Politics
Tinubu withholds assent to NDLEA bill, faults clause on proceeds of crime
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has declined assent to the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) Act (Amendment) Bill, 2025, citing concerns over provisions that would allow the agency to directly retain a portion of proceeds derived from drug-related crimes.
The rejection of the bill was formally communicated to the House of Representatives via a letter read during Thursday’s plenary session by Speaker Tajudeen Abbas. The bill, which had been passed by both chambers of the National Assembly earlier this year, was aimed at strengthening the operational capacity of the NDLEA in its ongoing war against drug trafficking and abuse.
However, President Tinubu, invoking the powers conferred on him under Section 58(4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), argued that specific provisions of the bill run contrary to established financial protocols and constitutional principles regarding the custody and disbursement of government funds.
The President specifically objected to a clause that sought to allow the NDLEA retain a percentage of funds recovered from drug barons and traffickers. According to him, the proposed arrangement conflicts with the current regulatory framework, which mandates that all proceeds from criminal activity must be deposited into the Confiscated and Forfeited Properties Account operated by the federal government.
Under existing law, agencies involved in asset recovery—including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), and the NDLEA—are not permitted to independently utilize funds or assets recovered from criminal activity. Instead, such resources are managed centrally and disbursed only upon presidential approval, subject to the concurrence of the Federal Executive Council (FEC) and appropriation by the National Assembly.
Tinubu emphasized the need to maintain the integrity and transparency of the government’s asset recovery and management processes, stressing that the system was deliberately designed to prevent abuse, ensure inter-agency checks, and promote accountability in the use of public resources.
“There is no compelling justification to deviate from a system that ensures proper oversight and accountability,” the President wrote. “Allowing individual agencies to retain a portion of proceeds from crime would create room for financial opacity and could encourage a profit motive in criminal prosecutions.”
The NDLEA had reportedly pushed for greater financial autonomy in the bill, citing the growing scale and complexity of the drug war, which it said requires rapid deployment of funds and operational flexibility. The agency argued that allowing it to retain part of the recovered assets would bolster its logistical capacity and reduce bureaucratic delays in accessing funding.
But with the President’s refusal to sign the bill, the National Assembly may now consider revising the contested sections or invoking its constitutional powers to override the presidential veto, a move that would require a two-thirds majority vote in both chambers.
Observers note that the standoff may ignite a broader debate over the financial independence of anti-crime agencies and the balancing act between empowering institutions and preserving central oversight mechanisms. While some lawmakers have expressed disappointment at the setback, others say the President’s concerns are valid and underscore the importance of strict safeguards in managing the nation’s assets.
