WorldStage– The Nigerian Senate again adjourned plenary on Wednesday, October 22, 2025 to resume on October 28, 2025 making it the fifth this year, with some of these adjournments involving multiple postponements.
Not a few Nigerians are worried about the practice, saying that frequent, repeated, and extended adjustments to plenary schedules by Nigeria’s National Assembly (NASS) have amplified public concern over legislative efficiency and productivity in 2025.
According to many observers, particularly the more politically conscious, these interruptions, which have extended recesses and caused delays in critical legislative work, pose significant challenges to the National Assembly’s constitutional duty of law-making and oversight.
In this year alone, key instances of adjournments have occurred during January budget delays when, after the resumption of the 2025 legislative session on January 14, the National Assembly initially adjourned plenary on January 28 to allow committees to conclude budget defense exercises. Resumption was later extended to February 4.
Again, both the Senate and House of Representatives adjourned on March 27 for a combined holiday. The planned resumption for April 29 was later pushed back to May 6. On May 28, the it adjourned plenary for the Eid-el-Kabir and Democracy Day holidays, with both chambers reconvening on June 17.
Yet again, for annual long recess and extensions, the assembly began it on July 24, with a scheduled return date of September 23.
Following this, an earlier suspension of plenary in July was announced for a few days to honor the death of former President Muhammadu Buhari, delaying resumption to July 22. On September 23, the resumption was postponed again for an additional two weeks, pushing the new resumption date to October 7.
Those who have criticized the Assembly’s frequent adjournments include civil society organizations, policy experts, former lawmakers etc. The recurring criticism punctuates concerns about legislative productivity, accountability, and the cost of governance.
Reflecting on the adjournment, a civil society organization – Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC) – scrutinized the 10th National Assembly’s stop-start calendar and raised concerns about its compliance with the constitutional requirement of sitting for at least 181 days a year.
Also, another civil society group, Citizens Rights Network, speaking through its representative Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, voiced disappointment over the frequent adjournments. He stated that urgent national issues like security crises, economic reforms, and budget oversight cannot wait, and citizens bear the cost of lost time.
Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) equally reacted, with its National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, expressing belief that the disagreements within the National Assembly on constitutional amendments stemmed from a failure of responsive leadership. Onwubiko also called on Nigerians to demand an explanation for the increased 2025 budget.
Tolu Adeniran, a policy expert who also commented on the frequent legislative breaks, criticized the recesses. Adeniran stressed that the public needs to see evidence of productivity during breaks. He added that empty chambers and rising allowances damage trust in democracy.
Also lamenting the frequency of plenary adjournment by the federal legislators, Prof. Amuda Kannike (SAN), an expert who participated in a June 2025 dialogue on oversight, said the National Assembly’s actions discourage institutional accountability. He highlighted the issue by asking, “Who oversights the oversighters?”.
Former lawmakers are not left out in condemning the disruption incessant breaks bring into legislative responsibilities. In June 2025, a dialogue was held where former legislators strongly criticized the National Assembly, pointing to a collapse in legislative oversight.
The critics base their arguments on several key issues as Constitutional non-compliance, which according to them, frequent adjournments make difficult for the National Assembly to meet the 181-day minimum sitting requirement, weakening its accountability,
stalling national priorities. “Urgent issues like national security, economic reforms, and budget oversight are neglected while lawmakers are on break. This can worsen crises and leave citizens waiting for action,” they pointed out.
The ex-lawmakers also claimed that repeated postponements and extended recesses create a public perception of an unproductive legislature.
Critics further argue that lawmakers seem disconnected from the realities faced by ordinary Nigerians, who are dealing with inflation and insecurity. According to them, this often results in inefficient oversight and prolonged suspensions of plenary sessions that compromise the legislature’s watchdog role, creating loopholes for the executive to act without proper checks and balances.
Multiple delays have left the National Assembly with a compressed timeframe to address a demanding legislative agenda. As of October 2025, lawmakers face a backlog of priority issues, including electoral reforms, constitutional amendments, fiscal measures, and bills on national security and the economy. This bottleneck risks vital legislation being rushed or neglected.
The Nigerian Constitution requires the National Assembly to sit for at least 181 days per legislative year. The frequent and extended recesses in 2025 have cast doubt on the assembly’s ability to meet this constitutional benchmark.
Civil society organizations and governance experts expressed concerns that the frequent adjournments and repeated issues with low attendance during plenary raise questions about the legitimacy of decisions made.
The constitution requires a quorum of at least one-third of the members to be present for proceedings to be valid. Some sessions have proceeded under conditions suggesting this rule was not met, and observers worry that fast-tracking critical bills under low attendance can undermine deliberative legitimacy.
Plenary adjustments and recesses have coincided with delays in the national budget process. While the 2025 Appropriation Bill was presented late in December 2024, lawmakers later postponed their resumption in January 2025 to allow committees more time for budget defense sessions with ministries, departments, and agencies. Delays continued, leading to budget implementation issues.
Reactions from various quarters converge on the position that the frequent disruption of plenary sessions impacts legislative oversight functions, which are crucial for holding the executive arm of government accountable. The Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre raised concerns that oversight duties may be neglected due to the loss of sitting days.
However, the federal legislative body has justified some postponements by citing the need for committees to conclude budget defense and oversight functions with MDAs. For example, a two-week postponement in September 2025 was explained as necessary for ongoing committee work. Some plenary adjustments have also been linked to political events.
In October 2025, the Senate suspended plenary to hold a retreat in Lagos on the Electoral Act amendment. In early 2025, a plenary suspension was announced to allow senators to participate in bye-election campaigns.
Some analysts however suggest that inadequate financial autonomy from the executive may enable manipulation and influence over the legislature, ultimately affecting its performance.
The frequency of plenary adjournment has also been held as having consequences for citizens, with regard to lagging national development.The Assembly’s legislative agenda for 2025 includes addressing issues like national security, economic growth, and social sector reform. Many believe delays in addressing these priority areas hinder the country’s development and undermine progress.
Besides, to critics, the frequency of plenary adjustments and the perception of underperformance contribute to public cynicism and erode trust in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. “Weakened legislative oversight and delays in critical law-making create a void in accountability, potentially leading to poor governance and mismanagement in the executive arm,” they further note.
The constant adjustments to NASS plenary schedule, including frequent and often extended adjournments, negatively impact legislative responsibilities by slowing down the law-making process, diminishing the quality of debates, and weakening oversight functions. This can lead to a backlog of important legislation, compressed and rushed deliberations, and a reduced ability to provide crucial oversight on government activities.
To address the problem of frequent plenary adjournments, it’s been suggested that National Assembly can enforce its own rules on quorum and attendance, set and adhere to a strict legislative calendar, and improve the efficiency of its committee system.
Part of the suggestion is rigorous enforcement of quorum rules to ensure legislative business is conducted legally, and that the Assembly should implement concrete sanctions for chronic absenteeism to deter non-compliance.
Another suggestion for tackling the problem is the use of electronic attendance and voting systems to improve accountability and transparency as well as enhanced calendar management, by creating and adhering to a strict legislative calendar with clear timelines for key legislative activities, including critical bills and motions.
It’s also suggested that extending scheduled breaks beyond the official recess periods, which can erode public trust, be avoided.
The Assembly is also urged to prioritize time-critical items, such as electoral and constitutional review exercises, to be addressed promptly upon returning from a break.
NASS is also advised to allow citizens track parliamentary participation and voting records to build confidence in the legislative process, thereby ensuring that legislative decisions made in sessions with low attendance are not in doubt by maintaining the necessary attendance discipline.
