The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) conducted a series of raids on illicit drug markets in Lagos, Onitsha, and Aba, resulting in the collection of approximately N2.5 billion in fines. These raids were part of a broader effort to combat the proliferation of counterfeit, substandard, and expired drugs in Nigeria’s open markets. The Director-General of NAFDAC, Prof. Mojisola Adeyeye, disclosed this information during a session with the House of Representatives Committee on Food and Drug Administration and Control. She detailed how the funds were utilized, emphasizing that they were deposited directly into NAFDAC’s official account and allocated to enforcement operations, regulatory expenses, and repayment of a borrowed grant.
The breakdown of the N2.5 billion revealed that N996 million was spent on the enforcement operations themselves, covering logistical costs such as deploying over 1,300 security personnel for up to four weeks in some locations. An additional N159 million was borrowed from a donor grant to supplement operational funding, highlighting the agency’s pre-existing financial constraints. Regulatory expenses, which likely included administrative costs, laboratory testing, and other related activities, amounted to N1.18 billion. After deducting these expenses, NAFDAC was left with a balance of approximately N207 million.
The raids uncovered a range of violations, including the distribution of banned substances like tramadol, the sale of expired or unregistered medications, and improper storage practices. While the standard fine for violating Good Distribution and Storage Practice is N2 million, NAFDAC often reduced it to N500,000 in many cases. This leniency was likely a pragmatic approach considering the financial realities of many traders and the agency’s focus on compliance rather than solely punitive measures. Prof. Adeyeye stressed that these charges were necessary to deter future violations and safeguard public health.
Beyond the southern raids, NAFDAC also carried out a court-mandated operation in Kano. This operation, distinct from the others, stemmed from a Federal High Court judgment ordering the relocation of open drug market traders to a newly constructed Coordinated Wholesale Centre (CWC). The Kano operation involved the forced relocation of over 1,300 shops to the CWC, encountering resistance and even threats of violence from traders initially reluctant to comply. Notably, no administrative charges or fines were levied during the Kano operation due to its urgent and court-directed nature, coupled with NAFDAC’s financial limitations at the time. The agency’s accounts had been effectively frozen and reopened with a zero balance at the start of 2024, further complicating matters.
The contrasting approaches between the southern raids and the Kano operation prompted questions from lawmakers, who perceived the latter as more lenient. Prof. Adeyeye clarified that the court order significantly influenced the Kano intervention, creating a volatile situation that limited their options. She acknowledged that, in hindsight, more inspections or administrative fees could have been levied, but the circumstances on the ground, including the threat of violence against officials, made such actions unfeasible. Kano, uniquely, had already established a CWC as mandated by a presidential directive, differentiating it from Lagos, Onitsha, and Aba, where no such infrastructure existed, and allowing for a more planned approach in the South.
NAFDAC’s financial challenges were further elaborated upon by the Director of Finance and Accounts, Adeniji Nma, who revealed that the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) had classified NAFDAC as a revenue-generating agency. This classification resulted in the OAGF automatically sweeping up to 50% of NAFDAC’s revenue into the federal treasury, despite the agency’s protests that its primary function is public health protection, not revenue generation. This percentage later increased to 75%, severely hampering NAFDAC’s operational capacity. The agency’s argument centered on the fact that much of its revenue is tied to specific client services, like inspections, making the OAGF’s sweeping action detrimental to its core functions. The House Committee, deeming NAFDAC’s initial presentation incomplete, requested a detailed breakdown of the revenue generated from each location during the enforcement operations. The Committee Chairman directed the agency to provide a more comprehensive account, emphasizing the need for clarity on all financial inflows and outflows related to the N2.5 billion generated from the raids.
