Date: July 9, 2026 l Reporter: Bill James
Lawyers representing former House of Representatives member Rt. Hon. Mark Terseer Gbillah have filed a Freedom of Information request to the Presidency, demanding records related to billions of naira collected under a controversial oil and gas royalty directive issued during President Bola Tinubu’s administration.
The request, submitted by Chronos Legal & Co. to the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President, seeks detailed presidential records, approvals, correspondence, expenditure documents, and implementation files connected to a 2023 directive that altered how the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission’s statutory cost-of-collection funds are managed. According to the petitioners, the move is aimed at forcing public accountability over revenue that has allegedly been collected for years without adequate disclosure on how it has been spent.
At the centre of the dispute is a July 2023 presidential approval that reportedly restructured the NUPRC’s statutory 4 percent cost-of-collection framework. Under the arrangement, 2.5 percent of the fund was to remain available for the Commission’s operations and routine capital expenditure, while the remaining 1.5 percent was to be ring-fenced specifically for upgrading crude oil and gas metering and transparency systems. The lawyers now want to know how much money has been collected under that arrangement since it took effect and whether the funds were used strictly for the approved purpose.
The legal request reportedly asks the Presidency to disclose whether the Office of the Chief of Staff prepared, transmitted, or acted upon any memorandum concerning the review, division, or implementation of the NUPRC fund structure. It also seeks certified true copies of all approvals, internal memos, correspondence, committee records, implementation documents, and other presidential authorisations linked to the policy. The lawyers want clarification on whether the President personally approved the restructuring through a written directive, marginal note, oral instruction later documented, or any other form of executive authorisation.
Beyond the approval trail, the petition goes further by demanding a full accounting of the money involved. It seeks disclosure of how much has been collected under the revised framework since July 2023, whether any portion of the ring-fenced 1.5 percent was diverted, and whether any transfer was authorised to other agencies, including the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority. The lawyers are also asking what became of any remaining balance under the administrative split and whether subsequent directives changed the original purpose of the reserved funds.
The request extends to project-level accountability. According to Sahara Reporters, the legal team is asking for project lists, procurement records, contractor details, payment schedules, monitoring reports, and implementation documents relating to any project financed through the 1.5 percent metering and transparency allocation. It also requests records showing the legal, fiscal, budgetary, treasury, and procurement basis used to justify the split and manage the money under public finance rules.
This development is politically significant because it touches a highly sensitive issue in Nigeria’s oil governance system: the management of revenue retained by regulatory agencies outside the normal public spotlight. The NUPRC’s cost-of-collection structure may appear technical, but in practice it involves enormous sums because it is tied to the collection of royalties and other upstream petroleum revenues. Any allegation that such funds have been retained, split, transferred, or spent without transparent public reporting immediately raises broader questions about fiscal oversight, regulatory discretion, and executive control over oil-sector revenues.
The case also reflects growing public and legal scrutiny of how Tinubu-era petroleum reforms are being implemented behind the scenes. While the administration has repeatedly framed energy-sector reforms as part of a broader modernisation agenda, critics argue that transparency must extend beyond policy announcements to include detailed disclosure of how revenue-linked directives are executed and who benefits from them. In a sector long associated with opacity, leakages, and elite bargaining, even a technically worded directive can become politically explosive if billions of naira are involved and public reporting is weak.
The lawyers reportedly cited the Freedom of Information Act 2011 and gave the Presidency seven days to provide the requested records or transfer the request to any public institution holding the documents, while notifying the applicants in writing. They also asked that all relevant records, including electronic files, approval registers, correspondence, and payment records, be preserved pending full compliance.
At its core, the FOI request is an attempt to force a paper trail into the open. If the Presidency responds fully, it could shed rare light on how billions linked to the NUPRC’s cost-of-collection framework have been handled since 2023, whether the ring-fenced metering funds were used as intended, and whether any administrative or political decisions altered the original approval structure.
Whether the Tinubu administration complies quickly, partially, or contests the request, the matter has already added another layer of scrutiny to Nigeria’s petroleum governance system. It also reinforces a broader message from civil society and public-interest lawyers: in a country where oil revenues remain central to state power and public finance, no directive involving billions of naira can be treated as a routine internal administrative matter without inviting questions about transparency, legality, and accountability.