A report by the US Department of State has alleged a lack of transparency in Nigeria?s public procurement contracts, categorizing it among 32 other African countries without any significant progress in the fiscal policy space.

But the Bureau of Public Procurement, BPP, in a swift reaction, described the allegation as false and lacking in merit.

However, in its 2025 Fiscal Transparency Report, the US noted that while Nigeria had made progress in making budget documents and debt obligations publicly available, the country?s failure to disclose information on public procurement contracts raised concerns about accountability and good governance.

The report, which highlighted significant areas for improvement in the country?s fiscal transparency, also indicted African countries, such as Egypt, Algeria, Libya, Cameroon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone, The Gambia, Chad, Angola, Gabon, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Lesotho, Sao Tome and Principe, Burundi, and Tanzania, among others.

The report also indicted the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation, considered the supreme audit institution, of consistently failing to publish comprehensive budget execution, despite having access to the entire executed budget, and attributed the Auditor-General?s failure to lack of institutional independence.

The report said: ?During the review period, government made budget documents widely and easily accessible to the public, including online. Budget documents provided a substantially complete picture of government?s planned expenditures and revenue and were generally reliable.

?The government made information on debt obligations, including major state-owned enterprises, publicly available. The Sovereign Wealth Fund had a sound behalf framework and disclosed its source of funding and general approach to withdrawals.

?The government specified in law the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses and followed existing regulations in practice.?

However, it said the ?supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence or publish substantive reports but did have access to the entire executed budget. The government did not publish accessible information on public procurement contracts.??

On steps needed to improve transparency, the US Department of State said there is need for government to ensure that supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence and publish audit reports of the government?s executed budgets as well as make information on public procurement contracts readily and easily accessible.

Meanwhile, the report found that of the 139 countries (and the Palestinian Authority) evaluated, 71 governments met minimum fiscal transparency requirements and 69 did not. Of these 69, 26, however, made significant progress toward meeting the minimum fiscal transparency requirements.

According to the US, the Fiscal Transparency Report fosters business enabling environments and promotes international macro-economic stability by strengthening public financial management to reduce the risk of corruption and unfair practices in international markets.

It advanced internationally recognized industry standards for extraction industries to improve market access, reduces the risk of financial crimes, such as money laundering and terrorist financing and requires publishing of debt data to counter predatory lending and aggressive resource extraction practices.

The Department maintained that budget information, including budget proposal, enacted budget and end-of-year report should be widely and easily accessible and complete documents should be available from government offices or libraries and widely available government publications or via mass media channels to be considered to have met the minimum fiscal transparency requirements.

?Budget documents should be disseminated within a reasonable period. A ?reasonable period? generally corresponds to, at least one month before the start of the fiscal year and before budget approval by the legislature for the executive budget proposal, within three months of enactment for the enacted budget, and within 12 months of the end of the fiscal year for the end-of-year report.

?Information on government debt obligations, including from state-owned enterprises, should also be publicly available on a public-facing website and updated at least annually, including aggregate, government-backed debt for major state-owned enterprises. The enacted budget and end-of-year report should be available online. ?If a government had a sovereign wealth fund, it should disclose its source of funding and general approach to withdrawals. If a government had a sovereign wealth fund, it should be established in a sound legal framework.

?Publicly available budget documents should provide a substantially full picture of a government?s planned expenditures and revenue, including natural resource revenues. Budgets should include expenditures broken down by ministry and revenues broken down by source and type.

?Budget documents should detail allocations to and earnings from state-owned enterprises. If not, such information should be available in other public documents.

?Major state-owned enterprises should have publicly available audited financial statements. A published budget that does not include significant cash or non-cash resources, including foreign aid, would not be considered substantially complete.

?The supreme audit institution should meet international standards of independence, audit the executed budget, and verify the annual financial statements. The results of such audits, to include an executive summary with findings or recommendations by the supreme audit institution, should be published within a reasonable period (generally within 12 months of the dissemination of the end-of-year report).

?The supreme audit institution should be established in an appropriate and effective legal framework that spells out in detail its independence, and beginning this review period, should have direct access to the executed budget.

?For countries with significant natural resource extraction sectors, criteria and procedures for the contracting and licensing of natural resource extraction should be publicly available and codified in law or regulation. The basic parameters of concessions and contracts should be made publicly available after the decision.

?Such information should include the geographic area covered by the contract or license, the resource being developed, the duration of the contract, and the company to which the contract or license is awarded. Basic information on public procurement contracts should be publicly available,?? the report stated.

Reacting to the report yesterday, the Bureau of Public Procurement, BPP, debunked it, describing the allegation as false and lacking in merit.

Director-General of the Bureau, Dr. Adebowale Adedokun, said reforms embarked upon by President Bola Tinubu?s government have sanitized the process and brought transparency and accountability to the system.

The BPP D-G said within one and half years he had been in office, awards of contracts followed due process and were advertised in accordance with the Procurement Act, adding that the bidding process had been transparent.

He also said anti-graft agencies, such as the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, the Police and the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, are currently investigating and prosecuting those that had contravened the Public Procurement Act.

He argued that the US report might not have taken into consideration the reforms being undertaken by Tinubu?s government and might have also not taken time to look at recent developments.

The BPP boss said: ?Prior to his (Tinubu) assumption of office, of course, there were issues around that, but since he took over and since he undertook a procurement reform, things have changed. For instance, in terms of transparency, contracts are being advertised.

?There?s bench-marking, price intelligence, government is bench-marking through Bureau of Public Procurement. Government has issued circulars in terms of ensuring transparency and accountability in the procurement process.

?You could also see that we are now engaging the civil society in terms of monitoring and evaluation. We?re discussing with professional bodies on ensuring that there?s value for money at all times. BPP as a regulatory body has seen a lot of improvement since my appointment as D-G in the last one year plus.

?A lot of reforms are ongoing in terms of issues of advertisement, issues of de-centralization of the procurement processes. FEC (Federal Executive Council) approval limits have been raised significantly high to give all government agencies the opportunity to run their procurement without any hindrances by government.

?Again BPP, as an institution, has been given freedom to conduct monitoring and evaluation, to conduct procurement audits nationwide. So the argument that Nigeria is not being transparent and accountable in procurement processes is not correct, based on reforms that are ongoing currently.

?Much more, government has committed itself to issues of electronic government procurement, digitalization of these procurement processes. And we are on it right now, trying to make sure we transit to electronic government procurement.

?We are also taking into consideration affirmative action; government is being transparent by getting women, youth and those with disability to come into procurement processes. And the law is also being reviewed to accommodate all the gaps, challenges that were identified.

?Again, publishing of contracts that everybody would see is something new, now that contractors are writing petitions to BPP and we are reversing award of contracts that were wrongly awarded to agencies.

?Only a few days ago, or a few weeks ago, even Nigeria advertised for a procurement that was won by a foreign firm which owners have never entered Nigeria. Is that not transparency and accountability? Contracts were advertised in Nigeria, companies abroad bidded without knowing anybody in Nigeria, without entering the country and they won and are executing contracts. They are being paid as at when due.

So, if in the global space, they are saying things have not improved, I have just given you an example of how foreign companies bidded for projects in Nigeria. They have not stepped into this country. They submitted online, bidded online, got their award letter online and they are executing it without stepping into Nigeria.

?So, their position may have been in the past, but not currently. Nigeria is on the threshold of total transparency and accountability in its procurement system, including human capital development.

?For the first time in over 10 years, Nigeria is spending huge resources to enhance and build capacity of procurement officers nationwide and giving them confidence to report any infraction in any procurement processes.

?Also, I have contractors who are now confident, who are now reporting to BPP directly about infringements in government agencies in their procurement processes. And we are reverting where somebody won legitimately, where they have been denied, we are reversing it in their favour.

?So, a lot is going on. And don?t forget, ICPC, EFCC, the Police, Code of Conduct, are currently investigating and prosecuting a number of people who have contravened the Public Procurement Act so far.

?Yes, we can do better, but have we done better? We have done better in the last one and a half years.? (Vanguard)

Update news