By: Odeh Favour
Former Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai (retd.), has stated that the $1bn approved for defence procurement during his tenure as Army Chief was released directly to the Ministry of Defence.
He emphasized that the funds approved by the National Economic Council did not pass through his hands or the bank accounts of the Nigerian Army, Navy, and Air Force.
Speaking at the Defence Correspondents Association of Nigeria conference in Abuja on Monday, Buratai described the allegations surrounding the funds as “political and malicious,” adding that they first emerged during the 2019 election period when the opposition alleged that the money had been diverted for electoral purposes.
“The $1 billion was approved by the National Economic Council for defence procurement. Not a single dollar of that fund passed through my hands or through the accounts of the Nigerian Army, Navy, or Air Force. The funds were released to the Ministry of Defence, and the entire procurement process was handled by that ministry.
“The Army, Navy, and Air Force never had a single dollar from that fund to make procurement directives. I have described these allegations as political and malicious. They first surfaced during the 2019 election period, when the opposition alleged the funds had been diverted for electoral purposes-a claim the Federal Government publicly refuted. Yet the stain remained, attached to the Service Chiefs rather than the institution that managed the funds”, Buratai stated.
Buratai noted that while the Federal Government publicly refuted the allegations at the time, the controversy continued to affect the reputation of service chiefs.
He faulted the Ministry of Defence for failing to publicly explain how the funds were disbursed or how contracts were awarded.
“The ministry then, on its own, had not publicly explained how funds were disbursed or contracts awarded.
Accountability must be properly located,” he said.
The former Army Chief called for greater transparency in military procurement, recommending the establishment of a defence procurement transparency portal to publish information on contracts awarded, contracting entities, and delivery timelines, subject to national security considerations.
“The Ministry of Defence must own procurement records. The $1 billion arms procurement controversy festered because the institution that managed the funds, the Ministry of Defence, remained silent while Service Chiefs absorbed criticism.
“I recommend a Defence Procurement Transparency Portal that publishes, within national security limits, broad categories of contracts awarded, contracting entities, and delivery timelines. When the media asks where the money went, the answer should come from the ministry that spent it, not from military officers who never touched it,” he said.
He further proposed quarterly accountability bulletins summarising court-martial outcomes relating to human rights violations and operational conduct, provided the publications did not compromise the rights of accused personnel or ongoing military operations.
Addressing allegations of human rights violations by members of the Nigerian security forces, Buratai said credible claims should be thoroughly investigated and, where substantiated, prosecuted.
“I have always maintained that where credible allegations exist, they must be investigated and, where substantiated, prosecuted. The military is not above the law,” he said.
He acknowledged the need for the military to demonstrate that its disciplinary processes were credible, transparent, and capable of addressing allegations at all levels.
The retired army chief said improved communication by the military and the Ministry of Defence would help address public concerns and ensure that media reports reflected the full context of security operations.
Speaking earlier, the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, said Nigeria’s security challenges cannot be addressed by military force alone, calling for improved intelligence, modern technology, and stronger collaboration among security agencies and communities.
Idris, represented by the Director-General of the Voice of Nigeria, Jibrin Ndace, said military operations remained necessary but must be complemented by measures to address the conditions enabling criminal groups to recruit members and threaten the lives and livelihoods of citizens.
“This Conference’s theme is particularly relevant because today’s security threats cannot be addressed by force alone.
Military operations remain necessary, but they must be supported by reliable intelligence, modern technology, effective coordination among security agencies and cooperation with communities,” he said.
The minister said President Bola Tinubu’s Renewed Hope Agenda placed national security at the centre of Nigeria’s development, adding that the administration was pursuing the modernisation of the Armed Forces, intelligence-led operations, improved surveillance, and stronger coordination among security and intelligence agencies.
He disclosed that Tinubu, in August 2026, directed the preparation of a comprehensive National Threat Assessment and a rolling five-year Strategic Defence Operations Plan to improve coordination, establish priorities, and guide the deployment of resources.
“This is an important step towards a more coherent national response to evolving threats,” Idris said.
He also said the President had approved salary increases of between 30 and 80 per cent for Armed Forces personnel, effective September 2026, describing the decision as recognition of the sacrifices made by security personnel.
According to him, security initiatives must translate into tangible improvements in the lives of Nigerians, including safer communities and roads, protection for farmers and businesses, and an environment where children can attend school without fear.
On the role of the media, Idris said accurate reporting and responsible verification were necessary to help citizens understand security developments and prevent rumours from creating panic or undermining military operations.
He however warned against interpreting responsible reporting as shielding the government or security agencies from scrutiny.
“This does not mean shielding the government or the security agencies from scrutiny.
Journalists must keep asking difficult questions and hold institutions accountable, while respecting legitimate operational sensitivities,” he said.
