In September 2025, Nigeria saw yet another instance of public funds being handed over under a shroud of ambiguity. Procurement records indicate that billions of naira were awarded to an entity identified only as “Permanent Secretary” — with no company name, no public explanation, and no apparent accountability trail. For a nation grappling with endemic procurement opacity, this is more than a bureaucratic slip; it is a structural failure.
The very term “Permanent Secretary” is meant to signify a career civil servant, a neutral administrator ensuring continuity and compliance within government ministries. It is not meant to be a stand-in for a private entity, a contractor, or a business front. And yet, here we are: billions released, records vague, and questions mounting. Who authorized this? Which Permanent Secretary? Under which procurement exemption? How was oversight maintained?
This is not about accusing any individual of wrongdoing — it is about interrogating the system that allows such ambiguity to flourish. Public procurement in Nigeria is governed by clear frameworks: contracts must be awarded transparently, companies must be properly registered, and approvals documented. When these steps are bypassed or left opaque, the risk is twofold: mismanagement of funds and erosion of public trust.
Transparency is not a bureaucratic luxury; it is a legal and moral imperative. Nigeria has experimented with open contracting initiatives, but as this episode shows, declaring transparency on paper is insufficient when implementation is weak. Open contracting without consequences is, at best, political theatre. At worst, it becomes a conduit for circumventing accountability entirely.
Moreover, this is not just an Ekiti problem. The architecture of procurement in every state allows similar scenarios: insufficient verification, lack of public audit trails, and exemptions that are rarely scrutinized. This makes it easy for opaque arrangements to slip through unnoticed until the media or civil society uncovers them. What happens when no one is watching? The “Permanent Secretary” becomes both the gatekeeper and the beneficiary — a clear conflict of interest embedded in policy.
Civil society groups, lawmakers, and anti-graft agencies must ask the hard questions: Are existing procurement exemptions being abused? How are contracts verified? What mechanisms exist to ensure that a career civil servant cannot, even unintentionally, be cast as a contractor in public records? Answers to these questions are not optional; they are foundational to rebuilding public trust.
Nigeria’s future depends on a procurement system that is not only transparent but enforceable. When billions of naira are on the line, ambiguity is not a minor flaw — it is a systemic threat. The public deserves clarity, the law demands it, and the moral obligation of those in power is clear: do not allow the “Permanent Secretary” to be a shadow in the ledger.
The time for paperwork excuses is over. It is time for records that name real entities, contracts signed by accountable individuals, and procurement processes that can withstand scrutiny. Until then, every citizen should ask: Who is the ‘Permanent Secretary’ doing business with Ekiti State?
Babatunde Akinsola ✔
Godwin Okafor is the Publisher & CEO of Naija247news Media Group LLC, an independent investigative news platform delivering accurate, data-driven reporting on Nigerian and global politics, economy, finance, and business. Founded in October 2010, Naija247news specializes in developmental journalism, providing timely insights and analysis to readers across Nigeria and the diaspora.
View Archive →
