The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) over “the failure to investigate the allegations that certain lawmakers improperly removed key sections on electronic transmission of election results from the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill during plenary, and unlawfully altered some aspects of the tax reform bills.”

In the suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/634/2026 filed last week at the Federal High Court in Abuja, SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel the CCB to probe the allegations that certain lawmakers improperly removed key sections on electronic transmission of election results from the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill.”

SERAP is seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel the CCB to probe the allegations that certain lawmakers and officers of the executive branch unlawfully altered some aspects of the tax reform bills, which resulted in differences between the tax laws passed by lawmakers and the gazetted copy available to the public.”

SERAP is also seeking: “an order of mandamus to direct and compel the CCB to refer any substantiated violations of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers deriving from the outcome of its investigation to the Code of Conduct Tribunal for prosecution and to uphold the constitutional principle that public office is a public trust.”

In the suit, SERAP is arguing that, “Granting the reliefs sought would help address critical concerns relating to conflict of interest, abuse of office, non-disclosure of interests, and reinforce adherence to due process. It would serve to curb the erosion of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers in the exercise of legislative powers.”

SERAP further argues that, “Where lawmaking is shaped by abuse of office and conflict of interest, it ceases to be a legitimate exercise of constitutional and fiduciary responsibility and becomes a legal and ethical infraction prohibited under the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.”

SERAP is also arguing that, “The Code of Conduct for Public Officers is a constitutional imperative designed to ensure probity, accountability and transparency in public life. This means that any credible allegation of breach must be promptly, thoroughly, transparently and effectively investigated by the CCB.”

According to SERAP, “Public officers hold their offices in trust for the people and must not deploy official power for personal or sectional advantage.”

The suit filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare, Kehinde Oyewumi, and Andrew Nwankwo, reads in part: “Public officers are bound by constitutional standards of conduct, and breach of such standards ought to attract constitutional consequences.

“This principle applies with particular force to officers of the executive branch, as well as lawmakers whose constitutional mandate is to legislate for the peace, order, and good government of the Federation—not to advance personal or sectional interests.

“Code of conduct obligations imposed by the Nigerian Constitution are enforceable against all public officers, including legislators and officers of the executive branch of government. No public officer is above the constitutional mechanisms established to enforce integrity in public office.

“The processes leading to the passage of the Electoral Act amendment Bill by the Senate and the signing into law of the Tax Reform bills were allegedly marked by: a) alterations to bill provisions without debate and due process of law; b) alterations of the passed Tax Reform Bill without the approval of the National Assembly.

“There are also allegations that certain amendments may have been removed or introduced to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill and the Tax Reform Laws to serve private or political interests rather than the public interest.

“Paragraph 1 of the Fifth Schedule to the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended prohibits public officers from placing themselves in situations where personal interests conflict with official duties.

“This constitutional provision mandates integrity, ensuring that personal gain does not interfere with the objective performance of public functions.

“Members of the National Assembly and officers of the executive branch of government are public officers within the meaning of Paragraph 19 of the Fifth Schedule to the Nigerian Constitution and are therefore bound by constitutional provisions on the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.

“Section 15(5) of the Nigerian Constitution imposes the responsibility on public institutions to “abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power including in the context of lawmaking.

“According to paragraph 12 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers contained in the Fifth Schedule, Part 1 to the Nigerian Constitution, ‘any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of this Code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau.’

“Paragraph 3 € of the Third Schedule Part 1 to the Constitution provides that, ‘the Bureau shall have power to receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct or any law in relation thereto, investigate the complaint and, where appropriate, refer such matters to the Code of Conduct Tribunal.’

“Section 3(d) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act provides that, ‘the functions of the Bureau shall be to receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of this Act and where the Bureau considers it necessary to do so, refer such complaints to the Code of Conduct Tribunal established by section 20 of this Act in accordance with the provisions of sections 20 to 25 of this Act.’

“Section 16 of the Act also provides that, ‘any complaint that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of this Act shall be made to the Bureau.’

“Certain members of the Senate allegedly removed the provisions on electronic transmission of election results from the Electoral Act (amendment) Bill during plenary after the majority of the senators had voted for the inclusion of the provisions and without any debate on the proposed removal of the said provisions.

“Similarly, the National Assembly recently alleged that there are unlawful alterations and some material differences between the tax reform bills passed by the legislative body and the tax reform laws gazetted by the Federal Government.

“A Sokoto lawmaker, Abdussamad Dasuki, raised the issue under a matter of privilege, drawing the attention of the House to the alleged discrepancies between the harmonised versions of the tax reform bills passed by both chambers of the National Assembly and the copies gazetted by the Federal Government.

“The lawmaker said the alterations contained in the gazetted copies did not receive legislative approval. These alleged unlawful alterations raise questions over the legality and legitimacy of both the law-making processes and the versions of the tax laws circulated by the Federal Ministry of Information.”

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

Update news