 |
| Femi Falana |
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has strongly criticised the recent proposal to increase salaries for political office holders in Nigeria, describing it as “highly insensitive” at a time when millions of citizens are grappling with severe economic hardship.
Speaking in an interview on Channels Television, Falana expressed concern that the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) is prioritising the welfare of political elites while a vast majority of Nigerians continue to struggle with poverty and unemployment.
“At this point, proposing higher wages for political office holders is not only tone-deaf but also unfair to the majority battling severe economic pressure,” Falana said.
He referenced recent data from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), which indicates that over 133 million Nigerians—more than half the population—live in multidimensional poverty, facing challenges ranging from limited access to basic education and healthcare to inadequate housing and income.
Falana argued that, in such a context, increasing salaries for lawmakers, ministers, and other political office holders sends the wrong message, suggesting that the government is more concerned with elite comfort than with addressing the day-to-day struggles of ordinary citizens.
RMAFC’s Defense
In response to criticisms, RMAFC Chairman Mohammed Shehu defended the proposed pay adjustments, insisting that political office holders’ salaries have not kept pace with the scope and responsibility of their roles. According to Shehu, the President’s salary of ₦1.5 million monthly and the compensation for federal ministers, currently less than ₦1 million per month, have remained largely unchanged since 2008.
Shehu argued that compared to heads of federal agencies, political office holders now face expanded workloads and heightened responsibilities, necessitating a review of remuneration to reflect the evolving demands of governance.
“We are not just considering salary increments for the sake of luxury; we are reviewing compensation in line with responsibilities, workload, and evolving economic realities,” he said.
RMAFC also announced that it is reviewing Nigeria’s revenue-sharing formula, which has remained largely unchanged since 1992. The commission stated that this review aims to better reflect current economic realities and reduce the overreliance of states on allocations from the federal government.
Labour and Civil Society Pushback
Despite RMAFC’s defense, the proposal has faced significant backlash from labour unions, civil society groups, and public commentators. The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has explicitly rejected the plan, arguing that politicians already enjoy considerable hidden allowances, including housing, transportation, security, and other benefits not reflected in official salary figures.
Labour leaders contend that increasing base salaries for political office holders at a time when food inflation, fuel price hikes, and energy shortages continue to strain households is inequitable.
“It is unacceptable that while ordinary Nigerians struggle to make ends meet, the government is considering enriching politicians whose allowances already eclipse their base salaries,” said a spokesperson for the NLC.
Civil society activists have also weighed in, noting that the move could worsen public perception of political elites and fuel anger and distrust toward government institutions. For many, the proposal underscores a disconnect between policymakers and the socioeconomic realities faced by millions of Nigerians.
Economic Context
Nigeria is currently facing a multi-layered economic crisis, with inflation hovering around double digits, rising unemployment, and a growing population of vulnerable citizens struggling to afford basic necessities. The NBS report shows that over half of Nigeria’s population lives in multidimensional poverty, meaning they are deprived in multiple areas including education, health, housing, and income simultaneously.
Experts argue that in such a climate, proposals to increase political salaries are politically and socially risky. Instead of raising politicians’ pay, some economists suggest that resources should be redirected toward poverty alleviation, job creation, and public service improvements.
Public Sentiment
The proposed pay hike has also drawn attention on social media and news outlets, with citizens expressing frustration over what they perceive as a mismatch of priorities. Many Nigerians feel that elected officials should lead by example, demonstrating fiscal restraint in difficult economic times rather than increasing their compensation.
Analysts warn that failure to address these perceptions could erode public trust in government institutions, undermine confidence in democratic governance, and exacerbate societal tensions.
RMAFC’s Revenue-Sharing Review
Beyond the salary issue, RMAFC’s announcement that it is reviewing Nigeria’s revenue-sharing formula could have long-term implications for state and federal finances. The current formula, largely unchanged since 1992, determines how federal revenue is distributed among the central government, states, and local councils.
Officials suggest that the review is necessary to ensure that revenue allocation reflects current population, economic activity, and development needs, potentially giving states greater fiscal independence while reducing dependence on federal allocations.
While this review has been welcomed in principle, many stakeholders argue that timing and optics are crucial. Undertaking such reviews while simultaneously proposing salary hikes for political office holders could be perceived as tone-deaf by a struggling populace.
The debate over proposed salary increases for Nigeria’s political office holders highlights a broader tension between governance, fiscal policy, and social responsibility. On one side, RMAFC argues that salaries must reflect responsibilities and long-standing stagnation. On the other, critics—including human rights lawyers like Femi Falana (SAN), labour unions, and civil society groups—view the proposal as insensitive and unfair given Nigeria’s worsening economic situation.
With over 133 million Nigerians living in multidimensional poverty, public opinion is likely to weigh heavily on this issue, and government officials must carefully consider the political, social, and ethical implications of their decisions.
As RMAFC moves forward with its review of salaries and revenue-sharing, the coming weeks may prove pivotal in shaping public trust, the allocation of national resources, and the ongoing debate about equity, governance, and fiscal responsibility in Nigeria.
0 Comments