No fewer than 31 state governments spent an estimated N252.26bn to fight criminality and eliminate insecurity in their respective states in the first six months of 2026, with Kogi, Plateau and Bauchi accounting for the largest share, despite the continued killings, kidnappings and banditry recorded across the country.
An analysis of the fiscal performance of each state, utilising data from the Q1 to Q2 budget performance reports from January to June 2026 obtained from Open Nigerian States, a budgIT-backed website that serves as a repository of government budget data, on Sunday, showed that Kogi topped the table with N34.67bn, representing 13.74 per cent of the total expenditure captured in the data. Plateau followed with N23.69bn, or 9.39 per cent, while Bauchi spent N22.35bn, representing 8.86 per cent.
The states which recorded security-related expenditure include Abia, Adamawa, Anambra, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Benue, Borno, Cross River, Delta, Ebonyi, Ekiti, Enugu, Gombe, Imo, Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara, Lagos, Nasarawa, Niger, Ogun, Ondo, Oyo, Plateau, Sokoto, Taraba and Zamfara, while Akwa Ibom, Edo, Osun, Rivers and Yobe recorded no expenditure in the listed categories.
The figures cover spending on security equipment, homeland security personnel, security votes and operations, ministries of security or special advisers, and security trust funds.
It showed that state-level spending rose sharply in the latest data, with the combined expenditure across the states covered increasing by N176.42bn, or 232.6 per cent, from N75.84bn in 2025 to N252.26bn.
But based on a year-on-year comparison of states with available data, the figures you supplied show that 22 states spent approximately N144.44bn in 2026, compared with N75.84bn in 2025. That is an increase of approximately N68.61bn, or 90.5 per cent.
The figures highlight the efforts by sub-nationals as they deploy resources to complement federal security efforts and respond to threats within their territories.
The comparison, however, is based on the 22 states for which 2025 figures were supplied. The latest data contains figures for more states, so the overall comparison is not a like-for-like 36-state comparison.
On the categories of spending, security equipment expenditure was N37.08bn, while spending on homeland security personnel reached N26.89bn.
Security votes and related homeland security expenditure climbed from N47.67bn to N135.61bn, representing an increase of N87.94bn or 184.5 per cent. Expenditure under ministries of security and special advisers rose from N14.95bn to N42.15bn, up N27.20bn or 181.9 per cent.
Security trust fund spending also increased from N6.82bn to N10.53bn, representing a rise of N3.71bn or 54.4 per cent.
The spending came against the backdrop of persistent insecurity across the country, including killings, kidnappings, banditry, terrorism and communal violence.
The National Human Rights Commission said its Human Rights Observatory documented 651 kidnapping incidents and 492 killings between January and March 2026, with the North-Central, North-West and North-East among the worst affected regions.
The security situation remained severe into the second quarter. A report by SARI Global obtained by The PUNCH showed that 792 people were killed in 882 security incidents across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory in June alone.
The data also showed that military and other security agencies conducted about 14,000 operations in the first half of the year, killing 1,597 terrorists and insurgents and rescuing 1,516 kidnapped victims, according to official mid-year operational figures.
The wide gap between security expenditure and security outcomes has therefore continued to raise questions about the effectiveness, transparency and coordination of security spending at both the federal and state levels.
Kogi’s N34.67bn was the highest among the states listed, accounting for 13.74 per cent of the total. It spent N10.98bn more than Plateau, the second-highest spender, and N12.31bn more than Bauchi.
Plateau’s N23.69bn accounted for 9.39 per cent of the total, while Bauchi’s N22.35bn represented 8.86 per cent.
Combined, the three states spent about N80.70bn, accounting for 32.0 per cent of all the security-related expenditure captured in the data.
The figures are particularly significant because all three states have experienced varying degrees of security challenges, including attacks by armed groups, communal violence, banditry and kidnapping.
Bayelsa ranked fourth with N17.49bn, representing 6.93 per cent of the total. Its spending was N17.18bn lower than Kogi’s.
Ekiti followed with N14.83bn, or 5.88 per cent, while Anambra recorded N13.40bn, representing 5.31 per cent.
Sokoto spent N11.27bn, accounting for 4.47 per cent, while Ondo and Kaduna recorded N10.54bn and N10.37bn, representing 4.18 per cent and 4.11 per cent, respectively.
Kebbi spent N10.14bn, or 4.02 per cent, while Adamawa recorded N9.95bn, representing 3.95 per cent.
Zamfara, one of the states at the centre of the country’s banditry crisis, recorded N9.07bn, or 3.60 per cent, while Borno, a major theatre of insurgency, spent N8.29bn, representing 3.29 per cent.
Kano spent N8.26bn, or 3.27 per cent, while Katsina recorded N7.21bn, representing 2.86 per cent.
Niger spent N5.36bn, or 2.13 per cent, while Nasarawa recorded N5.18bn, representing 2.05 per cent.
Ebonyi spent N4.72bn, or 1.87 per cent, while Kwara recorded N4.69bn, representing 1.86 per cent.
Delta’s expenditure stood at N4.63bn, or 1.83 per cent, while Oyo spent N3.82bn, representing 1.51 per cent.
Enugu recorded N3.46bn, or 1.37 per cent, followed by Cross River with N2.43bn, representing 0.96 per cent.
Ogun spent N1.73bn, or 0.68 per cent, while Imo recorded N1.52bn, representing 0.60 per cent.
Taraba expended N1.38bn, or 0.55 per cent, while Abia recorded N766.72m, representing 0.30 per cent.
Lagos deployed N615.12m, accounting for 0.24 per cent, while Jigawa recorded N395.33m, representing 0.16 per cent.
Gombe spent N48.02m, while Benue recorded only N1.58m across the categories captured in the supplied data.
Four states, Akwa Ibom, Osun, Rivers and Yobe, had no expenditure recorded in any of the listed categories in the supplied table.
Edo was also listed without figures, while no separate entry for the Federal Capital Territory was contained in the data.
When compared with 2025 quarter two, Anambra recorded the biggest percentage increase, with its combined security expenditure rising from N22.10m to N13.40bn, an increase of N13.38bn or 60,544.5 per cent. Plateau followed, rising by N11.46bn or 93.7 per cent, from N12.23bn to N23.69bn.
Sokoto’s spending increased by N9.23bn or 452.3 per cent, from N2.04bn to N11.27bn, while Bayelsa rose by N8.35bn or 91.4 per cent, from N9.14bn to N17.49bn.
Zamfara recorded a N8.28bn increase, or 1,054.1 per cent, from N785.90m to N9.07bn. Kaduna increased by N6.03bn or 139 per cent, while Ondo rose by N5.38bn or 104.3 per cent.
Kwara recorded a N4.37bn increase, or 1,385.1 per cent, from N315.79m to N4.69bn, while Adamawa rose by N4.20bn or 73.1 per cent to N9.95bn.
Delta increased by N3.59bn or 348.9 per cent, Jigawa by N367.7m or 62.6 per cent, and Gombe by N27.6m or 129.9 per cent. Oyo rose from N6.76bn to N3.82bn, meaning its expenditure actually fell by about N2.94bn, or 43.5 per cent, while Ebonyi remained broadly unchanged because its security-vote allocation stayed at N3bn.
Kano’s expenditure rose from N5.35bn in 2025 to N8.26bn in 2026, an increase of N2.91bn or 54.3 per cent. Taraba’s spending fell from N2.58bn to N1.38bn, while Borno’s declined from N9.56bn to N8.29bn. Cross River, Benue and Osun recorded changes from their relatively low 2025 bases, while the latest dataset shows substantial new allocations in several states not covered by the 2025 comparison.
Overall, the figures show a significant expansion of state-level security financing, particularly in equipment procurement, personnel and security operations.
The analysis indicates that security spending was heavily concentrated in a relatively small number of states.
The top five spenders-Kogi, Plateau, Bauchi, Bayelsa and Ekiti- accounted for about N112.15bn, or 44.8 per cent, of the total captured.
The top 10 states accounted for approximately N157.65bn, representing 66.9 per cent of the total.
This means the remaining states collectively accounted for roughly N94.61bn, or 37.50 per cent.
The figures also show that the spending pattern does not necessarily correspond directly with the intensity of insecurity. Some states facing serious security threats recorded relatively modest spending, while others with lower levels of reported violence recorded substantial allocations.
For instance, Zamfara, Borno, Katsina, Kaduna, Sokoto and Kebbi, states that have remained major theatres of banditry and insurgency, collectively recorded about N56.04bn, representing roughly 22.2 per cent of the total captured.
Meanwhile, Kogi alone recorded more than N34.67bn, higher than the combined expenditure of several states confronting serious insecurity.
The figures come as the Federal Government and state governments continue to face pressure to improve security while ensuring that resources allocated for the purpose produce measurable results.
In the first half of 2026, insecurity remained widespread. The NHRC’s first-quarter dashboard identified Kwara, Niger, Benue, Borno, Plateau, Zamfara, Kebbi, Katsina, Kogi and Adamawa among the states most affected by kidnapping and killings.
The situation was not limited to the northern part of the country. Reports of kidnapping, cult violence and other criminal activities were also recorded in southern states, underscoring the nationwide nature of the security challenge.
It, however, remains unclear whether increasing allocations to security at the state level is translating into fewer attacks, better intelligence, faster response and greater protection for residents.
Retired personnel
Speaking on the increasing security expenditures, Brig. Gen. Bashir Adewinbi (retd.) commended the authorities for what he described as a new attempt to tackle the country’s security challenges through dedicated funding.
He said although some public officials might be sincere in their efforts, others could have been compromised, urging Nigerians to give the initiative a chance before passing judgment.
Adewinbi said, “It is commendable that they are coming together for the first time to take the bull by the horns. Naturally, while some officials may be sincere, others may not be, and some might have been corrupted along the way.
“However, we should give them a chance, as an effort of this scale hasn’t been attempted before. They have resolved to allocate funds to combat terrorism and other security threats, even though security votes already exist. How those votes were previously utilised remains a question, but it seems they now recognise that sustainable growth and survival depend on establishing peace and stability.”
The retired general said the initiative could enable the government to acquire the technology and other resources required to tackle terrorism and other security threats more effectively.
He, however, cautioned against reaching conclusions before the funds were deployed, saying the implementation would determine whether the initiative achieved its intended objectives.
“Let us give them a chance and see how things unfold—time will tell. It is a step in the right direction. Many of them likely intend to acquire technology to fight terrorism and set aside dedicated resources to address the crisis properly.
“We cannot make definitive judgments until we see the implementation. Let us wait and see if the funds are applied as intended. Time will tell, as there is a time for everything,” he added.
A former Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Wilson Inalegwu (retd.), said governors should stop making huge lump-sum allocations to security without clear plans on how the funds would reduce crime.
Inalegwu advocated result-based budgeting, saying state Commissioners of Police should prepare annual policing plans outlining security priorities and the resources required to address them.
He said the plans should reflect the prevailing security challenges in each state, including kidnapping, banditry, farmers-herders clashes, insurgency, separatist agitations, cultism and election-related security threats.
“My position is slightly different. I don’t understand when governors just slam or spend N200bn, whatever amount, on security. I believe in process,” he said.
According to him, every Commissioner of Police should submit an annual policing plan, which would enable the governor to identify the security challenges requiring funding and subsequently hold the police leadership accountable for results.
He explained that a policing plan could identify the need for patrol vehicles, surveillance cameras, drones or other equipment, depending on the specific security challenges confronting a state.
“For example, this year, if you were to submit your policing plan in January, you are going to factor the upcoming 2027 national elections, and for those with off-season elections, you factor them. Election is a priority,” he said.
He added that the plan should also identify prevailing crimes in the state and establish measurable targets for reducing them.
Inalegwu said governors should periodically review the implementation of the plans with Commissioners of Police and other relevant officials to determine whether the funds allocated were producing the desired results.
He said, “So, you now sit down. Then you now hold the CP accountable. Every three months, every quarter, the Security Adviser and the Governor will invite the Commissioner of Police: ‘We have seen your policing plan. If we do this and do that, are you going to reduce the crime rate?’
“And in the next three months, the Commissioner is invited… We will now begin to study and look at the crime statistics.
“Then, after three months, the Commissioner comes: ‘We were having 10 cases, and you said if we give you all this, you are going to reduce it to five, for example. Now it has gone to 15. What is happening?’ The Commissioner has an explanation to give. Then you are adopting result-based budgeting.”
The retired police officer said such an approach would ensure that security expenditure had a measurable impact on crime management, while also making the police and other security stakeholders accountable.
He also urged governors to pay attention to community policing, noting that the amended Police Act 2020 provides for the establishment of Community Policing Committees at various levels of the police structure.
Inalegwu said governors should ensure that the committees were functional and adequately supported, arguing that effective community policing would strengthen grassroots participation in crime prevention.
“Part of the orientation of new governors is to understand policing. Because in that money you spend, the amended Police Act 2020, Sections 113 to 117 state that Community Policing Committees should be established at every police station, every police divisional headquarters, every police command, and even at the IG level,” he said.
He added, “I would prefer that it is broken down, and then the Governor and the Commissioner of Police are achieving results, bringing the dividends of democracy to their population through careful planning.”
While acknowledging the importance of technology in modern policing, Inalegwu said it should be deployed based on an identified security need rather than purchased simply to demonstrate government spending.
“Technology is good, but it is a policing plan that will reveal what you need—that this is what you intend to do, and you are now funding what you need,” he said.
He said a comprehensive policing plan would enable governors to determine what aspects of security they could fund at a particular time and subsequently expand support as resources became available.
“So when you have a policing plan, technology is there. I told you that where you have some hotspots, you say, ‘Let’s put some cameras there.’ Is that not technology? But what I have done is give you a complete picture of what I think a professional should do.
“I don’t believe in just slamming money on you. No. Let’s agree, so that when the results are not coming, I’ll say, ‘Commissioner, I did this. You said if you have this, this will not happen.’ That’s all I’m trying to say,” he added.
Also commenting on the development, Brig. Gen. George Emdin (retd.) said the huge spending should not be attributed solely to the fight against banditry and kidnapping, noting that governments had historically maintained security votes.
He said insecurity in Nigeria was multidimensional and therefore required different strategies to tackle the various threats confronting the country.
“Really, the expenditure is not just because of the bandits and kidnapping. It has been in existence from time immemorial. They call it the security vote.
“You see, security in Nigeria is multidimensional. You cannot use one tactic or strategy to defeat everyone. To be honest, insecurity cannot be eradicated at once; it takes time because when you deal with one threat, you can then face another.”
CSOs react
The Executive Chairman of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, Debo Adeniran, said Nigerians had the right to demand accountability for funds allocated to security, arguing that the effectiveness of the expenditure should be measured by its impact on the lives and property of citizens.
“No matter what you spend on security, no matter how confidential they believe it is, we are not satisfied,” he said.
Adeniran noted that security had traditionally received a significant share of government expenditure, but questioned whether the funds were reaching security agencies and personnel who needed them.
According to him, complaints by security personnel about poor welfare and inadequate equipment raised questions about how security funds were being utilised.
He said, “We have the right to ask for accountability. Is the spending going to the right quarters? Are security personnel being well paid?”
The CACOL boss argued that the persistent complaints by security personnel, including soldiers, about poor welfare and inadequate equipment suggested that security allocations might not be reaching their intended purposes.
He said despite the government’s spending on security, Nigerians remained dissatisfied with the level of protection provided, adding that insecurity had placed citizens in a state where many were afraid to travel or go about their daily activities.
Adeniran, however, acknowledged that there had been some improvement in the security situation in recent times, particularly with a reduction in some incidents of mass kidnapping, stating however that, “As long as we are not satisfied, it means that the security vote is not worth spending.”
Similarly, the Executive Director of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, questioned the whereabouts of the funds reportedly spent on security.
Rafsanjani said if the money had genuinely been spent as claimed, Nigerians should be able to see corresponding improvements in security.
He asked, “Where is the money? Who has taken the money? What procurements were made with these monies? Which equipment did they buy?”
The CISLAC boss also raised concerns about the welfare and operational capacity of security personnel, noting that many continued to complain about inadequate welfare and insufficient weapons to confront terrorists and other criminal elements.
He said the reported N252bn expenditure did not include security votes controlled by state governors and local governments, suggesting that the total amount spent on security could be substantially higher.
Rafsanjani warned against the alleged use of security spending as a vehicle for diverting public funds, stressing that the lives and property of Nigerians should not become a means of personal enrichment by public officials.
He said, “Government officials must not use security as a means to siphon money. They cannot use the lives and properties of Nigerians as a means to make more money for personal aggrandisement.”
The Executive Director further called on the Auditor-General for the Federation to provide a detailed breakdown of security-related expenditure, including the projects, procurements and other items for which the funds were spent.
He also criticised the National Assembly for failing to adequately exercise its oversight responsibilities over security spending.
“Unfortunately, the National Assembly that should be doing oversight have decided to donate their powers and responsibilities away,” Rafsanjani said.
(Punch)
