Nigeria is losing billions of naira in public funds to a cycle of legislative investigations that generate allegations, expose financial leakages and consume public resources, but often end without definitive findings, recovery of funds, prosecution or reforms, raising fresh concerns over the effectiveness of the National Assembly’s oversight functions.
Since the return of democracy in 1999, the National Assembly has launched hundreds of investigations into alleged corruption, revenue leakages, abuse of public funds, regulatory failures and economic sabotage.
Yet, many of the probes have either remained inconclusive, died a natural death at the end of a legislative session, produced reports whose recommendations are ignored or led nowhere, wasting precious time in the process.
The consequence, analysts say, goes beyond the money spent conducting hearings, summoning officials and visiting project sites.
According to them, every abandoned investigation potentially leaves public funds unrecovered, allows institutional failures to persist and weakens the deterrent effect of parliamentary oversight.
‘Abandoned investigations not only undermine the integrity of the legislative process but also weaken public confidence in Nigeria’s anti-corruption efforts,’ Victor Agi, head, Public Affairs, at the Centre for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity, told BusinessDay.
BusinessDay findings show that the issue of endless probes with no definite outcomes has become increasingly visible in the 10th National Assembly, where committees of both chambers have launched high-profile investigations into crude oil theft, alleged N210 trillion discrepancies in the audited accounts of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), the Dangote Refinery versus Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) dispute and the ongoing controversial Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC).
It is even more concerning that, in several recent cases, Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and government officials have failed to appear before committees, delayed submitting requested documents or sent representatives lawmakers deemed unable to answer key questions. The pattern raises concerns about whether parliamentary oversight is fast losing its effectiveness.
The development has prompted threats of arrest, budgetary sanctions and other punitive measures from both chambers.
While lawmakers have in the past argued that the powers of the National Assembly are limited, particularly because it lacks prosecution powers under the constitution, experts say the reluctance of some agencies to comply with parliamentary summons is also an offshoot of a deeper institutional problem, including the perception that many of these investigations end with reports and headlines rather than enforcement, prosecution, recovery of funds or institutional reform.
‘The major concern is the outcome of the probes,’ Bola Onayinka, a lawyer, said in an assessment of legislative investigations.
‘It is one thing to perform oversight functions; it is another thing to influence changes that are required.
‘The legislative oversight is yet to bring about the desired change that Nigerians want to see in governance, as most oversight functions in the National Assembly are mere formalities.’
Probe after probe, accountability remains elusive in oil sector
The petroleum industry provides one of the clearest illustrations of the cycle of investigation, revelation and limited follow-through.
The House Special Committee on Crude Oil Theft and Vandalisation of Pipelines, chaired by Alhassan Ado-Doguwa, was inaugurated in November 2023 to determine the immediate and remote causes of crude theft and recommend remedial measures.
The committee was mandated to investigate the activities of criminal gangs, militia groups, host communities, companies and security agencies involved in oil theft.
By July 2024, the House said Nigeria had lost an average of 437,000 barrels of crude per day between January and July because of theft, vandalism and other criminal activities, translating to more than $10 billion at prevailing prices.
The committee held hearings with oil companies, regulators, security agencies and other stakeholders and visited oil-producing areas.
Doguwa also led the committee to interact with the military and other security agencies, with the committee promising closer collaboration to protect oil infrastructure.
In March 2024, the committee said it had uncovered serious vulnerabilities in the country’s pipeline infrastructure.
Doguwa said there was ‘hardly a week or even a few days without an infraction or damage to an oil and/or gas pipeline’, while expressing concern about alleged opacity at crude export terminals and claims that approvals were sometimes granted to vessels involved in crude theft.
The Senate subsequently joined in the probe in 2024, constituting a 15-member ad-hoc committee on alleged economic sabotage in the petroleum industry, chaired at the time by Senate leader Opeyemi Bamidele.
The panel was mandated to investigate allegations surrounding petroleum imports, product quality, crude supply to local refineries, the operations of the NNPCL, NMDPRA, depots and other elements of the petroleum value chain.
The investigation also brought the Dangote Refinery controversy directly before Parliament.
The House’s investigation into the dispute between Dangote Refinery and petroleum regulators became one of the most closely watched parliamentary probes in the petroleum sector.
The House constituted a joint committee involving its Petroleum Resources committees to investigate allegations of substandard petroleum products, crude shortages to domestic refineries and regulatory failures.
Ikenga Ugochinyere, chairman of the House Committee on Petroleum Resources (Downstream), was one of the key lawmakers leading the investigation.
The probe came amid a bitter dispute between Dangote Refinery and the NMDPRA over the quality of imported petroleum products and access to domestic crude.
The House committee said it would investigate why local refineries, including the Dangote refinery, were unable to obtain adequate crude, examine the operations of standards agencies and conduct a forensic review of the petroleum sector.
The dispute attracted international attention because of its implications for Nigeria’s refining industry.
Dangote had allegedly complained that oil majors were blocking access to locally produced crude, while the regulator argued that production constraints and contractual obligations affected domestic supply.
Nwoko’s $300bn oil theft probe
The Senate’s more recent crude oil theft investigation, chaired by Ned Nwoko, produced another revelation.
Nwoko, at the commencement of the probe, boasted that he would name the power brokers behind crude oil theft in the country, which he has yet to fulfil.
In November 2025, Nwoko presented an interim report to the Senate alleging that Nigeria had lost more than $300 billion in crude oil proceeds through theft, poor measurement practices and other leakages.
The committee recommended stricter crude measurement standards, modern surveillance technology, a special court for crude oil theft and immediate implementation of the Host Communities Development Trust Fund.
It also called for the tracking and recovery of stolen crude proceeds, saying consultants had ‘identified more than $22 billion, $81 billion and $200 billion in unaccounted proceeds from different periods.’
But even before the report could become a basis for action, senators demanded more specifics.
Abdul Ningi pointed out that the committee could trace and document losses but did not have the mandate to recover stolen funds.
‘We can track and trace, but recovery is beyond the powers of the Senate,’ he said.
He further argued that the committee should identify the losses and locations and refer the recovery aspect to the appropriate agencies, particularly the EFCC and ICPC.
Solomon Adeola demanded that the consultants provide the names of companies and individuals allegedly involved.
Adeola noted, ‘The funds mentioned in this report, if put together, we are talking about $300 billion. The consultant should come up with a detailed list of those who carried out these actions.’
Ibrahim Dankwambo similarly asked the final report to identify the specific wells, rigs and locations associated with the alleged losses.
‘The title of the report includes ‘the actors,’ so we must know who they are. It is a complex web involving companies, individuals, and illegal refineries. We need well-by-well and rig-by-rig data,’ he stated.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio directed the committee to continue its work and submit a comprehensive final report, which has yet to be released.
The N210trn NNPCL investigation
The Senate Public Accounts Committee’s investigation of NNPCL produced a similar cycle. The committee, chaired then by Aliyu Wadada, flagged more than N210 trillion in discrepancies in NNPCL’s audited financial statements for 2017 to 2023.
The Senate noted that the figures included about N103 trillion in liabilities and N107 trillion in receivables requiring explanation.
The investigation was further complicated by the failure of NNPCL officials to appear before the committee at an earlier stage.
The committee subsequently issued ultimatums and demanded explanations.
In 2026, the dispute escalated when the committee threatened an arrest warrant against Mele Kyari, former NNPCL group chief executive officer, after he failed to appear.
Kyari, in response to the threat, described it as ‘deeply shocking’, maintaining that he had not deliberately ignored the summons and pledging to cooperate with the investigation.
Fake Agency probe
The House’s current investigation into the alleged activities of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council offers another example of how parliamentary probes can expose serious concerns without necessarily leading to swift action.
The House inaugurated an ad-hoc committee chaired by Yusuf Gagdi in July 2026 to investigate how the alleged unestablished PFIPC became recognised within the federal budget framework and received a budgetary allocation.
The investigation quickly expanded into questions about government documents, financial authorisations and the role of several MDAs.
The committee subsequently said it had uncovered about 29 allegedly forged government documents linked to the council and directed the Inspector-General of Police to produce Adeyemi Adeniyi, its self-acclaimed director-general, before the lawmakers. Adeniyi, however, had yet to appear before the committee as of the time of filing this report.
The committee has also faced delays from agencies that either failed to appear or were slow to provide requested information, prompting fresh ultimatums.
At the outset of the probe, the committee generated significant momentum, with Nigerians eagerly awaiting its findings.
However, the momentum has since faded. The committee’s activities have gone quiet since last week, with no fresh updates, leaving Nigerians waiting for answers.
A history of unfinished investigations
The proliferation of investigations is not peculiar to the 10th National Assembly.
Major investigations that generated substantial allegations in the past also failed to produce lasting consequences.
An ad-hoc committee of the House investigated the National Pension Commission over the withdrawal of N33 billion from a CBN account and other alleged violations. The probe produced revelations but died with the 8th Assembly.
A joint Senate committee investigating alleged N30 trillion revenue leakages in the import and export value chain reported an interim recovery of more than N140 billion, but its final report was not produced before the Assembly expired.
Another Senate ad-hoc committee investigated the $16 billion Egina offshore oil project, including local-content issues and cost variations, but the investigation was inconclusive.
The power sector provided yet another example.
The Senate investigated more than N1.8 trillion in Federal Government interventions in the electricity sector following privatisation. It raised concerns about agreements with power-generation companies and losses in the sector, but the Presidency faulted the findings and recommendations, and the probe remained inconclusive.
The Niger Delta Development Commission investigation became a national spectacle after the then acting managing director, Kemebradikumo Pondei, fainted while being questioned.
The House investigated alleged mismanagement of about N40 billion by the commission’s interim management committee.
But years later, the episode remains more memorable for the drama surrounding the hearing than for any definitive institutional consequence arising from the investigation.
In the past, stakeholders have emphasised that the National Assembly uses its budgetary power to drive accountability.
The House Committee on Public Accounts recently attempted that dynamic by recommending that 22 MDAs be excluded from the 2026 budget due to persistent failure to account for public funds and to comply with legislative oversight.
The committee, chaired by Bamidele Salam, said the affected agencies had failed to respond adequately to audit queries despite repeated invitations.
That move is significant because it uses one of Parliament’s strongest constitutional levers, control of appropriations, rather than relying solely on summonses and public reprimands.
But even the routine conduct of oversight has exposed the problem.
In March 2026, a House Finance Committee hearing into revenue-generating agencies was reportedly stalled because agencies arrived without sufficient documents, with lawmakers spending valuable hearing time dealing with the absence of basic materials rather than examining revenue figures.
Cost of abandoned probes
Experts say the repeated failure to follow through on investigations has weakened the deterrent value of committee invitations and raised questions about the effectiveness of legislative oversight.
Aliyu Ilias, development economist and Chief Executive of CSA Advisory, said, ‘In fact, the national assembly, for me, is not getting its oversight job right.’
He stressed that legislation is only part of the legislature’s responsibility, arguing that rigorous oversight, particularly of public spending, is central to its mandate.
While discussing the need for independent scrutiny of government expenditure, Ilias said, ‘I think what they are saying can only be believed by those who are saying it because the fact remains that transparency is key.’
He added that the National Assembly should be the institution independently verifying government claims because of its oversight responsibility.
Further commenting, Victor Agi said the trend was particularly concerning because the legislature, which should lead by example in promoting transparency and integrity, was instead allowing critical investigations to fade from public attention.
He said this was happening amid growing concerns that some probes were deliberately abandoned following alleged inducements from heads of agencies or ministries under investigation.
The implications, he said, extend beyond individual committees failing to complete their assignments.
‘The issue is not simply that a committee failed to finish its assignment. Every inconclusive probe leaves unanswered questions about public money, weakens deterrence and tells citizens that even when wrongdoing is exposed, there may be no consequence.’