National Assembly Faces Criticism Over Frequent Recesses and Non-Disclosure of Attendance Records

A civic advocacy organization, AdvoKC Foundation, has criticized Nigeria’s 10th National Assembly over its frequent legislative breaks and refusal to release lawmakers’ attendance records, accusing the federal legislature of undermining transparency and public accountability.

In a statement released by AdvoKC Communications Manager, Luqman Adamu, the group expressed concern that both the Senate and the House of Representatives have spent significant time on recess despite ongoing national challenges, including economic hardship, inflation, and security concerns. The National Assembly embarked on its annual statutory recess on July 23, 2026, shortly after returning from earlier breaks taken during the Easter and Eid-el-Kabir holidays.

The advocacy group argued that while legislative recesses are intended for constituency outreach and committee assignments, plenary sessions appear to have become secondary to breaks. AdvoKC noted that despite carrying the largest budget allocation in the country’s legislative history, the Assembly’s overall floor time does not align with its funding levels.

Additionally, the organization accused the National Assembly of resisting public oversight after failing to comply with a Freedom of Information (FOI) request submitted on June 19, 2026. The request sought detailed records of attendance, absences, official apologies, and voting participation across both chambers covering the period from June 2023 to June 2026.

According to AdvoKC, after a notice of non-compliance was issued, the Legal Services Directorate of the National Assembly responded on July 24, stating that attendance logs constitute “evidence of proceedings” protected under Section 16 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017, and Section 16 of the FOI Act. The Assembly maintained that such information could only be released with explicit authorization from the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, or relevant committee chairpersons.

AdvoKC rejected the legal interpretation, maintaining that attendance lists are purely administrative roll calls rather than privileged legislative debates or deliberative proceedings. The foundation called for the immediate release of the requested data, quarterly public reporting of plenary attendance, and a transparent audit of time spent in session versus recess. The group indicated plans to seek a judicial review under Section 20 of the Freedom of Information Act to compel the release of the documents.