By Nkechi Eze
Former Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Tukur Buratai (retd.), has said allegations surrounding the alleged diversion of $1 billion approved for defence procurement unfairly damaged the reputations of service chiefs, insisting that the funds were managed by the Ministry of Defence.
Buratai stated this on Monday in Abuja at a conference organised by the Defence Correspondents Association of Nigeria (DECAN), where he challenged the handling of public narratives surrounding the controversial defence procurement funds and called for greater institutional accountability.
The former army chief maintained that the money, approved by the National Economic Council for defence procurement, did not pass through his hands or the accounts of the Nigerian Army, Navy or Air Force.
According to him, the funds were released to the Ministry of Defence, which was responsible for managing the procurement process.
“Not a single dollar of that fund passed through my hands or through the accounts of the Nigerian Army, Navy, or Air Force,” Buratai said.
He described the allegations as “political and malicious,” recalling that they emerged during the 2019 election period when opposition figures reportedly alleged that the funds had been diverted for electoral purposes.
Buratai said the Federal Government publicly refuted the allegations at the time, but the controversy continued to affect the image of the service chiefs, even though, according to him, they were not directly responsible for managing the funds.
He faulted the Ministry of Defence for not publicly providing sufficient explanations about the disbursement of the money and the contracts awarded, arguing that accountability should be directed at the institution that handled the procurement.
“The $1 billion arms procurement controversy festered because the institution that managed the funds — the Ministry of Defence — remained silent while Service Chiefs absorbed criticism,” he said.
To prevent similar controversies, Buratai proposed the establishment of a Defence Procurement Transparency Portal to publish information on contracts awarded, contracting entities and delivery timelines, subject to national security considerations.
He said such a platform would provide the public with a clearer understanding of defence spending and ensure that questions about procurement were addressed by the appropriate authorities.
“When the media asks where the money went, the answer should come from the ministry that spent it, not from military officers who never touched it,” he said.
The retired general also recommended quarterly accountability bulletins summarising court martial outcomes involving alleged human rights violations and operational misconduct, provided such disclosures did not compromise the rights of accused personnel or ongoing military operations.
On allegations of human rights abuses by security personnel, Buratai said credible claims should be investigated and prosecuted where substantiated, stressing that the military must remain subject to the law.
He added that the Armed Forces needed to demonstrate the credibility and transparency of their disciplinary processes to sustain public confidence.
Buratai further called for improved communication between the military, the Ministry of Defence and the media, saying timely and comprehensive explanations of security operations and institutional decisions would help prevent misconceptions and strengthen public understanding.
His remarks come amid continuing calls for greater transparency in defence expenditure and accountability in the management of public funds allocated to national security.
