Advocacy group says disbursements formed part of N55.62bn constituency project funding, urges evidence-based investigation of alleged irregularities
The Transparency Advocacy for Development Initiative (TADI) has defended payments totalling N10.69 billion made to businessman Kenneth Ifekudu between April 2023 and 2026, insisting that the transactions were processed through established government financial procedures.
The organisation said the payments formed part of the N55.62 billion disbursed by the Nigerian Stored Products Research Institute (NSPRI) for projects across 221 constituencies, adding that the transactions underwent government financial processing and verification.
In a statement issued on Saturday, TADI Executive Director, Yomi David, said the Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS) processed the transactions, while the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) carried out verification.
The organisation's response followed a publication by SecretsReporters concerning the payments, which prompted questions about the disbursements and the implementation of constituency intervention projects.
TADI maintained that payments processed through government financial systems were subject to procurement approvals, contract documentation, payment certificates and evidence of project execution. It also cited internal audit checks and verification of tax, pension and other statutory obligations.
According to the organisation, the existence of payments to contractors should be assessed alongside the relevant contracts, project records and implementation evidence rather than relying solely on transaction summaries.
Breakdown of payments to companies
Providing a breakdown of the transactions, TADI said three Diamond companies received N4.28 billion, three Gold Reef companies received N3.68 billion, while two Gorrion companies received N2.73 billion through 63 payments.
The figures collectively amount to N10.69 billion.
The organisation separately listed Ken Vic Moore Biz Ventures as having received N1.89 billion through nine payments, noting that the amount was outside the N10.69 billion under discussion.
TADI said the payments were associated with constituency intervention projects allocated to federal research institutes through the national budget.
The projects, according to the group, included road construction, borehole provision, solar-powered streetlights, solar dryers and the supply of agricultural inputs.
It identified projects across Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Sokoto, Imo, Edo and Bauchi states, stating that members of the National Assembly nominated the interventions before they were processed through government procurement and financial systems.
The organisation argued that NSPRI's responsibility was to implement projects appropriated to it in the national budget, rather than independently determine which projects should be included in the budget.
TADI explains similar payments to contractors
Addressing concerns over payments of similar amounts to different contractors, the advocacy group attributed the pattern to the use of lotting and framework contracting arrangements.
It argued that projects of comparable scope undertaken in different communities could attract similar contract sums, depending on their specifications and implementation requirements.
To support its explanation, TADI cited transactions dated November 20, 2023, September 23, 2024, and September 11, 2025, relating to road construction, solar-powered boreholes, streetlights, solar dryers and agricultural products.
The group maintained that similarities in payment amounts did not, on their own, establish that the transactions were fraudulent or otherwise improper.
It also cautioned against drawing definitive conclusions from brief descriptions on the GovSpend portal, saying the summaries did not necessarily provide the full details of individual contracts, project locations, quantities or supporting documentation.
According to TADI, a proper assessment of the transactions would require examination of the underlying contracts and relevant implementation records.
Group defends NSPRI executive director
TADI also defended NSPRI Executive Director, Professor Lateef Oladimeji Sanni, who assumed office on May 1, 2023, against allegations suggesting that he personally distributed billions of naira.
The organisation said such claims failed to adequately account for the established procedures through which government payments are processed and verified.
It maintained that the transactions should be examined within the context of the relevant budgetary allocations, procurement arrangements and financial control mechanisms.
However, the organisation's defence centred on the existence of administrative procedures and verification processes, which would need to be considered alongside project-specific evidence in assessing whether the funds were properly applied.
TADI calls for evidence-based investigation
While defending the payments, the advocacy group urged SecretsReporters to refer any evidence of projects that were not executed to the appropriate anti-corruption and procurement authorities for investigation.
It specifically identified the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) as institutions to which relevant evidence could be submitted.
The call placed emphasis on the need to establish whether the projects associated with the payments were delivered in accordance with their contractual terms and public procurement requirements.
The controversy has highlighted the importance of transparency in constituency intervention spending, particularly where public funds are channelled through government agencies to contractors for projects spread across multiple communities.
While TADI maintains that the payments followed due process, the ultimate assessment of their propriety depends on the supporting financial records, procurement documentation and evidence of project execution.
The organisation's position is that similarities in payments and abbreviated transaction descriptions should not, by themselves, be treated as proof of wrongdoing. It has nevertheless called for any evidence of unexecuted projects to be presented to the relevant authorities for further examination.