The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has sued the Independent National Electoral Commission over its failure to account for more than N126.46bn appropriated for electoral operations, which it alleged was diverted, lost, mismanaged or otherwise unaccounted for.
SERAP is seeking an order of mandamus compelling INEC to disclose details of the expenditure, utilisation and disbursement of the funds, which were meant for the procurement of ballot boxes, electoral devices and materials, result sheets, vehicles and accreditation devices, as well as audit and consultancy services.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2507/2026, was filed last week at the Federal High Court in Abuja, according to a statement issued by SERAP Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, on Sunday.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.
However, the organisation said the allegations were contained in the 2023 audited report of the Auditor-General of the Federation, published on August 7, 2026. The alleged infractions covered periods between January and December 2022 and, in some cases, extended to December 31, 2023.
In the suit filed by its lawyers, Kolawole Oluwadare, Kehinde Oyewumi and Andrew Nwankwo, SERAP is seeking “an order of mandamus to direct and compel INEC to promptly disclose detailed information on the expenditure, utilisation and disbursement of over ₦126.46 billion appropriated for electoral operations, including the procurement of election materials, equipment, and vehicles.”
It is also seeking “an order of mandamus to direct and compel INEC to disclose a full financial and documentary account of the over ₦126 billion appropriated for electoral operations, including amounts released and paid, payment beneficiaries, details of contractors and their beneficial owners.”
SERAP argued, “Electoral resources are public resources. INEC must be able to account for every naira, demonstrate that it was lawfully spent and show that it served the purposes for which it was appropriated. These allegations are particularly disturbing given the constitutional importance of INEC and the fact that the expenditure concerns resources appropriated for the administration of Nigeria’s electoral system.
“With the 2027 general elections approaching, transparency and accountability in the management of these funds are essential to safeguarding public confidence in the electoral process and ensuring that resources intended to support credible elections are properly utilised.
“These findings by the Auditor-General suggest a grave violation of the public trust and the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended), national anti-corruption laws, and the country’s obligations under the UN Convention against Corruption.
“Democracy requires an informed citizenry. That principle is directly relevant to public expenditure by an electoral management body: citizens are entitled to know how resources entrusted to INEC for the conduct of elections have been used.”
According to the suit, the Auditor-General reported that INEC “irregularly paid” more than ₦112bn (₦112,155,597,845.00) “for ballot boxes, electoral devices, items and materials without competitive bidding or a BPP Certificate of No Objection. The Auditor-General found ‘no evidence that the items were procured.’ The ‘contracts were awarded to companies whose competences, experience, capacities, addresses and factory locations were unknown.’ He is concerned that the money ‘may have been diverted.’ He wants the money recovered.”
The suit also alleged that INEC “paid over ₦1 billion [₦1,058,925,000.00] for Toyota Prado TXL 2021 Model without advertisement, competitive bidding, bid evaluation or a BPP Certificate of No Objection. The Auditor-General fears that the money ‘may have been lost’ and that the contracts ‘may have been inflated.’”
On payments for electoral materials, SERAP stated that INEC “paid over ₦3 billion [₦3,136,806,050.00] to four contractors for ballot guides, sensitive materials and result sheets before the contracts were awarded, with no evidence of payment. The Auditor-General is concerned that the money ‘may have been diverted.’ He wants the money recovered and remitted to the treasury.”
The organisation further alleged that INEC “paid over ₦9 billion [₦9,245,965,502.60] for 22 contracts for similar goods and services”, with the contracts “split to circumvent procurement procedures and awarded on the same day.”
It said the Auditor-General reported that the money “may have been lost” and that “the payment may have been made for items not supplied.”
On payments to accounting firms, SERAP stated that INEC “paid over ₦129 million [₦129,375,000.00] to 19 accounting firms for financial audit services without evidence of utilisation or requests and expenditure by the consultants. The Auditor-General raised concerns that the money ‘may have been diverted.’ He wants the money recovered and remitted to the treasury.”
The suit also stated that INEC “paid over ₦504 million [₦504,492,641.00] for accreditation devices without due procurement process. The ‘APG had expired before the security licence key was delivered and the software was valid for only four months, raising questions about economy and value for money.’ The Auditor-General also raised concerns that the money ‘may have been diverted.’”
On other alleged procurement irregularities, SERAP said INEC “paid over ₦235 million [₦235,103,000.00] to unqualified contractors for sleeping mats and digital archiving. The Auditor-General identified ‘serious concerns regarding the eligibility and capacity of the contractors’, and raised concerns that the money ‘may have been lost.’ He wants the money recovered.”
SERAP is asking the court to compel INEC to provide evidence of how the funds were spent and establish the whereabouts of the electoral materials allegedly procured.
The suit further stated, “INEC should provide documentary and physical evidence that the over ₦112 billion identified as ‘irregularly paid’ was actually used to procure the electoral materials concerned and account for the present location and status of those materials. Nigerians have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in the public interest, by their public institutions including INEC.”
SERAP is also seeking an order directing INEC to preserve the assets covered by the Auditor-General’s findings, arguing that, “INEC should be directed to ensure that no electoral equipment, material or other public asset covered by the Auditor-General’s findings is disposed of, transferred, destroyed, written off or otherwise dealt with in a manner that could frustrate transparency and accountability.”
The organisation further called for the disclosure of the identities of those involved in the transactions, stating: “The names of the contractors, companies, suppliers and consultants who irregularly received public funds, as well as any INEC officials or other public officials who authorised, processed, facilitated or benefited from the transactions should be widely published.”
It added, “Nigerians have the right to know whether the contracted goods and services were actually supplied; whether payments corresponded with goods and services actually delivered; and whether contracts were deliberately split to circumvent procurement requirements.”
SERAP also cited constitutional and international provisions in support of its case.
The suit stated: “SERAP notes that Section 15(5) of the Nigerian Constitution requires public institutions, including INEC, to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power. Section 13 of the Nigerian Constitution imposes clear responsibility on INEC to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of Chapter 2 of the Constitution.”
It further argued that “Nigeria’s obligations under the UN Convention against Corruption require INEC to adopt preventive anti-corruption policies and transparent public procurement and public financial management.”
The suit also cited “Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 13 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party” as provisions that protect citizens’ rights to participate in public affairs.