Tinubu Removes Uzoka-Anite Over ₦1.15tr Capital Funds Row

Tinubu Removes Uzoka-Anite Over N1.15tr Capital Funds Row

Tinubu redeploys Doris Uzoka-Anite after ₦1.15tr in approved capital funds were exposed as undisbursed during a tense House budget hearing.

Atlantic Post

March 4, 2026

4–7 minutes

Atlantic Post, budget crisis, Doris Uzoka-Anite, featured, Fiscal Accountability, forensic audit, House of Representatives, Public Procurement, Taiwo Oyedele, Tinubu Administration

Bola Tinubu Removes Finance Minister After ₦1.15tr Exposé
Names Taiwo Oyedele as Replacement
Doris Uzoka-Anite Redeployed After Questions by Alex Mascot Ikwechegh and Exchanges With Wale Edun

ABUJA, Nigeria — President Tinubu has moved swiftly after a parliamentary showdown exposed an apparent breakdown in the flow of capital funding.

The presidency announced the redeployment of the Minister of State who managed disbursements and the nomination of a seasoned tax and fiscal policy specialist to replace her.

Observers say the sequence looks like accountability in action but leaves one urgent question unresolved: where is the ₦1.15 trillion earmarked for capital projects, and who will answer for its non-release.

The spark that lit the fuse

On 25 February, a member of the House Appropriation Committee confronted the finance team with what he described as a startling paper trail.

The lawmaker listed loans, donor commitments, and internally approved capital allocations. These totaled sums in the billions. The lawmaker particularly singled out ₦1.15 trillion of approved capital funds that had not been disbursed.

When he asked why capital projects across the country were showing zero execution, the question halted the hearing. The substantive finance minister redirected detailed questions about disbursement to his junior minister.

That exchange forced a follow-up. The Minister of State confirmed the figure. Yet, he said pre-disbursement conditions had not been satisfied. Critics saw either negligence in approvals or an opaque withholding of funds.

The presidency acts and names a technocrat

Exactly seven days after the explosive hearing the presidency issued a statement announcing a cabinet adjustment.

Dr Doris Uzoka-Anite is to be redeployed to Budget and National Planning. Mr Taiwo Oyedele, the chair of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, was nominated to be Minister of State for Finance.

The official release made no explicit link to the House showdown. But the timing is hard to ignore and political operators are already connecting the dots.

Who is Taiwo Oyedele and why does his nomination matter

Oyedele is a technocrat widely linked with the administration’s tax overhaul agenda.

He spent more than two decades at PwC. During this time, he rose to senior leadership in fiscal policy and tax. He also chaired the presidential panel.

This panel proposed cutting the number of overlapping taxes, creating a centralised tax architecture, and seeking to lift Nigeria’s tax-to-GDP ratio.

His nomination signals a tilt toward technical fixes to revenue mobilisation and stronger controls over fiscal flows.

It also raises expectations that the new appointments will be accompanied by tighter scrutiny of how approved funds are released.

The legal and fiscal implications of ₦1.15 trillion at zero disbursement

If funds were lawfully approved by the legislature and the executive then failed to deliver them to executing ministries the matter is not merely a budgeting lapse. It can constitute mismanagement of public funds and, depending on the facts, misappropriation.

That is the view expressed by the lawmaker who exposed the gap.

Beyond criminal consequences, failure to release capital appropriations erodes public service delivery, stalls projects that create jobs and deepens distrust in public institutions.

The immediate fiscal consequence is that headline revenue gains do not translate into visible infrastructure, which in turn undermines the social licence for difficult economic reforms.

Government defence and the pre-disbursement argument

The Minister of State told legislators that standard pre-disbursement conditions had not been met by some ministries. That is a legitimate point. Governments must verify project readiness and compliance with procurement rules before releasing funds.

But the committee then asked the simple follow-up: which ministry satisfied the conditions and still did not receive funding? The minister could not name one.

That failure to produce a single example shifted the debate from procedural caution to administrative confusion or worse.

If conditions were unmet then the approvals are questionable. If conditions were met and payments were not made then the accountability chain is broken.

What the reshuffle does and does not settle

Moving a minister after a public accountability hearing delivers a political message. It says questions will be noticed and that failures will have consequences. But it does not answer the central fiscal question.

The transfer of a minister to another ministry does not recover funds, nor does a nomination to the senate establish who authorised approvals or who oversaw execution.

What Nigerians now need are three concrete steps.

• A forensic audit of the ₦1.15 trillion tranche, published in full and showing line by line where approvals were made and where funds were directed.

• Immediate public disclosure of the disbursement protocols is needed. These protocols are cited as the reason for non-release. This includes a list of ministries that failed or passed those checks.

• A firm timetable for the senate confirmation of the new nominee is needed. There should also be a special appropriation committee review. This review can recommend prosecutions if the audit shows malfeasance.

These steps will determine whether the reshuffle is a meaningful reform or merely a short-term political fix.

What to watch next

The senate confirmation of the new nominee will test the president’s intent. It will also examine the legislature’s appetite for accountability.

Equally important is whether the Finance Ministry will publish a transparent register of disbursements and project status updates.

The Civil society and reform-minded media should press for the release of the audit trail. They should also advocate for procurement records linked to the capital allocations.

If those records remain sealed, popular frustration will grow and trust in fiscal policy will be further eroded.

For ordinary citizens the stakes are simple and immediate. The ₦1.15 trillion represents roads, clinics, schools and offices that were budgeted but remain unbuilt.

If the funds exist and were approved, they must either be delivered to projects. Alternatively, the names of those responsible for their retention should be placed before investigators.

Bottom line

A single parliamentary intervention exposed a worrying gap between approved capital and executed projects. The presidency responded with a reshuffle and a technocratic nomination. That is a start.

The hard work now is forensic. Only a transparent accounting will convert a political moment into lasting fiscal reform. It will also restore the link between revenue gains and public goods.