthly in salary and allowances.
The yawing difference between these figures, rather than being just a matter of arithmetic, is a reflection of a deeper, systemic issue that plagues Nigeria’s governance.
In a country where a significant portion of the population lives in poverty, with many struggling to afford basic necessities, the idea that lawmakers could be earning such exorbitant amounts is not only morally questionable but also politically destabilizing.
The average Nigerian, who faces daily hardships such as very expensive food costs, fuel price hikes, inflation, and unemployment, cannot comprehend how their elected representatives, who are supposed to be custodians of the public trust, could justify earning millions while the nation grapples with economic adversity.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s recent critique of the National Assembly only serves to underscore this disconnect. “You give yourselves all sorts of things, and you know it is not right…”, said Obasanjo. His assertion that lawmakers have no moral right to determine their own salaries and allowances resonates deeply with a populace that is increasingly disillusioned with a political class that appears more concerned with self-enrichment than public service. Obasanjo’s claim that each lawmaker received N200 million from the executive branch only adds fuel to the fire, suggesting that the financial entanglements between the legislature and the executive are far more insidious than previously thought.
The counterclaims by the Senate, dismissing Obasanjo’s allegations as “lies,” do little to address the root of the problem. Instead of engaging in defensive posturing, the Senate should be more transparent about its finances. The lack of accountability and transparency in the handling of public funds is a significant factor in the erosion of trust between the government and the governed. When lawmakers are seen to be living in opulence while the majority of Nigerians struggle to make ends meet, it becomes difficult for the public to believe that their interests are being represented. The revelations by former Senator Shehu Sani, who once disclosed that each senator receives a monthly running cost of N13.5 million, further illustrate the extent to which the financial dealings of the National Assembly are shrouded in secrecy. This running cost, which supposedly covers operational expenses, appears to be a convenient way to funnel additional funds to lawmakers with little to no oversight. Such practices not only breed corruption but also perpetuate a culture of entitlement among the political elite.
In his pointed response to the RMAFC’s seeming art of deflection, Senator Sani reignited the debate over the actual earnings of Nigerian lawmakers. Sani’s remark that the RMAFC “danced around the figures” for the total monthly running costs of legislators speaks volumes of the troubling issue of transparency in the financial dealings of public officials.
The RMAFC’s evasive approach to revealing the earnings of lawmakers is reminiscent of a carefully choreographed dance – a performance designed more to distract than inform. By focusing solely on the official salary figures while sidestepping the much larger and more controversial running costs, the RMAFC has effectively downplayed the true financial burden that legislators impose on the public purse. This tactic of partial disclosure feeds into a broader culture of opacity within the arms of Nigerian government, where the true cost of governance is often obscured by a lack of full transparency. While the RMAFC may have technically fulfilled its obligation by quoting the official salary figures, its failure to address the full scope of lawmakers’ earnings – including the N13.5 million monthly running cost that Sani has previously exposed – only serves to fuel public distrust.
Senator Sani’s response to the RMAFC’s evasive statements is refreshing in its honesty. By acknowledging the full extent of what lawmakers actually take home each month, the former Senator sheds light on a reality that many in government would prefer to keep in the shadows. His willingness to speak out, despite the potential backlash from his peers, is a testament to his commitment to transparency and accountability. Sani’s comment that he “understands their fears” is particularly telling. It suggests that the RMAFC, and by extension, the government, is acutely aware of the potential public outrage that could ensue if the full extent of lawmakers’ earnings were laid bare. This fear of public backlash may explain the RMAFC’s reluctance to be fully transparent about the total compensation packages of Nigeria’s lawmakers.
At the heart of this issue is the concept of state capture, where those in power manipulate the system to serve their interests at the expense of the public.
The fact that lawmakers can reportedly fix their own salaries and receive unapproved allowances with impunity is a testament to the failure of Nigeria’s democratic institutions to serve as effective checks on power. This capture of the state by a small elite has far-reaching consequences for the country’s development and stability. As Nigeria faces a multitude of economic challenges, from rising inflation to dwindling foreign reserves, the need for a more equitable distribution of resources has never been more urgent.
The lavish earnings of lawmakers stand in stark contrast to the financial struggles of ordinary Nigerians and serve as a reminder of the need for systemic reform.
The controversy over lawmakers’ earnings is emblematic of broader issues in Nigerian governance: the persistent lack of transparency, corruption and disregard for accountability.
For a democracy to function effectively, citizens must have access to accurate and comprehensive information about how their leaders are compensated. Partial disclosures, like those provided by the RMAFC, do little to enhance public trust or promote good governance.
To address this issue, there must be a concerted effort to ensure that all aspects of public officials’ earnings are made public. This includes not only their official salaries but also any additional allowances, running costs, and other forms of compensation. Without this level of transparency, it is impossible to hold lawmakers accountable for how they spend public funds.
Shehu Sani’s critique of the RMAFC’s handling of the lawmakers’ earnings debate serves as a call to action for greater honesty and transparency in Nigerian governance.
The public deserves to know the full extent of what their representatives are earning, and the RMAFC’s reluctance to provide this information in full only serves to erode trust in the government. As Nigeria continues to grapple with economic challenges and widespread poverty, the public’s demand for transparency and accountability will only grow louder.
It is up to government agencies like the RMAFC to respond to this demand by providing clear, accurate, and comprehensive information about how public funds are being spent. Anything less is a disservice to the principles of democracy and good governance. The RMAFC must take a more active role in ensuring that the remuneration of public office holders is not only transparent but also reflective of the economic realities of the country.
The two national legislative chambers, as they currently operate, tend to represent a fortress of wealth for its members amidst widespread poverty in Nigeria.
This is not just an economic issue but a moral one, raising fundamental questions about the nature of leadership and public service in Nigeria.
The revelations by Senator Kawu, coupled with the accusations by former President Obasanjo and Senator Sani, paint a disturbing picture of Nigeria’s legislative system.
The discrepancies in figures, the lack of transparency, and the apparent self-enrichment of lawmakers at the expense of the public underscore the urgent need for reform. If the country is to move forward and address the myriad challenges it faces, there must be a concerted effort to bridge the gap between the rulers and the ruled, starting with a more transparent and accountable National Assembly. The RMAFC must take a more proactive role in ensuring that the remuneration of public office holders is transparent, justifiable, and in line with the economic realities of the country. Without such reforms, public trust in the legislative arm of government will continue to erode.
Without deliberate and concerted efforts at effecting a radical paradigm shift in this regard, the gulf between the political elite and the ordinary citizen will only widen, further deepening and exacerbating the crisis of governance in Nigeria.
