Group Cautions Against Media Trial In Allegations Against NNRA

The Integrity Advocacy for Development Initiative (IADI) has cautioned against media trial over allegations of misappropriation involving the Nigerian Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NNRA).

The group while calling for a thorough and evidence-based investigation, stressed that allegations and audit observations should not be treated as proof of personal guilt.

At a press briefing in Abuja, the executive director of IADI, Comrade Ofomhi Christopher, said the organisation was responding to a publication by a media organisation dated October 1, 2026, which alleged that about N6.69 billion was involved in contract fraud and misappropriation at the NNRA.

IADI also referred to a protest reportedly staged at the NNRA headquarters on October 5 by Global Integrity Watch (GIW), where the organisation demanded accountability, responses to audit observations and Freedom of Information (FoI) requests, as well as changes in the leadership of the regulatory authority.

Christopher said the allegations had attracted legitimate public interest but urged all parties to allow evidence, rather than headlines or predetermined conclusions, to guide the process.

“An allegation is not a conviction,” he said, arguing that the public should have access to the underlying audit observations, the periods and transactions involved, the contracts concerned, the status of projects or services, responses from the NNRA and the current status of any outstanding observations.

According to IADI, an audit observation is a serious matter that requires explanation and verification but does not, on its own, constitute a judicial finding of fraud or personal misappropriation.

The organisation also acknowledged an explanation attributed to the NNRA Director-General concerning the authority’s 2024 capital budget.

According to the explanation cited by IADI, the NNRA’s total capital budget for 2024 was approximately ₦2.7 billion, comprising about ₦200 million said to belong directly to the authority and approximately ₦2.5 billion relating to constituency projects. The explanation also referred to an additional ₦200 million regional project, bringing the total figure referenced to about ₦2.9 billion.

IADI said it was not presenting the explanation as conclusive, but maintained that the figures should be tested against appropriation documents, budget releases, project records, procurement documents, payment records and relevant audit reports.

The organisation said allegations concerning unexecuted projects should be subjected to physical verification, while claims of inflated contract prices should be examined through contracts, bills of quantities, procurement records and relevant price benchmarks.

It also called for scrutiny of contractor records where necessary and said any allegation of diversion or misappropriation should be tested by following the financial trail.

“Audit questions should lead to verification. Verification should lead to findings. And findings should determine the appropriate action,” Christopher said.

The organisation also addressed the October 5 protest by Global Integrity Watch, noting that civil society organisations have the constitutional right to demand accountability and organise peaceful assemblies.

IADI cited Section 40 of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly and association, while stressing that such rights should be exercised peacefully and within the law.

On Freedom of Information requests, the organisation said there should be a distinction between the right to protest and the legal remedies available where an FOI request is not answered.

IADI noted that the Freedom of Information Act provides a judicial mechanism for applicants who have been denied access to information or whose requests are deemed to have been denied. It urged civil society groups to consider available legal and institutional mechanisms alongside peaceful civic action.

An unanswered FOI request, the organisation argued, may justify further steps to obtain the requested information but should not, by itself, be treated as proof that allegations of fraud or misappropriation are true.

IADI also urged organisers of protests at government institutions to consider public safety, access to government premises and the safety of protesters, workers and members of the public.

At the same time, it said government institutions must respect lawful civic expression and should not use possible institutional tensions as a justification for suppressing peaceful protests.

“The answer to institutional disagreement should be law, evidence and due process, not intimidation or retaliation,” Christopher said.

IADI stressed that its position was neither to shield NNRA officials from scrutiny nor to dismiss questions surrounding public expenditure.

The organisation called on relevant audit and oversight authorities to publicly clarify the status of the observations in question, responses received from the NNRA and whether the matters had been resolved, sustained or referred for further investigation.

It also encouraged civil society organisations pursuing accountability to make full use of available legal and institutional mechanisms while retaining their legitimate right to peaceful civic action.

“The public deserves accountability. But the public also deserves accuracy, fairness and evidence,” Christopher said.

He added: “A headline is not a verdict. An allegation is not evidence. An audit observation is not automatically a finding of personal guilt.”