Tinubu outspends Buhari on corruption fight, but is he winning the war?

President Bola Tinubu has never made fighting corruption the defining theme of his presidency in the way his predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, did. Over the past three years, however, Tinubu’s administration has consistently allocated more funding to Nigeria’s anti-corruption agencies than they received under Buhari, while Nigeria‘s standing on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index has also improved modestly.

The outlook presents a striking paradox. Buhari’s government was headlined by an anti-corruption war. By contrast, Tinubu’s 2023 campaign didn’t dwell much on the subject. In his 80-page manifesto, it appears briefly under a section on fiscal policy, where he promised a reform of the civil service “to fight corruption, reduce bureaucracy, streamline agencies and decrease inefficiency and waste”.

Higher allocations for the anti-graft war over the past three years have coincided with increased government revenues driven by Tinubu’s economic reforms, particularly the removal of the fuel subsidy. Analysts say that higher allocations are not a measure of the government’s commitment to tackling corruption.

“The Tinubu administration may have increased funding for anti-corruption agencies. However, increased funding alone is not a reliable indicator of political commitment to fighting corruption,” Kolawole Oludare, deputy director of Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), tells The Africa Report.

Bigger budgets, slower release of funds

Nigeria’s anti-corruption drive is led by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). Other agencies with anti-graft responsibilities include the Code of Conduct Bureau, the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, the Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, the Bureau of Public Procurement and the offices of the auditor general and accountant general.

All have received larger budget allocations under Tinubu. The EFCC’s budget rose from N56.8bn ($41.4m) in 2024 to N92.2bn ($67.3m) in 2025 before easing slightly to N88.5bn in 2026. By comparison, its highest allocation under Buhari was N49.9bn in 2023. In 2017, it received just N17.2bn.

With successive administrations, agencies hardly receive full budgetary allocations due to funding deficits. Of the EFCC’s N92.2bn allocation for 2025, only N68.5bn was released. Still, it exceeds the commission’s highest annual budget allocation during Buhari’s era.

The ICPC has also seen larger appropriations, getting approvals for N14.5bn in 2024, N22.4bn in 2025 and N21.1bn in 2026. However, the picture is more nuanced. Of the N22.4bn allocated for 2025, only N5.3bn was released. Under Buhari, the commission generally enjoyed higher release rates. In 2023, it received N8.4bn out of its N10.6bn allocation, while releases in 2020 and 2021 were similarly close to budgeted amounts. Analysts also point to the naira’s lower purchasing power under Tinubu.

Modest global ranking gains

Nigeria has made modest gains on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index under Tinubu. In 2022 – Buhari’s last full year in office – the country ranked 150 out of 180 countries with a score of 24 out of 100.

It climbed to 145 with a score of 25 in 2023, improved further to 140 with 26 points in 2024, then slipped slightly to 142 in 2025 while retaining the same score. Despite the improvement, Nigeria remains among the world’s poorest performers on perceptions of public-sector corruption.

“The same Transparency International assessments show that Nigeria continues to face serious governance and corruption challenges, underscoring the need for deeper institutional reforms rather than isolated enforcement actions,” says Oludare.

The 2024 listing of Tinubu as the world’s third-most corrupt leader by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project showed a mixed picture.

Asset recovery gains

Still, the government points to asset recovery to measure Tinubu’s anti-corruption war. Attorney General Lateef Fagbemi disclosed in May 2025 that the EFCC recovered N248bn, $105m and 753 duplexes in Abuja in 2024 alone. The ICPC recovered N29.6bn and $966,900 over the same period.

ICPC Chairman Musa Adamu Aliyu announced recoveries totalling N37.4bn and $2.35bn in 2025, while EFCC Chairman Ola Olukoyede said the commission recovered N566bn, more than $411m and over 1,500 non-cash assets between 2023 and 2025. For the EFCC, those figures demonstrate that the administration’s approach is producing tangible outcomes.

“The biggest strength of any anti-corruption fight is to deny fraudsters the pleasure of enjoying the proceeds of their crimes,” says EFCC spokesman Dele Oyewale. “These asset forfeitures, temporary or permanent, are also a boost to the economy.”

Is Tinubu winning the war?

Tinubu’s framing of the anti-corruption fight is framed differently. He sees corruption primarily as a consequence of economic hardship rather than criminal conduct. He says that his reforms – such as fuel subsidy removal, higher minimum wages, a student loan scheme and increased allocations to states and local governments – reduce incentives for corruption by improving economic conditions.

“If I can add more money, giving more money to the states and local government level, we are addressing corruption directly,” he said during his December 2024 presidential chat.

The EFCC points to larger budgets, asset recoveries and non-interference as evidence of the government’s commitment. “I am not making a comparison with the previous administration, but I am telling you that this government has shown seriousness in the fight against corruption,” Oyewale says.

But governance experts remain unconvinced. Tinubu’s large-scale state pardon for offenders, including looters, in October raised eyebrows. Former National Human Rights Commission chairman Chidi Odinkalu says that the president’s government lacks a clearly articulated anti-corruption policy.

“If the government has an anti-corruption policy, I have not seen it yet. And I am sure I am not alone in saying this. The truth is that a lot of people will be surprised to hear that Tinubu is fighting corruption,” he says. This coincides with Odinkalu, who says that convictions of politically exposed persons have become rare and that anti-corruption efforts increasingly appear directed at political opponents.

Fagbemi has pushed back against that narrative. “We don’t interfere in investigations,” he said last year.

EFCC’s Oyewale argues that the anti-corruption fight is not merely about court prosecution. “It is also about implementing socially beneficial programmes that discourage corruption. The N50bn take-off grant for the student loan scheme came from recovered assets.”

He also dismisses allegations of selective prosecution. “There is no political pressure at all. This government has given the EFCC a free hand to operate. There are many members of the ruling party that we have prosecuted – Yahaya Bello, Saleh Mamman and Sadiya Farouq.”

Lack of formal anti-corruption strategy?

However, Olanrewaju Suraju, chairman of the Human and Environmental Development Agenda, says Tinubu’s government lacks institutional coordination. “My assessment is that the government lacks a formal anti-corruption strategy that the Buhari administration had.

Unlike the Buhari government, international bodies are not partnering with the Tinubu administration on anti-corruption efforts. That makes the fight considerably more difficult. The presidency is simply not giving the issue the level of attention it deserves,” he says.

Oludare points to SERAP’s litigation over the Niger Delta Development Commission forensic audit, electoral offences, Nigerian National Petroleum Company spending and compliance with the Freedom of Information Act as evidence that transparency remains weak despite official commitments.

Ultimately, he says, success should not be measured by bigger budgets or marginal improvements in perception rankings. “It should be measured by whether public officials are held accountable irrespective of political affiliation. Whether citizens can obtain information about how public funds are spent. Whether recovered assets are transparently managed and whether institutions, rather than individuals, drive the anti-corruption fight.” (The Africa Report)