DUE PROCESS AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY: A Case Study of Ministry of

Finance and Budget.

Eriamiantoe Osamede B.A, MPA

Osamede.ugo-wogu@zenithbank.com

Imahsunu, Albert Felix B.Sc, MBA

Imahsunualbert@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
The study looked at Due Process as an Instrument for Public Accountability: a case study of
Ministry of Finance and Budget (Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit). The study gave
a general overview of Due Process Mechanism and Public Accountability and the major
challenges of the Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit, of two hundred and forty (240)
respondents randomly selected from staff of Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit. The
sampled respondents were selected by lottery method (a variant of the sample random sampling
method). The research used both structured interviews and questionnaires including observation
method to obtain relevant data from the respondents. The responses of the respondent to the
questionnaire were coded into scores and percentage showing the extent and measure of their
exposure to the due process mechanism, these were then correlated with the chi-square measured
by the tests administered. From the study, it was observed that there is compliance with due
process in budget formulation, there exists a significant relationship between due process and
budget performance and there is a relationship between effective monitoring and budget policy
implementation. We finally draw conclusion that since many Nigerians identify corruption and
poverty as the bane of the nation‟s development paralysis and with this Due Process and other
reforms such as ICPC and EFCC the people are rekindling their confidence in the erst-while lost
hope on the government. On the basis of these, the paper recommends among others that for
accountability to be successful in the management of public funds in Nigeria there must be a
reduction in the level of corruption, improving public sector accounting and auditing standards,

1
legislators as champions of accountability and restructure the public accounts committees and the
value of money must be applied in the conduct of government business.
KEYWORDS: Accountability, Due Process, Public Sector, Public Accountability.

INTRODUCTION
Accountability is a central concept for governance. Accountability requires that those who hold
positions of public trust should account for their performance to the public or their duly elected
representatives. Accountability, therefore, implies that decision makers are monitored by, and are
responsible to, others, each of whom is, in turn, responsible to the people of the country. In
recent years, there has been a drive to strengthen existing public accountability arrangements and
to design new ones. This prompts the question whether accountability arrangements actually
work.

Due Process mechanism has made reasonable progress in Nigeria. Within years of its
implementation, progress has been made especially in the promotion of fair play and
competition. A lot of savings have been made especially in the area of reduction to contract sums
in some cases to the tune of $500 million (Obasanjo, 2003). Obasanjo (2003) also stated that “the
Due Process Mechanism has saved Nigeria over N102 billion in two years arising from various
Federal Government‟s over-bloated contracts”. Ezekwesili (2003) also disclosed that her office
“saved N672.4 million (an equivalent of 4.1 million Euros) from a single project by the Ministry
of Health meant to procure and supply equipment to tertiary health institutions”. Various
contracts awarded with spending units that failed to comply with laid down competitive bid
parameters have been cancelled. Inflation of contract has also reduced to a reasonable extent.
There is also a general awareness of anti corruption mechanism put in place by Government.

Accountability is one of those golden concepts that no one can be against. It is increasingly used
in political discourse and policy documents because it conveys an image of transparency and
trustworthiness. Everyone intuitively agrees that public authorities should render account
publicly for the way they use their mandates and spend public money. The power of government
needs to be checked routinely if we don‟t want to wake up in an authoritarian regime one day.
Budget accomplishment is far from reality and the disparity between budget and accomplishment

2
are so wide and kept on abating as years pass by. The question that could readily come to mind is
why is there re-occurrence of budget failure? Could it be that it is ill conceived or ill planned?
Could it be ascribe to poor monitoring and implementation? The need to provide answers to
these questions gave impetus for this study. Due process

STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PROBLEM

Public accountability in a society is a very big problem to the economy of the nation. There are
lots of collaborations in the utilization of public funds to the extent that funds allocated through
the budget are not properly utilized. The annual budget for the public (government) income and
expenditure are at times late. Institutions decayed to an unprecedented extent as available
resources and opportunities were filtered away by the powerful with little respect for existing
rule. As would be expected, this process was followed by the subversion of due process and
manipulation of existing laws and regulations in all the tiers of governments and these greatly
undermined accountability and performance in governments (Agu, 2010). A major area of great
concern is the way and manner public officers go about circumventing laid down procedures in
award of contracts and other transactions; thereby contravening Due Processes lay down by the
system (Chijioke, 2004). In fact, meritocracy has given way to mediocrity. All this, helped the
international community and some members of the society to look down on the government
officials as due process are not complied with.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Four dominant questions being reviewed by this research include;
1. Is there compliance with due process mechanism in budget formulation?
2. Does the accounting system in the public sector provide for proper financial control and
accountability of stewardship?
3. Is there a correlation between due process and budget performance?
4. Does the accounting system in the public sector provide useful information for the
effective monitoring & implementation of government budget?

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objectives of this research study include the following:

3
 1. To determine whether there is compliance with due process in budget formulation
2. To find out the impact of due process on budget performance
3. To determine the extent to which budgets are effectively monitored and implemented.

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

As the research topic would suggest at a glance, the scope of this, is essentially focused on the
due process mechanism of the sample ministry which is the ministry of finance and budget. This
study will look into the nature of the due process mechanism of the sample ministry; how the
system operates, the relevance of the system to the environment, problems and prospects of the
system from 2007 to 2012.

RELEVANCE OF THE STUDY

This research project has the ambition to add to the state of the art in the discipline of Public
Administration. First, thematically, studies of due process have until now mainly stressed legal,
managerial, financial and technical dimensions of public accountability. Few studies have
addressed public accountability issues of governances in regards to due process. Secondly, this
study will be of immense help to the policy makers in government of today to be able to know,
understand and assert the adequate role of the due process as a key to public accountability in
substance of our present democracy. Government (public service) whose realm of operation is
popularly referred to as the public sector has as its objective the governance of her people. This
implies the tremendous responsibility to grannies resources and allocates same towards fostering
economic growth and improving the standard of living of the citizens of the nation. Again
government is empowered by the laws of the land (constitution) to engage in contractual
arrangements for the purpose of increasing the resources available to her in order to meet the
requirements of governance, since it holds the wealth of her nation in trust for that nation. To this
extent, the government of a nation owes her citizens the duty to account for the stewardship in
the effective disposition of the resources entrusted to her.

For the government or the public sector to discharge her responsibility or stewardship
effectively, there is the need to maintain proper records of the value of all contracts, programmes
activities and services, synthesize and analyze the effect of government financial transaction,

4
classify, summarize and communicate such information for purposes of future decision-making
or assessment of performance.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The Nigerian society is filled with stories of wrong practices such as stories of ghost workers on
the pay roll of Ministries, Extra-ministerial Departments and Parastatals, frauds, embezzlements
and setting ablaze of offices housing sensitive documents and corruption are found everywhere
in the country (Okwoli, 2004). According to Bello (2001), huge amount of Naira is lost through
one financial malpractice or the other in Nigeria, which to say the least, drains the nation‟s
meager resources through fraudulent means with far-reaching and attendant consequences on the
development or even socio-economic or political programmes of the nation. Billions of Naira is
lost in the public sector every year through fraudulent means.

This represents only the amount that is ferreted out and made public. Indeed much more
substantial or huge sums are lost in undetected frauds or those that are for one reason or the
hushed up. Appah and Appiah (2010) argues that cases of fraud is prevalent in the Nigerian
public sector that every segment of the public service, could seem to be involved in one way or
the other in some of these nasty acts.

The bane of public sector financial mismanagement in Nigeria since the oil boom years a period
under which there existed structurally weak control mechanism, which create a variety of
loopholes that have tended to facilitate and sustain, corrupt practices. This is coupled with the
fact that there is a near total absence of the notion and ethics of accountability in the conduct of
public affairs in the country (Bello, 2001). Tanzi (1999) noted that good governance is essential
part of a framework for economic and financial management which includes: macroeconomic
stability; commitment to social and economic equity; and the promotion of efficient institutions
through structural reforms such as trade liberalization and domestic deregulation. Poor
governance may result from factors such as incompetence, ignorance, lack of institutions, the
pursuit of economically inefficient ideologies, or misguided economic models. It is often linked to
corruption and rent seeking. Okoh and Ohwoyibo (2009) opine that accountability reflects the
need for government and its agencies to serve the public effectively in accordance with the laws

5
of the land. Appah (2010) point out that with the number and monetary value of public sector
activities has increased substantially. This increase in activities has brought with it an increased
demand for accountability of public officers who manage these activities of the public. Achua
(2009) says “serious consideration is being given to the need to be more accountable for the
often vast amounts of investment in resources at the command of governments, which exercise
administrative and political authority over the actions and affairs of political units of people.
Government spending is a very big business and the public demands to know whether the huge
outlays of money are being spent wisely for public interests”. Accountability is a fundamental
value for any political system. Citizens should have the right to know what actions have been
taken in their name, and they should have the means to force corrective actions when
government acts in an illegal, immoral, or unjust manner (Peters, 1999). Accountability is also
important for government. It provides government with the means of understanding how
programs may fail and finding ways that can make programmes perform better. Kaufman (2005)
argues that an emphasis on accountability by citizens is one aspect of the growing emphasis on
eliminating corruption and promoting transparency in government. However, the issue of
accountability in Nigeria is a fundamental problem because of the high level corruption in all
levels of government in the country. The Transparency International global Corruption
Perception Index in October 2010 ranked Nigeria 134 from its 130 position in 2009 and 121 in
2008. The 2010 CPI, drawn on a scale from 10 (highly clean) to 0 (highly corrupt), showed that
Nigeria scored 2.4, and is ranked 134 amongst the 178 countries surveyed. This fearful situation
of Nigeria‟s lack of public accountability in the public sector provided the need for this paper.
.
2.2 THE CONCEPT OF ACCOUNTABILITY
Accountability is all about being answerable to those who have invested their trust, faith, and
resources to you. Adegite (2010) defined accountability as the obligation to demonstrate that
work has been conducted in accordance with agreed rules and standards and the officer reports
fairly and accurately on performance results vis-à-vis mandated roles and or/plans. It means
doing things transparently in line with due process and the provision of feedback.

6
Johnson (2004) says that public accountability is an essential component for the functioning of
our political system, as accountability means that those who are charged with drafting and/or
carrying out policy should be obliged to give an explanation of their actions to their electorate.

Premchand (1999) observed that the capacity to achieve full accountability has been and
continues to be inadequate, partly because of the design of accountability itself and partly
because of the widening range of objectives and associated expectations attached to
accountability. He further argues that if accountability is to be achieved in full, including its
constructive aspects, then it must be designed with care. The objective of accountability should
go beyond the naming and shaming of officials, or the pursuit of sleaze, to a search for durable
improvements in economics management to reduce the incidence of institutional recidicism. The
future of accountability consists in covering the macro aspects of economic and financial
sustainability, as well as the micro aspects of service delivery. It should envisage a three-tier
structure of accountability: that of official (both political and regular civil employees), that of
intragovernmental relationships and that between government and their respective legislatures.

Accountability, defined here as „the relationship between an actor and a forum, in which the
actor has an obligation to explain and justify his or her conduct, the forum can pose questions
and pass judgment, and the actor may face consequences‟ ( Bovens, 2006 ), is widely seen as a
tool for citizens to force those vested with public power to speak the truth. And since we know
that power corrupts its holders and unchecked power corrupts more, the more accountability
there is the better – or so it seems.

However, owing to the lack of a cogent yardstick, the debate tends to be impressionistic and
event driven. In this article we develop an instrument for systematically assessing public
accountability arrangements, drawing on three different normative perspectives. In the
democratic perspective, accountability arrangements should effectively link government actions
to the „democratic chain of delegation. In the constitutional perspective, it is essential that
accountability arrangements prevent or uncover abuses of public authority.

7
In the learning perspective, accountability is a tool to make governments effective in delivering
on their promises. We demonstrate the use of our multi criteria assessment tool in an analysis of
a new accountability arrangement: the boards of oversight of agencies.

In recent years, there has been a drive in many western democracies to strengthen existing
accountability arrangements and to design and add new ones. Not only has there been
considerable growth in the number and scope of accountability arrangements, but also a
accumulation of these arrangements. The ideas and impulses for increased control and
accountability mechanisms have come partly from outside the realm of national government.
Idea brokers in the „new public management‟ mould, such as the OECD, have been instrumental
in spreading the gospel about benchmarking, monitoring, accreditation, and planning and control
cycles (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2004).

According to Coker (2010), the various approaches to accountability based on the language of
account can be grouped into: (1) Process Based Accountability: This approach measures
compliance with pre set standard and formally defined outcomes. This includes fiscal and
managerial accountability with reliance on the use of accounting methodologies. (2)
Performance Based Accountability: This approach measures performance against broad
objectives. This measure may be qualitative and the criteria against which performance is
measured less precisely defined. Adegite (2010) also noted that there are three pillars of
accountability, which the UNDP tagged ATI (Accountability, Transparency and Integrity).
Accountability which is segmented into: (1) Financial Accountability: The obligation of any
one handling resources, public office or any other positions of trust, to report on the intended and
actual use of the resources or of the designated office. (2) Administrative Accountability: This
type of accountability involves a sound system of internal control, which complements and
ensures proper checks and balances supplied by constitutional government and an engaged
citizenry. These include ethical codes, criminal penalties and administrative reviews. (3)
Political Accountability: This type of accountability fundamentally begins with free, fair and
transparent elections. Through periodic elections and control structure, elected and appointed
officials are held accountable for their actions while holding public office. (4) Social
Accountability: This is a demand driven approach that relies on civic engagement and involves

8
ordinary citizens and groups exacting greater accountability for public actions and outcomes.
Ojoakor (2009) argues that the factors and forces which militate against accountability in Nigeria
include ethnicity and tribalism, corruption, religious dichotomy and military culture.

2.2.2 Beyond Ex Post Control?

After defining what public accountability is, it can helpful to distinguish it from other related
concepts in order to fully understand its essence. More recently, there is a strong tendency to
extend the concept of public accountability beyond its central features. By doing so the risk of
over-stretching the concept becomes real (Mulgan, 2000). For instance, Koppell (2003) offers
five dimensions of public accountability. First, transparency is according to him the literal value
of accountability. Second, liability attaches culpability to accountability. Third, the dominant
substantive conception of accountability emphasises control. Fourth, responsibility refers to
internal norms and rules of behaviour. Fifth, responsiveness emphasises an organization‟s
attention to direct expressions of needs and desires. Responsiveness turns accountability
outward. Public accountability is those things combined, according to Koppell. Mulgan (2000)
regrets that recently public accountability has increasingly been extended beyond its core sense.
The extensions are readily intelligible because they are closely related to the practice of public
accountability. Transparency is a vital condition of accountability, but it does not capture the
whole process. Accountability is indeed somehow linked to the internal responsibility of public
actors (see below). It is an important part of the institutional checks and balances system, but
there are other types of control mechanisms besides ex post accountability. It is related to being
responsive to wishes or needs of citizens by the government, but that does not mean that they are
induced to do so by processes of calling to account. It also involves public explanation and
discussion in a forum, but it is not the same as the dialogue between citizens in a deliberative
model of democracy. In short, the extensions of meaning can be challenged as weakening the
importance of external ex post scrutiny. The original core of accountability, signifying processes
of information, justification and judgement, is sufficiently distinct and important to warrant
separate identification.

Rubin (2006) explains the attempts to extent the notion of accountability by referring to a
widespread anti-administrative or anti-bureaucratic impulse. He underlines that true public

9
accountability involves many of the features that are central to the modern administrative state
and that many people find so unattractive about it: hierarchy, investigation, evaluation, rules,
reporting, etc. He also stresses that public accountability has a well-established meaning: “the
ability of one actor to demand an explanation or justification of another actor for its actions, and
to reward or punish that second actor on the basis of its performance or its explanation.” Again,
his view corresponds with our interpretation of public accountability.

2.2.3 What is Good Public Accountability?

Esmark (2008) claims that the democratic norm of accountability is fundamentally premised on
the idea of representation. Keane (2009) also stresses that all of the new power-scrutinising
experiments rely inevitably on representation. The democratic promise invoked by the norm of
accountability is one of proper functioning representation. Although direct public participation
and deliberation are important democratic values, we can reasonably assume that our forms of
indirect public participation and deliberation (i.e. political representation) are going to expand
given the enormous complexity of public governance. New forms of representation are emerging
in the everyday practices of public policy, where governance extends to experts advisory bodies,
stakeholder roundtables, citizens‟ forums, networks of corporations, etc. They all make public
claims to represent particular interests. In most cases these new forms of representation are
selfauthorized, which means that they lack formal authorization from those they represent
(Hendriks, 2009; Keane, 2009; Mansbridge, 2003).

So, we primarily focus on public accountability as the predominant democratic value because it
is the most feasible option. Other democratic values like ex ante direct participation and
deliberation face serious limitations in practice. We assume that democratic anchorage is to be
found in a better-functioning representative democracy, with an increased emphasis on
monitoring and reviewing. Secondly, the enduring dominance of public sector management with
its focus on value for money, performance and results will only accentuate ex post public
accountability as the most valid democratic reference point. Thirdly, the strong call for a
transparent government has opened the doors, which will not be closed again in the foreseeable
future. On the contrary, the digitalisation and rise of the internet will only fortify the pressure to

10
open up and account for one‟s actions. In sum, good and reliable public accountability should
have the following key features:
1. Proper representation: it should engage (directly or indirectly) all relevant stakeholders
actively in its process. Those people whose interests are affected by political decisions ought to
have the possibility to hold those political authorities to account.
2. Full transparency: all documents and other information prepared by the government should be
made available to the public. Transparency however has both a passive and active dimension. A
transparent public authority grants access to the public, press, interest groups and other parties
interested in its activities. In addition, government should take an active role in identifying
relevant stakeholders and organising a discussion with them.
3. Ex ante reference frame: public policy goals and purposes should be formulated as clear as
possible. If you want to hold public authorities to account for its actions, it is easier to do on the
basis of explicit performance specifications. If there is no agreed upon ex ante reference frame,
then it is harder to evaluate someone. Difficult discussions about success or failure are likely to
rise in that case.
4. Real responsiveness: it should be demonstrable that the process of rendering account has led
to improved outcomes. The mere revelation of wrongdoing or poor performance does not
constitute public accountability. Without the possibility to face public authorities with certain
consequences and correct its behaviour for the better, public accountability remains without real
value.
5. Compact information. Not only should all relevant information be made public by the
government, but that information should also be complete. It is not enough that all technical
documents are made accessible for the public. Good public accountability requires governments
to make these technical documents comprehensible for a larger public.
6. Public contestation: a vibrant „agonistic‟ or adversarial public forum where different political
opinions and proposals can be contested is crucial for the existence of good public accountability
(Mouffe, 1993, 2006). The agonistic approach contributes to a deepening and revitalisation of
public accountability. In other words, contestation, even confrontation, is a catalyst rather than
an impediment for good public accountability.

2.3 DUE PROCESS MECHANISM

11
Over the years, the public procurement system in Nigeria has been grossly abused leading to
high losses of resources. Past governments in the country had taken steps to address this problem
but with no good result. With the emergence of the last civilian administration under President
Olusegun Obasanjo, a diagnostic study was commissioned in 2001 to investigate the stage of
affairs of public procurement in Nigeria. In a bid to sanitize the system, the Federal Government
set up a Due Process Unit under the presidency to undertake the exercise.

On a continuous basis and in both the private and public sectors, efforts are usually made, to seek
how to improve on the ways activities are carried out, if there is to be progress in the results
being sought to be achieved. More importantly, in the public sector, those at the helm of affairs
must make deliberate effort to improve on the system already put in place in all the three tiers of
government if they must remain relevant in the global village which the world is turning into.
The concept of control as applicable to the public sector has been undergoing various changes
from one country to the other in the recent past. Each nation has been formulating policies aimed
at improving resources utilization at the budget implementation stage. Considerable efforts have
been made to find new techniques of control and to introduce institutional changes and
improvements to the types of controls applied. In an effort to exercise control on the expenditure
of government, it is not sufficient to rely on the fact that expenditure items have been provided
for in the approved budget (via the Appropriate Act). At the implementation stage, approval for
releasing the money must be tied to availability of funds to the extent to which the revenue
budgeted for has been earned. Therefore the process of controls involved under the overall
expenditure control structure should cover monitoring of the activities, for example, contract
approval for payment and release of funds. There must be commitment by top management staff
at the relevant tier of government to the new ways of doing things (Corporate governance).

In Nigeria, the relatively long period of military rule had almost eroded the basic economic
structures that had been developed since independence. Consequently, the Obasanjo
administration was faced with the task of seeking ways of reversing the trend of decadence in the
nation. At the inception of his government in 1999, the president emphasized that his
administration had adopted transparency, equity, justice and accountability as its guiding

12
principles and policy imperatives. These principles are to ensure commitment to public policies
and good governance (Nwankwo, 2004).

Due Process rights in public contracting originated from 5th and 14 amendments of the United
States of America constitution. They prohibit the government from depriving a person of “life,
liberty or Property without due process of cause”. This is substantiated in the procedural due
process and substantive due process of America Law. Due Process is defined as a mechanism for
ensuring strict compliance with openness, competition and cost accuracy rules and procedures
that should guide contract award.

According to Ezekwesilli (2004), Due Process is geared towards infusing the needed fiscal
discipline and sound economic principles to ensure transparency, accountability and rebuild
public trust in governance by attacking the much abused processes in the past.

The Due Process mechanism was conceived among other things to bring sanity to public
procurement system in the country through the attainment of these performance targets: ensuring
sustainable participation by reputable, competent and Reliable contractors; settlement of contract
price at near marginal cost; faith by tenders in the tendering mechanism and value for money in
projects execution and delivery.

The mechanism is also meant to carry out functions like regulating and Setting standards to
enforce harmonized bidding and the tender documents; formulation of general policies and
guidelines on public sector procurement and upholding professional ethics and reporting erring
personnel amongst other statutory functions.

2.3.1 Due Process Principles and Defects

There is nothing much new in the principles of Due Process. The principles have been there but
they were hardly observed and implemented as there were loop holes inimical to its
implementation and circumvention. The emphasis in Obasanjo administration is that if
judiciously observed, project planning and procurement in Nigeria will not experience the higher
cost observed on similar projects within the international community (Esenwa, 2004). The

13
guidelines exist in our status books but the implementation and the enforcement of the
procedures left much to be desired.

According to Esenwa, the major defects of previous procurement system include the followings:
• Project proposals from ministries/parastatals were unrelated to justifiable needs. In
particular budgetary process lacked up to date plans. They are simply a wish list of
officials.
• Absence of economic cost/benefit analysis of projects as a way of justifying the need for
the project.
• Lack of competition and transparency in project procurement leading to high cost of
projects. Where advertisement was made, the applicable rules were tilted in favour of a
predetermined winner.
• Projects were not prioritised and harmonised, consequently several ministries were
pursuing supposed needs simultaneously.
• Unjustifiable gap exist between budget and actual releases leading to underfunding,
delayed implementation, price escalation and project abandonment.
• Preference for new projects to the detriment of maintenance, refurbishment and
completion of existing projects.
• Absence of efficient and effective project monitoring aimed at ascertaining compliance
with original project plans and targets.
• Frequent government policy reversal.

2.3.2 Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit (BMPIU)

It has always been a recurrent observation of those reviewing the budgetary performance of
governments in Nigeria that implementation is our problem. The problems experienced during
implementation may as well have originated in formulation. Therefore the axiom “Prevention is
better that cure” could be appropriate here. It is on the basis of this view that evaluation of
completed programmes and projects were initiated as an ex-post control but with an impact that
goes beyond the budget implementation phase. The evaluation consists of an assessment of
progress and its impact, so that areas of success and failure in implementation can be identified.
Evaluation in the context of the above explanation serves mainly to link formulation and

14
implementation of budgets and is used by the executive. It is also possible to view evaluation as
a tool for ensuring both transparency and accountability.

Due process involves ensuring strict compliance with laid-down rules and procedures, guiding
the process of contract invitation, contract award and contract implementation. This is with a
view to ensuring that government‟s resources are managed in such a way that they are not
wasted.

The BMPIU has become synonymous with Due Process. In fact, it has become to be known as
the Due Process Unit because of the emphasis on the need to follow due process in all the
different tiers of government and parastatals. It is noteworthy that the term “Due Process” simply
means the appropriate way or proper method or expected approach or normal way of doing
something. It is, therefore, merely an awakening or revival of the application of the procedures
already put in place earlier but for some time abandoned due to corruption and moral decadence.

Arising from the difficulties discussed, established in the presidency is Budget Monitoring and
Price Intelligence Unit (BMPIU) which is assigned the responsibility of formulating and
implementing appropriate policies on procurement and award of contracts. Some of its functions,
objectives and implementation strategies are summarised below (Esenwa, 2004).

The goals of BMPIU

The goals of BMPIU is to be a vanguard for ensuring fiscal transparency, strict compliance with
Federal Government guidelines on Due Process Certification with respect to budgeting for and
procurement of facilities/services/contracts at least cost.

Objective of BMPIU
The objectives of the BMPIU are summarized below:
• To harmonize existing government policies/practices and update it on public
procurement.
• To ensure that packaging of project conception is geared to the realization of priorities
and target.

15
 • To determine whether or not Due Process has been observed in the procurement of
services and contracts throughout the initiation and execution of such projects.
• To introduce more probity, accountability and transparency into the procurement process.
• To establish and update pricing standards and benchmarks for all supplies to government.
• To monitor the implementation of projects during execution with a view to providing
information on performance, output, compliance with specifications and targets (cost,
quality and time).
• To ensure that only projects which have been budgeted for are admitted for execution.
• To ensure that budget spending is based on authentic, reasonable and fair costing.

Implementation Strategies
The BMPIU operates under the following guidelines: Regulatory Functions, Certification
Functions, Monitoring Functions and Training and Advisory Functions.
A. Regulatory Functions
1. To regulate and set standards, including the enforcement of harmonized bidding and tender
documents
2. To formulate the general policies and guidelines related to public sector procurement
3. To develop, update and maintain a related system wide database and technology
4. To undertake procurement research and survey in order to determine information needs and
project costing
5. To enforce professional ethics and sanction erring officers and professionals
6. Enhance the capacity of the President to be fully informed about budgetary process, project
certification and project implementation stations.
B. Certification Functions
The Unit will certify all federal-wide procurements under the following guidelines:
1. Resident Due Process Team Certification for projects below N50million
2. Full Due Process Certification for projects above N50million at various stages such as
“contract award certificate” and “payment certificate”.
C. Monitoring Functions
1. To supervise the implementation of established procurement policies
2. To monitor the prices of tendered items

16
3. To perform procurement audits
4. To undertake the monitoring of capital projects that have exceeded 50% of contract sum
before release of further funds
5. To document all projects at award and completion stages, and publish same in designated
journals
D. Training and Advisory Functions
1. To co-ordinate relevant training programmes so as to build institutional capacity
2. To embark on regular public enlightenment programmes so as to sensitise various stakeholders
involved in procurement
3. To interact with Government and parastatal officials, National Assembly members,
consultants and relevant professional bodies so as to educate them on all aspects of the work of
BMPIU.

Organisation of Due Process Certification

The Federal Government of Nigeria has issued three circulars relevant to this presentation.
• New Policy Guidelines for Procurement and award of contracts in Government
Ministries/Parastatals (Circular F.15775 of 27 th June 2001).
• Due Process Certification of Contracts (Circular TRY/A5&B5/2001 of October
2001).
• Guidelines for Implementation of Due Process Certification of Contracts (Circular
TRY/A4/B4/2002/OAGF/TS/026/168 of 5 th July 2002).
The above circular are consequently mandatory for immediate application. Participants are
therefore urged to obtain copies of these circulars to familiarise themselves with the provisions
of the guidelines.

2.3.3 Organisation of Due Process Certification

The Nigeria Treasury Circular of 5 July 2002, “Guidelines for Implementation of Due Process
Certification of Contract”, provides a plan for the implementation of the Capital Budget. Major
sections of the Circular include:
A. Approval of Contracts
The approval of contracts has been categorised into the following:

17
1. Contracts below N1.0million
Permanent Secretary/Chief Executive of Parastatals, of any Ministry or Agency can approve
provided that Due Process is strictly observed. Advertisement of such projects must be placed in
the notice board in a conspicuous layout at the Ministry, Agency or Department.
2. Contracts over N1.0million but below N50.0 million
A "Resident Due Process Team" established by the Ministry Parastatal or Agency handles the
Due Process Review of all such contracts and approves the award of the contracts. The members
shall include.
• The permanent Secretary/DG - Chairman
• Director of Finance/Accounts - Member
• Director of Research & Statistics - Member
• Director of Admin/Finance/Supplies - Member
• A representative of BMPIU - Member
The role of the BMPIU representative at meetings of the RDPT is to observe compliance in order
to facilitate the Unit's endorsements of the Ministry/Agency and Department's internally
generated certificate to which all the members of the RDPT are signatories. These classes of
projects require call for pre-qualification of contractors and must be advertised in at least two
National Newspapers or Government Gazette.
3. Contracts above N50.0million
These shall be processed in accordance with Government guidelines and approved by the
Ministerial Tender Board before being forwarded to BMPIU to obtain a Due Process Certificate.
When certification is obtained from BMPIU, the project would be forwarded to Federal
Executive Council for approval before an award can be made.
4. Due Process Review Procedure
The procedures for Due Process Review are as follows;
a. Requirements for Due Process Review
i. The Project Policy files
ii. Tender Returns
iii. Tender Evaluation Report
iv. Contract Award Letter and Agreement
v. Original Contract Bills of Quantities (if any)

18
vi. Contract Drawings (if any)
vii. Other Contract Documents
viii. Financial Summary and Statements
ix. Progress Reports
x. Variation Requests and Variation Orders arising
xi. Interim Valuation and Certificates
b. Preliminary Discussion (BMPIU and Beneficiary Ministries)
There may be a need to schedule meetings between BMPIU and beneficiary
ministries/parastatals to clear issues connected with the report for certification. Such meetings
may take place at pre-review and during the review exercise. BMPIU may call for additional
information from the ministries to facilitate the issuance of certification.
c. Preparation of Draft Report
The Due Process Certification will require an assessment to ensure that;
i. The appropriation is available for the funding requirements of the project upon award
ii. The contract awarded by the spending unit/ministry shows that the process complies with
open competitive bid standards and that the cost is comparable with national, regional and
international standards.
d. Transmission of Draft Report
The Draft Report from BMPIU shall be transmitted to the beneficiary confirming certification. If
certification is not granted, attention of the beneficiaries is drawn to the findings and
recommendations in the report.
e. Organisation of “Right of Reply” Meeting
For a project where certification is denied, BMPIU has made provisions for a “Right of Reply”
meeting aimed at clarifying issues leading to the denial of certification. Such a meeting may
either lead to reconciling differences or confirming the position of BMPIU.
f. Final Report
The outcome of a “Right of Reply” meeting will assist in fine-tuning the report and facilitating
the issuance of a final report.
g. Granting or Denying Due Process Certification
The final report may either lead to the project being granted certification or being denied
certification. Whatever the outcome, it will be transmitted to the beneficiaries. The granting of

19
certification may lead to the project being recommended for approval by the Federal Executive
Council. In cases where projects are denied certification, the beneficiaries may be advised to
repackage the project for fresh procurement.

Rules of the contracting game:

1. Advertisement Requirements
2. Prequalification Process and Criteria
3. Invitation to Tender: The Technical and Financial Bid Process
4. Opening of Tender: Opening of the bid/tender must be done in the public on a designated date
and time, following the closing of the bidding/tendering period. The bidders or representatives
must be invited as well as members of the civil society.
5. The Bid Evaluation Process
6. Determination of Winning Bid
Project below 10 million
For projects below 1.0 million and those between 1.0 million and 10.0 million notices shall be
posted at the Notice Board of the procuring agencies.
Project above 10 million
For projects above 10.0 million shall be advertised in at least two national dailies and or
government gazette. The call for pre-qualification shall be included as necessary.
The invitation should include the followings:
• The name and address of processing agency
• Brief description of the objectives and technical specifications
• The qualification and category of contractors expected to bid.
• Date by which documents must be returned for a minimum of six weeks.
• Place and time for the document to be returned including labelling of documents.

The review and certification process are carefully and professional handled by the Sector
Specialist of BMPIU (Due Process Unit) with the Due Process Check-list as the basic guide.
MDA‟s that comply by providing all the listed information (as applicable)contained in the Due
Process check-list is issues with Due Process Certificate within stated 7-10 working days from
the date of submission of request. It is only after the Due Process Certificate is obtained fro

20
BMPIU that the MDAs (i.e. spending unit) can forward the project to the Federal Executive
Council for final approval to award the contract.

To enhance effectiveness in public procurement spending, the executive arm of government

mandated all ministries, agencies and parastatals of government within and outside the country
and at all levels to set up internal due process units. The units so created are empowered to
certify public projects (contracts and supplies) to specific limits of financial expenditure.

Over the years, the BMPIU has embarked on diverse measures to inculcate its policies and
provisions for improved public expenditure in service delivery including amongst many others;
organising workshops and training sessions for various states of the federation and the FCTA as
well as the management of the National Assembly. It has produced a number of publications
intended to educate operators of the units, contractors and suppliers and the general public on its
activities. It is however very clear from the field exercise that the BMPIU has a long way to go in
educating stakeholders and the general public on their activities and modus operandi. The
location of the BMPIU operational office in the presidential villa over the years has not in any
way helped matters, as access is highly restricted and the cumbersome protocols involved in
accessing the office puts off many of its service users. Recent publications in the media and
according to a manual published by the Due Process Unit, claimed that by October 2004, the
BMPIU had saved Nigeria billions of Naira through reduced contract cost, with instances where
sums ranging from N10 billion and N11 billion saved from a single contract transaction. The due
process unit in its bid to combat corruption and restore public confidence in public financial
management is also said to have reinstated over 185 contractors who rightly won public contracts
but were sidetracked at the ministries, agencies or departmental levels as well as cancellation of
processes for the award of over 330 federal contracts found to have fallen short of due process
rules and a new process for award were successfully instituted.

2.3.4 Budget and Expenditure Unit

This unit formed at the micro level of the department should be in-charge of preparing budget for
the Department during the year and its execution. Such budget must be within the spending
capacity of the department as may be approved from time to time by the University.

21
2.3.5 Price Intelligence Unit
This is a market survey unit which gathers information on current prices of such procurement.
The survey entails three independent prices on each commodity and thereafter, decision is made
on the price without loosing the importance of quality. On the basis of this, the average price,
supply is placed plus the mark-up price.

Dividends of Due Process in Project Evaluation

The Due Process is putting us back to path of accountability and transparency. It is a
reevaluation of social value and contract in the light of competition and reward for efficient
execution of government contracts. This is because the public confidence in governance is partly
a function of how the citizens perceive the procedures through which contracts are awarded.

From the presidency, the Due Process Mechanism has saved Nigeria over 102 billion in two
years. This arose from various Federal Government over-bloated contracts as usually the art of
the day in previous governments. And according to Due Process and Price Monitoring Unit,
672.4 million (4.1) million was saved from a single project by the Ministry of Health in
procurement and supply of equipment to teaching hospitals.

The implication is that such a wasteful charge on the public treasury impacts on the ability of the
government deliver goods and services to the people. Such inflated cost (will) create a large
deficit. The deficit will require public borrowings by government to finance. This would crowd
out private sector borrowing implying that the productive sector would have a time finding
money to borrow as government would have picked up most of what is available (Obasanjo,
2004).

Such borrowings increase the stock of domestic debt that has grown over the past two decades
into its current levels of over 1.5 trillion and these debts are serviced at about 180 billions per
annum. In essence, such repayments inhibit the ability of government to widen the boundaries
and size of the annual capital budget development projects, Obasanjo concluded. In a happy
note, it has been reported that the Due Process has succeeded in increasing the value for money

22
spent for capital projects by the Federal Government from less than 40 kobo for every 1.00 to
75kobo for every 1.00.

2.3.6 Problems associated with the Due Process Implementation:

The most common shortcomings of the BMPIU as experienced by contractors and suppliers are;
• Delay in Due Process certification and
• Delay in payments
• Ineffective enforcement of the „rules of the contracting game
Abuse of the procurement system arises largely due to weak or inconsistent enforcement of the
prevailing rules. This is clearly reflected by the dissonance between the prevailing (formal) rules
and what actually takes place in practice during the procurement process. Public entities will go
to lengths to create a semblance of formal compliance with procedural and other requirements
while seriously compromising the intent and spirit of such rules. In severely compromised
systems, even this veneer of formal compliance is not observed mainly because public officials
and their private sector accomplices have no fear of retribution. A common example of this is the
requirement for advertising that is found in most countries. Findings, however, indicate that in
practice, this is normally abused by advertising bids for extremely short periods and doing so in a
medium that reaches as few potential bidders as possible, the intent being to limit competition to
a favored few.

2.4 CONCEPTUAL AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The practice of budgeting, as it is now understood, originated in the central government of Great
Britain. It later developed gradually, as a result of parliament‟s struggle to obtain control over the
finance of the crown. In 1217, it was declared in Magna Charta that “No cottage or aid shall be
imposed in the kingdom unless by the common council of realm. After the revolution of 1688,
parliament now approved the right to authorized expenditure by the crown as well as taxation
apart from items in the sovereign‟s civil list, which was gradually reduced until it covered only
the personal expenses of royal family”. (Bendlebury, 2005).

Parliament now began to fix government total expenditure and to prescribe or appropriate the
amount to be spent for parliamentary purposes (California Department of Finance, 1998). A

23
budget is a framework for revenue and expenditure outlays over a specified period usually one
year. It is an instrument stipulating policies and programmes aimed at realizing the development
objectives of a government. Budgeting and its process in Nigeria remain problematic both in the
areas of preparation and implementation, hence, the need for adequate control aimed at
improving effective resources utilization at the budget implementation stage. To achieve these
objectives, there is need for the introduction of new audit waves such as the value for money
audit, Due process, and cost audit and so on.

Omolehinwa (2003) viewed Budget as the plan of dominant individuals in an organization

expressed in monetary terms and subject to the constraints imposed by other participants and the
environment indicating how the available resources may be utilized to achieve whatever the
dominant individual agreed to be the organization‟s proprieties”. Meigs and Meigs, (2004)
defined budgets as a comprehensive financial plan, setting forth the expected route for achieving
the financial and operational goals of an organization”. Budgeting in the early stage of its
evolution was primarily concerned with serving the purpose of legislative accountability
(Johnson, 1992), Jones and Bendlebury (2005) argued that the origin of a budget could be traced
back to Britain when the parliament attempted to exercise control over the activities of central
government.

According to Nigeria‟s Financial Regulations (2000), before ministries and spending agencies
can incur an obligation to make expenditures, they must secure spending authorization from the
Ministry of Finance through the use of warrants. This warrant will authorize officers controlling
votes to incure expenditure in accordance with the approved estimates subject to any reserved
items. If the Appropriation Act has not come into operation at the beginning of the year, a
provisional General Warrant may be issued to ensure continuity of the services of government at
a level not exceeding those of the previous year. The length of period of spending authorization
is determined in functional cash flow forecast for the period when payments are anticipated.
During the phase of budget implantation, there are many possibilities for interventions and
manipulations in view of the fact that officials have a great amount of discretionary power to
decide which spending ministry or agency will be granted spending authorization (Federal
Republic of Nigeria, 2000). In spite of the specific nature of appropriation laws, the commitment

24
phase of the expenditure process is a fertile ground for corrupt activities. The most frequent is
the partial or total disregard of procurement regulations and procedures, where they exist.
Procurement procedure and regulations specify the price and quality of goods and services that
are authorized in the budget. They also specify the delivery schedule, terms of delivery and
payment as well as contingent supplementary services such as maintenance and warranties. In
addition, they specify the procedure, which will have to be followed by competing bidders‟
prescription for price quality and quantity as well as terms of delivery. These are often
disregarded in favour of one supplier who is ready to offer a bribe to corrupt officials. Another
possible case of corruption is the ordering of goods and services, which are not authorized in the
budget. In this case, corrupt officials will simply disregard the budget as approved by the
legislature and will purchase, for instance, luxury cars instead of trucks or other needed
equipment.

System of Budgeting and Implementation: An Overview

Budgeting in the public sector is a document or a collection of documents that refers to the
financial condition of the government (Turns, 2006). A budget is prospective in the sense that it
refers to expected future revenue and expenditure, in the Federal Government circle the budget is
greatly limited in legal status. It is the official recommendation of the president to the congress.
In other to provide for a responsible government, budgeting is generated to a cycle. The cycle
allows for the system to absorb and respond to new information and in doing so the government
is held accountable for its action though it should be recognized that many factors curtail the
extent to which the president can make major changes in the budget. In some states, preparation
and authority is not always given to governors while some have responsibility for preparation
and submission, some share budget making authority with other elected administrative officer,
civil servant, political appointees, legislative leader, or some combination of these officers. In the
federal government level, preparations start from, large agencies. The agencies begin by
assessing their programmes and considering which programmes required revision and whether
new programmes should be recommended. At same time, estimates are made by the president‟s
staff regarding anticipated economic trends in order to determine available revenue under
existing tax legislation. The budget approval in the public sector (Government) occurs at three
stages namely ministerial approval, executive approval and legislative approval. The preparation

25
of budget phase commences five months before the beginning of the fiscal year. Guidelines are
issued from the ministry of budget and planning in a form of circular. When the circular
demanding the budget estimates to prepare is received by each ministries and department, a
departmental committee of budget estimate is set up by each ministry and extra ministerial
department. The committee is headed by the ministerial head of budget and personnel. It has its
function as consideration and reconciliation of the budget proposals submitted by various
departmental branches, division and units of the ministry.

Ministerial Approval Phase

Each ministry submits their estimates to the Ministry of Budget and Planning for further
consideration and approval. The Ministry of Budget and Planning in turn set up a committee
called “Draft Committee” for the review of draft estimates submitted by the ministries. These
committee asked each ministry or department to come and defend its proposals; having concord
on the proposal, the budget department aggregate the budget in the form of a consolidated
estimates of revenue and expenditure. This is sent to the presidents for its approval.

I. Executive Council Approval Phase

The president on receipt of the advanced proposal as approved by the budget and
planning present the draft estimate before his cabinets members known as the council of
ministers for further consideration and approval. This council discusses and agrees the
estimates with the president‟s political priorities of government and therefore the
president gives his executives approval of the draft estimates before sending it to house of
legislature inform of appropriation bills.

II. Legislative Approval Stage

The National Assembly comprises the house of representative and the house of senate.
The president presents his budget package to the National assembly at a joint meeting of
the two houses of assembly. This meeting is known as BUDGET SESSION. It is up to
the national assembly to approve, modify or rejects the Bills. In each house there are
standing committees, which relates to the ministries and departments. At such
committees, each ministries and departments are invited to defend the increasing

26
 budgeting allocation, in justification of their Programmes. The house debates the bill and
makes modifications where necessary. After the house must have considered and
reconciled the budgets estimates in the light of national economic and priorities then the
appropriation committee is brought for appropriation purposes. If the house are
convinced and satisfied with the proposals, each of them will approve the budget. Where
there are discrepancies in opinion on some particular items, the two houses appoint
finance committee that would resolve such differences. The resolution of the finance
committee is final on the difference. Afterward they both sit to approve the budget. On
approval of the national assembly the budget is sent back to the president for his assents
and signature. And consequently it becomes the appropriation act. These will now be
printed and distribute to the ministries and department inform of approved estimates.

METHODOLOGY

THE RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a plan that guides the researcher in the various stages of the research process
(Agbonifoh and Yomere, 1999). It defines the population being studied, the sample size e.t.c.
Generally, research design may be experimental, a survey, an observation or a case study. This
study will adopt a survey design.

Survey design has to do with systematically gathering information from respondents for the
purpose of understanding and or predicting some aspect of the behavior of the population of
interest.(Agbonifoh and Yomere 1999). It is of great importance to identify the method and
procedure adopted in this research work, since it gives the reader background information on
how to evaluate the findings and conclusion.

3.3 SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION

In adopting any method in research study, it is imperative to put into consideration the approach
that will yield the most productive result relevant to the problems at hand. In this regard, data for
this study/research were gathered from the following sources.

27
Primary Data are first hand data obtained from the respondents. The research used both
structured interviews and questionnaires including observation method to obtain relevant data
from the respondents.
Secondary Data are data obtained from review of related literatures of opinions of expects in the
subject matter. These data were obtained from text books, magazine, newspaper, from private
professionals, public and academic libraries.

3.4 POPULATION OF STUDY

Population of the study refers to the group about whom we want to be able to draw up a
conclusion. It is the totality of objects or elements been studied and to which the generalization
of our result will apply. Agbonifoh and Yomere (1999) states that the population is the totality
from which the researcher draws his sample. The focus of this study therefore, is on budget
monitoring and intelligence unit entrusted with the responsibilities to ensure the success of Due
process mechanism. These governmental bodies include the Budget Monitoring Unit (240),
Budget Review Unit (160), and Anti-Corruption Unit (200) totaling six hundred (600) staff.

3.5 THE SAMPLE DESIGN AND DETERMINATION OF SAMPLE SIZE

A sample size of (240) two hundred and fourty would be used to represent the population of the
responsible staff in the sample Board. The sample size determines the sample size from a
heterogeneous population. The sample size can be determined by using Yaro Yamani Formula:
n= N
1 + N(e)2
Where:
n = Sample size to be used
N = Population size
e = Error estimated level of significance
1 = Constant.
For the purpose of this study, the level of significance (e) is given as 0.05 that is 95% confidence
level/limit.

Given that N = 600, e = 0.05, n =?

28
  600
1+ 600 (0.05)2

 240

3.6 THE DATA GATHERING INSTRUMENT

The research instrument that will be used is Questionnaire. A questionnaire is a document
containing a set of questions for soliciting information from respondents on the subject matter of
the research investigation (Yomere and Agbonifoh, 1999). It contains questions to be answered
completely by the respondents. It is particularly useful where the researcher wants to obtain
answers to the same set of questions from several people.

The researcher will be making use of closed ended questions. Closed-ended questions are those
in which respondents are given options that will adequately cover the possible range of their
response. Closed-ended question that will be used in the questionnaire are dichotomous
questions and liker-type questions.

The research instrument used was the questionnaire. The questionnaire had four sections. Section
“A” was for background variables while section „B‟ „C‟ „D‟ contained a few questions needed to
unravel due process as an instrument for public accountability. The data were analyzed using
simple percentages and kendall‟s measure of concordance at 0.05 level of significance. This was
used to ascertain whether or not there is correlation between the variables of interest.

3.7 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

Data analysis has to do with converting a series of recorded information (data) into descriptive
statements and/or inferences about relationships. The data would be collected from the structured
and unstructured sections of the questionnaire will be grouped with a view of attaining the
objectives that have been put forward.

In analyzing the data, the chi-square statistical method would be used in testing the hypotheses.
While the table and percentage method would be used in analyzing the remaining data. Also a

29
brief interpretation of the percentages in the table will be made. The reasons for using percentage
and frequency table were based on research questions in testing the variables in the research
study used by the researcher. The data collected from the respondent were being examined to
find out the number of the respondents with similar answers to each particular question, the
percentage of the numbers got were then worked out. The table was also provided to give the
number of respondents with the percentage distribution. The likely outcome was also analyzed
and narrated.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The researcher met with some problem in undertaking this study, notably in some areas of data
collecting. The problems are as follows:
Scarcity of Material: This aspect of public accountability has received very little attention from
scholars despite its long historical age. Consequently, there are few literary publication available
to the student; the researcher was therefore limited to reviewing few literature which are mostly
in origin, through relevant to the study.
Bureaucracy: Government establishment are well known for maintaining utmost screening as
regards their operations, more so, where it is a study that concerns their financial operation the
researcher found it difficult to obtain material relating to the study (that is literature) and some
officials who have been very elusive and uncooperative. More so the bureaucracy and protocol
the research went through to obtain material and an appointment has been very discouraging.

Due to all this constrains, the researcher cannot say for certain whether the study has covered
very rutty gritty of the sample ministry as regards its due process in public accountability, but
one thing is certain, enough materials have been gathered to help express an opinion as to the
operative of the sample ministry.

Apart from the above listed limitations witnessed by this researcher is time constraint. This is a
major limiting factor as the time between approval of the study and the deadline for submission
was very short. The researcher relied heavily on the good will of the research supervisor
because he understands my plight. Again lack of sufficient funds to conduct an extensive study
was another handicap.

30
3.8 OPERATIONALIZATION AND MEASUREMENT OF VARIABLES
VARIAB VARIABLE OPERATIONALIZATION MEASURE REPRESEN
LE LABEL MENT TED IN
NUMBE DATA
R GATHERIN
G
INSTRUME
NT AS IN
QUESTION
NUMBER

Variable To Is there awareness in budget Closed 11

determine
number 1 formulation process? ended
whether there is
Is there inadequacy of budget Closed
compliance with 12
formulation? ended
due process in
Is there compliance with due Closed
budget
process mechanism in budget ended 13
formulation formulation?

. Budget provisions are strictly

Closed 14
adhere to?
ended
Would you say the needs of public
Closed
are adequately met in the budget 15
ended
formulation?

Variable To find out the Is there a correlation between due Closed 10

number 2 impact of due process and budget performance? ended
process on
Is there a performance appraisal of
budget
the approved suppliers /
performance Closed
contractors? 19

31
 The significant impact of due ended
process mechanism would be the
outcome of service delivery?
Closed 20
There is inclusion of all
ended
stakeholders in the determination
of budget priorities
22
Closed
ended

Variable To determine the The Implementation of Due Likert type 6

number 3 Process Mechanism exists to
extent to which
ensure thorough accountability in
budgets are public offices.

effectively To a reasonable extent budgets are

monitored & effectively monitored &
Likert type 7
implemented.
implemented.
Likert type 8
There is a strong demand for
accountability from the public
officials, by the people on budget
implementation and outcomes?

Evidence of systemic corruption

and office immunity reduces Likert type 9
efficient implementation of Due
process as an instrument of public
accountability

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

32
Yomere and Agbonifoh (1999), have written that is the analysis stage of a research project that

meaning is given to the data that has been collected, if the data is not properly analyzed the

conclusion made from the data will not be valid and may even be wrong.

The substance of a research is the extent to which the available information is processed to the

purpose of drawing reference to conclude the research. The questionnaires administered were

analyses by using the simple percentage method was used to categorize the information in order

of occurrence. I adopted the use of chi-square technique as basis of making decisions as to

rejection or acceptance of the hypothesis stated in his study.

4.3 TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS

In the introductory chapter of this study, I formulated some hypothesis to guide the conduct of

this study. I shall, in this section, attempt to test these hypotheses in order to determine their

acceptability and unacceptability--hence, it is after that a reliable conclusion could be drawn.

The following hypotheses are to be tested:

1. Null Hypothesis: There is no compliance with due process in budget formulation

Alternative Hypothesis: There is compliance with due process in budget formulation

2. Null Hypothesis: There is no relationship between due process and budget performance

Alternative Hypothesis: There is a relationship between due process and budget

performance

3. Null Hypothesis: There is no relationship between effective monitoring and budget policy

implementation

33
 Alternative Hypothesis: There is a relationship between effective monitoring and budget

policy implementation

The hypothesis would be tested using the chi-square statistical tool, which is given as:

For Two Way Classification

χ2 = ∑(Oij- eij)2
eij

χ 2 = chi- square

O = observed frequency
ij

eij = expected frequency

d.f = degree of freedom = (k-1)(r-1)

Where; k = no. of columns

r = no. of row since the expected is not given,

We shall solve for it using the formula

Column Total × Row Total

Grand Total

The decision rule of the hypothesis would be at 0.05 level of significance in which case the null

hypothesis will be rejected if the calculated is greater than the tabulated and accepted if

otherwise.
2
χ cal > χ 2tab we reject Ho
2
χ cal < χ 2tab we accept Ho

HYPOTHESIS 1

Two way classifications

RESPONSES YES UNCERTAIN NO TOTAL

34
 Question 11 70 32 138 240

Question 12 27 61 152 240

Question 13 17 89 134 240

Question 14 69 50 121 240

Question 15 92 64 84 240

TOTAL 275 296 629 1200

e11 = 240 × 275 = 55

1200

e12 = 240 × 296 = 59.2

1200

e13 = 240 × 629 = 125.8

1200

Put into the formula

2
X2 = ij ij
eij
(O - e )
Table 4.1 The computational details of the 1 st hypothesis

Oij eij Oij-eij (Oij-eij)2 (Oij-eij)2/eij

70 55 15 225 4.091
32 55.9 -23.9 571.21 10.218
138 125.8 12.2 148.84 1.183
27 55 -28 784 14.255
61 55.9 5.1 26.01 0.465
152 125.8 26.2 686.44 5.457
17 55 -38 1444 26.255
89 55.9 33.1 1095.61 19.599
134 125.8 8.2 67.24 0.534
69 55 14 196 3.564
50 55.9 -5.9 34.81 0.623
121 125.8 -4.8 23.04 0.183

35
 92 55 37 1369 24.891
64 55.9 8.1 65.61 1.174
84 125.8 -41.8 1747.24 13.889
Total 126.381
At 0.05 significance level

d.f = (3-1)(5-1) = 8

Therefore, at 0.05 significance level

2
χ tab = 15.507
2
χ cal = 126.381
2
χ cal > χ 2tab we reject Ho

Decision rule: The chi-square tabulated under level of significance of 0.05 @ 8 degree of
2
freedom χ t = 15.507. Meanwhile the calculated value of chi-square is more than the tabulated,

value (χ 2c> χ 2t) in hypothesis I so we accept the alternative hypothesis which state that there is

compliance with due process in budget formulation

HYPOTHESIS 2

RESPONSES YES UNCERTAIN NO TOTAL

Question 10 119 27 94 240
Question 19 71 36 133 240
Question 20 147 9 84 240
Question 22 80 148 12 240
TOTAL 417 220 323 960
Source: Field Survey

e11 = 240 × 417 = 104.25

960

e12 = 240 × 220 = 55

960

e13 = 240 × 323 = 80.75

960

36
Put into the formula
2
χ2 = ij ij
(O -eije )

Table 4.2 The computational details of the 2 nd hypothesis

Oij eij Oij-eij (Oij-eij)2 (Oij-eij)2/eij

119 104.25 14.75 217.563 2.087
27 55 -28 784.000 14.255
94 80.75 13.25 175.563 2.174
71 104.25 -33.25 1105.563 10.605
36 55 -19 361.000 6.564
133 80.75 52.25 2730.063 33.809
147 104.25 42.75 1827.563 17.531
9 55 -46 2116.000 38.473
84 80.75 3.25 10.563 0.131
80 104.25 -24.25 588.063 5.641
148 55 93 8649.000 157.255
12 80.75 -68.75 4726.563 58.533
Total 347.056
At 0.05 significance level

d.f = (3-1)(4-1) = 6

Therefore, at 0.05 significance level

2
χ tab = 15.507
2
χ cal = 347.056
2
χ cal > χ 2tab we reject Ho

Decision rule: The chi-square tabulated under level of significance of 0.05 @ 6 degree of

freedom χ2t = 15.507. Meanwhile the calculated value of chi-square is more than the tabulated,

value (χ2c>χ2t) in hypothesis II so we accept the alternative hypothesis which state that there is a

relationship between due process and budget performance

HYPOTHESIS 3

37
Two way classification

Strongly Strongly
RESPONSES Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Disagree TOTAL

Question 6 67 97 15 33 28 240

Question 7 45 143 16 17 19 240

Question 8 97 78 7 30 28 240

Question 9 98 89 38 7 8 240

TOTAL 307 407 76 87 83 960

Source: Field Survey

e11 = 240 × 307 = 76.75

960

e12 = 240 × 407 = 101.75

960

e13 = 240 × 76 = 19
960

e14 = 240 × 87 = 21.75

960

e15 = 240 × 83 = 20.75

960

Put into the formula

χ2 = (Oij- eij)2
eij

Table 4.3 The computational details of the 3 rd hypothesis

Oij eij O -e (Oij-eij)2 (Oij-eij)2/eij

ij ij
67 76.75 -9.75 95.0625 1.239
97 101.75 -4.75 22.5625 0.222

38
 15 19 -4 16 0.842
33 21.75 11.25 126.563 5.819
28 20.75 7.25 52.5625 2.533
45 76.75 -31.75 1008.06 13.134
143 101.75 41.25 1701.56 16.723
16 19 -3 9 0.474
17 21.75 -4.75 22.5625 1.037
19 20.75 -1.75 3.0625 0.148
97 76.75 20.25 410.063 5.343
78 101.75 -23.75 564.063 5.544
7 19 -12 144 7.579
30 21.75 8.25 68.0625 3.129
28 20.75 7.25 52.5625 2.533
98 76.75 21.25 451.563 5.884
89 101.75 -12.75 162.563 1.598
38 19 19 361 19.000
7 21.75 -14.75 217.563 10.003
8 20.75 -12.75 162.563 7.834
Total 110.617
At 0.05 significance level

d.f = (5-1)(4-1) = 12

Therefore, at 0.05 significance level

2
χ tab = 21.026
2
χ cal = 110.617
2
χ cal > χ 2tab we reject Ho

Decision rule: The chi-square tabulated under level of significance of 0.05 @ 12 degree of

freedom χ2t = 21.036. Meanwhile the calculated value of chi-square is more than the tabulated,

value (χ2c>χ2t) in hypothesis I so we accept the alternative hypothesis which state that there is a

relationship between effective monitoring and budget policy implementation.

39
The hypotheses were evaluated with the aid of Chi-squared for population proportion at 5% level

of significance. The research result revealed the following:

a) That the proportion of respondents in the sampled ministry agreed that there is

compliance with due process in budget formulation.

b) That the proportions of respondents in the sampled ministry agree that there is a

relationship between due process and budget performance.

c) That the proportion of respondents in the sampled ministry there is a relationship between

effective monitoring and budget policy implementation.

6.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The study revealed that;

1. Citizen involvement in public accountability is a relatively recent phenomenon compared

to other areas of public governance. Most citizen involvement in public accountability

has occurred at local community or village levels.

2. BMPIU has been effective in reducing overcharging on government projects through

rigorous checks and controls.

3. Several modalities have opened up to citizens groups in engaging governments in audit

institutions and processes that indicate potential for future partnerships. These modalities

include actual field feedback, performance indicator surveys, and citizen report cards,

among others.

4. The level of accountability is very poor in Nigeria because the attributes of accessibility,

comprehensiveness, relevance, quality, reliability and timely disclosure of economic,

40
 social and political information about government activities are completely non available

or partially available for the citizens to assess the performance of public officers mostly

the political office holders.

5. The due process unit is amongst others responsible for ensuring that only projects

budgeted for, are presented for certification and subsequent execution.

6. BMPIU has been effective in ensuring full compliance with laid down guidelines and

procedures for the procurement of capital and minor capital projects as well as associated

goods and services.

6.3 CONCLUSION

On a conclusive note, to consolidate the gains of Due Process, the nation must go beyond the

transitional arrangement that is policy – driven, goal-oriented and institutionally organised

procurement system that should be embraced by all. It should be noted that Due process and

public accountability produced some useful dividends. It resulted in a more transparent, efficient

and effective accountable system which creates equal assess to bidders of public sector contracts.

It leads to increase in Government revenue base by minimizing avenues of wastages and

leakages in the economy through efficient management of government resources. It makes it

possible for Contractors and Suppliers to have a fair hearing when aggrieved through filing their

protests to a statutory contract appeal Board (Ekpenkhio, 2003).

Finally, the official instrument designed to achieve this much desired honesty, transparency and

accountability in the conduct of government business especially in the award of contracts and

procurement in the ministries, parastatals and departments in Nigeria is the Due Process Policy.

41
With this Due Process and other reforms such as ICPC and EFCC the people are rekindling their

confidence in the erst-while lost hope on the government. There is that emergence of a new

culture where objective parameter of bids competitive response determines the ultimate winners.

5.4 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the above analysis, the following recommendations were made;

1. Government should give the due process mechanism appropriate legal backing by an act

of the parliament so as to make it a generally acceptable policy.

2. For accountability to be successful in the management of public funds in Nigeria there

must be a reduction in the level of corruption, improving public sector accounting and

auditing standards.

3. Due processes and value-for-money audits should remain in our policy for economy,

efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources.

4. Due process is too centralized and must be decentralized in order to move procurements

by the spending units from the threshold of the resident due process team.

5. Due process should be adequately strengthened in local government level where it is not

enjoying the required acceptance.

6. Due Process office should improve on the sensitization, promotion and education of the

public on their functions.

7. There is need not only to consider the tender figures, but the due process office should

endeavour to include evaluation of pre-qualified bidders on the technical competence of

the bidding contracting firms.

42
 8. Government at all times should endeavour to re-strengthen due process through necessary

framework mechanisms that would repose confidence of the public in award of public

contracts so as not to bring colossal waste to public treasury.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Achua, J.K. (2009). “Reinventing Governmental Accounting for Accountability Assurance in
Nigeria”, Nigeria Research Journal of Accountancy, 1(1): 1-16.

Adegite, E. O. (2010). “Accounting, Accountability and National Development”, Nigerian

Accountant, 43(1): 56-64.

Agbonifoh, B.A. and Yomere (2004). “Research Methodology: Management Science and Social
Science Approach” Benin: Malthouse Press.

Agu, Sylvia Uchenna (2010). “Due Process as an Instrument for Public Accountability-A Study
of Obasanjo‟s Administration”. The Nigerian Journal of Politics and Public Policy.Vol.6,
1 & 2.

Agu, Sylvia Uchenna (2014). “Internal Control Mechanisms and Financial Accountability in the
Local Government System: An Assessment”. Nigerian Journal of Public Administration
and Local Government 12(1).

Appah, E. and Appiah, K.Z.A. (2010). “Fraud and Development of Sound Financial Institutions
in Nigeria”, Nigerian Journal for Development Research, 1(1): 49 – 56.

Bello, S. (2001). „Fraud Prevention and Control in Nigerian Public Service: The need for a
Dimensional Approach”, Journal of Business Administration, 1(2): 118-133.

BMPIU (2006). “20 Questions & Answers on Contract Due Process”. A Manual of Public
Procurement Reform Programme in Nigeria, 1st Edition.

43
Bovens, M., Schillemans, T., & 't Hart, P. (2008). “Does Public Accountability Work? An
assessment tool”. Public Administration 86(1), 225-242.

Bovens, M.A.P. (2005). “Public Accountability”, in: E. Ferlie, L. Lynne & C. Pollitt (eds.), The
Oxford Handbook of Public Management, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chijioke, J. (2004). “ASCON Workshop Proposal on Due Process” (Unpublished).

Ekpenkhio S.A. (2003). “Public Sector Procurement Reforms: The Nigerian Experience.” A
paper presented to the Government of the Federation at the Regional Workshop on
Procurement Reforms and Transparency in Government Procurement for Anglophone
African Countries in Tanzania.

Ekpo A.H. (2004.). “The Nigerian Economy under a New Democratic Experience: The Charles
Soludo Effect”. A paper presented at The Convocation Ceremony at University of
Nigeria, Nsukka.

Esenwa, F.O. (2004). “Project Procurement Method in Due Process.” Department of Physical
Planning and Development, National University Commission, Abuja.

Ezekwesili, O. (2003). “Due Process Guidelines and Budget 2002 Implementation”. A Paper
Presented at Abuja and Discussion on the Due Process by Office of the Secretary to the
Government of the Federation.

Ezekwezilli, O. (2004). “Understanding Due Process”. Villascope. Vol.4, No.2 April.

Ezekwesili O. (2005). “Due Process Mechanism and Digital Opportunities” Paper Presented to
the University Community at Princess Alexandria Auditorium, Nsukka: University of
Nigeria.

44
Gabriel Tanimu Aduda (2007). “Good Governance and Public Procurement: An Appraisal of the
Budget Monitoring and Price Intelligence Unit.” Pillars of Governance Series Vol.4.

Johnson, I. E. (2004). Public Sector Accounting and Financial Control. Lagos: Financial
Institutions Training Centre.

Kaufman, D. (2005). “Myths and Realities of Governance and Corruption. World Bank
Governance Programme, Washington, DC.

Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding Power to Account. New York: Palgrave. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T.
(1992). Reinventing government: how the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public
sector Reading, Massachussets: Addison-Wesley.

Nwankwo, S. (2004). “Due Process in Public Accounting”. The Nigerian Accountant 5(2), 34.

Obasanjo, O. (2003). “Nigeria: From Pond of Corruption to Island of Integrity”. Lecture,

Delivered at the 10th Anniversary Celebration of Transparency International, Berlin.

Obasanjo, Olusegun. (2004). “Due Process Saves Nigeria N102 bn.” This Day, July 13, Abuja.

Obasi, I.N. (2000). “Local Government Autonomy and Implication for Public Accountability”.
In E. Ozor (Ed.), Public Accountability: Financial Management in Local Governments in
Nigeria. Lizzibon Publishers, Lagos.

Obianyo, N. N. (2003). “Public Accountability In Nigeria Under Obasanjo‟s Regime: An

Appraisal”. In E. O Ezeani (ed.) Public Accountability in Nigeria: Perspectives and
Issues. Academic Publishing Company, Enugu.

Ojo, J. (2006). “2007 Elections: INEC blames Due Process Office for Delay”. Daily Sun,
Sunday, August 20.

45
Okoh, L. and Ohwoyibo, O. (2010). “Public Accountability: Vehicle for Socio-Economic
Development of Nigeria”, International Journal of Investment and Finance, 3(1 & 2):
145-149.

Okwoli, A. A. (2004). “Towards Probity, Accountability, and Transparency in Revenue

Generation in the Nigerian Public Sector”, Nigerian Journal of Accounting Research,
Vol. 1(1): 1- 9

Omolehinwa, E. (2003). “Government Budgeting in Nigeria”. Pumark Nig Ltd, Lagos.

Onuorah, Anastasia Chi-Chi; Appah, Ebimobowei (2012). “Accountability and Public Sector
Financial Management in Nigeria”. Arabian Journal of Business and Management
Review (OMAN Chapter) Vol. 1, No.6; January

Oransaye, S. (2003). “Due Process, Accountability and Cost Control in the Award and
Administration of Government Contracts”. Paper delivered at a seminar organized for
Executive Arm of the River State Government, Port Harcourt, August 12.

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (Eds.). (2004). Public Management Reform: A Comparative
Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Premchand, A. (1999). “Public Financial Accountability” in Schviavo-Campo, S. (ed).

“Governance, Corruption and Public Financial Management”. Asian Development Bank.
Manila, Philippines. www.adb.org

Rubin, E. (2006). The myth of non-bureaucratic accountability and the antiadministrative

impulse. In M. W. Dowdle (Ed.), Public Accountability: Designs, Dilemmas and
Experiences (pp. 52-82). New York: Cambridge University Press.

46
Stephen Ocheni; Basil C. Nwankwo (2012). “Assessment of Application of Due-Process Policy
in Public Procurement and Contracts Under Obasanjo Administration in Nigeria, 2003-
2007” International Business and Management Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 93-98

Tanzi, V. (1999). “Governance, Corruption, and Public Finance: An Overview”, in

SchvianoCampo, S. (ed). “Governance, Corruption and Public Financial Management”,
Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines. www.adb.org

The ABC of the Contract Due Process Policy (2005). “A Manual on Public Procurement Reform
Programme in Nigeria”. Published by the “Nte” Agency Unit (Due Process), State House,
Abuja.

Wali, A. (2007). “Due Process: Federal Government Saves N200billion” Opening Lecture of
The Joint Planning Board and The National Council on Development Planning, Calabar,
Friday, March 23.

47