A civic advocacy organisation, AdvoKC Foundation, has raised fresh concerns about the activities of Nigeria’s 10th National Assembly, accusing the federal legislature of executive interference, weak oversight, budgetary irregularities and insufficient transparency.

In a statement signed by its Communications Manager, Luqman Adamu, the organisation alleged that lawmakers had not sufficiently exercised their constitutional oversight responsibilities and were giving greater attention to executive-backed initiatives while several bills it considers to be in the public interest remained pending.

AdvoKC cited the proposed state police legislation as an example of a measure it believes has moved rapidly through the legislative process, while raising questions over the progress of the National Health Act Amendment Bill and the proposed Special Seats Bill for women.

The foundation also questioned the executive's decision to present its own version of the Special Seats Bill, arguing that the development raised concerns about the legislature's independence in driving legislation on issues of public interest. These are, however, positions advanced by AdvoKC and should not be treated as an independent finding that the National Assembly has failed in its constitutional duties.

Another issue highlighted by the organisation was President Bola Tinubu's recent working vacation in Europe. AdvoKC criticised the National Assembly's handling of the President's absence and argued that Section 145(1) of the 1999 Constitution should have been more closely applied.

The Presidency announced on August 30 that Tinubu had left Nigeria for a three-week annual vacation in Europe. On September 21, it announced that his stay had been extended by a few days, while stating that the President continued to direct government affairs and had delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to represent him at some official engagements. Tinubu eventually departed Paris for Nigeria on September 29.

AdvoKC particularly criticised Senate President Godswill Akpabio over comments concerning the President's absence, arguing that such statements did not adequately address constitutional concerns surrounding presidential absence.

The organisation also turned its attention to the National Assembly's resumption on September 29, describing the legislature's handling of the 2025 budget as another indication of what it considers inadequate legislative productivity.

The Senate and House of Representatives did, in fact, approve another extension of the implementation period for the capital component of the 2025 Appropriation Act on September 29. The deadline was moved from September 30 to December 31, 2026, marking the fourth extension of the capital-budget implementation period.

The previous deadlines had been moved from December 31, 2025, to March 31, 2026, then to June 30 and September 30. The National Assembly said the latest extension was intended to give ministries, departments and agencies additional time to complete ongoing capital projects and utilise funds already appropriated.

President Tinubu subsequently signed the amended 2025 Appropriation Act into law, formally extending the capital implementation period to December 31, 2026. The Presidency said the move would allow government agencies to complete ongoing capital projects without disrupting critical programmes.

AdvoKC, however, views the repeated extensions differently. The organisation described the continued adjustments as a concern for fiscal predictability and argued that repeated extensions could weaken effective legislative scrutiny of public spending.

The foundation also raised concerns about access to information concerning the National Assembly itself. According to AdvoKC, it submitted a Freedom of Information request in January seeking details of the legislature's statutory budget allocation and budget-performance records but did not receive the response it expected.

The organisation said it subsequently pursued legal action in an effort to compel the release of the requested information.

AdvoKC also disclosed that it submitted another FOI request in June seeking attendance, absence, apology and voting-participation records of lawmakers. The organisation said the request was eventually rejected on the grounds that such records constituted evidence of legislative proceedings and therefore required authorisation from the Senate President, Speaker or relevant committee chairman before disclosure.

The disagreement over lawmakers' attendance records is not entirely new. In August, AdvoKC publicly criticised the National Assembly over what it described as a pattern of frequent recesses and a lack of public access to attendance information. The foundation said its June request covered the first three legislative years of the 10th Assembly, from June 2023 to June 2026.

Speaking on the latest concerns, AdvoKC Project Director Habib Sheidu said the National Assembly was elected to represent Nigerians and should maintain an independent legislative role rather than function as an extension of the executive arm.

The organisation said it intends to continue with its legal efforts over the FOI requests and urged Nigerians to pay closer attention to the activities and accountability of elected lawmakers.

AdvoKC also called on the judiciary to uphold the rule of law as its case concerning access to National Assembly information proceeds.

The latest criticism adds to an ongoing debate over legislative transparency, budget implementation and the relationship between Nigeria's executive and legislative arms of government. While AdvoKC has presented its concerns as evidence of weaknesses within the 10th National Assembly, the legislature's stated position on the budget extension is that the additional time is intended to facilitate completion of ongoing projects and ensure that already-approved capital funds are utilised.