Extortion Row Hits Taraba LGAs as Councils Allegedly Demand ₦54.4m ‘Screening Fees’ From Appointees
Controversy has erupted across the 16 local government councils of Taraba State following allegations that newly appointed supervisory councillors and special advisers are being forced to pay illegal screening fees totaling over ₦54.4 million before their official confirmation.
The investigative findings reveal that local government legislative councils have established an unauthorized charging system, demanding varying amounts from political nominees as a prerequisite for their screening and formal assumption of office.
According to appointment data across the state’s third-tier administration, each of the 16 local government areas recently appointed an average of seven supervisory councillors and at least 11 special advisers.
The legislative councils are reportedly extracting a flat fee of ₦250,000 from each supervisory councillor nominee. Meanwhile, individuals appointed as special advisers are being forced to pay between ₦50,000 and ₦150,000, depending on the specific council.
With hundreds of political appointees affected across the state, the cumulative extortion is calculated to have exceeded ₦54.4 million.
The development has generated intense concern among public affairs observers and grassroots stakeholders who have sharply questioned the legality and accountability of the funds. A review of Nigerian jurisprudence shows that neither the 1999 Constitution (as amended) nor the Taraba State Local Government Administration Laws contain any statutory provisions authorizing the collection of fees to screen public servants.
However, local parliamentary leaders have defended the practice, describing it as an institutionalized tradition. Confirming the financial demands to journalists, the Leader of the Jalingo Local Government Legislative Council, Abdulsalami Joda, admitted that his council charges ₦250,000 for supervisory councillors and ₦150,000 for special advisers. Joda dismissed the illegality of the practice, asserting that the payment structure is a long-standing administrative arrangement that “did not start today.”
