The House of Representatives has dismissed a report by an ad hoc committee reportedly set up by its minority caucus to re-examine recently enacted tax laws, describing the move as procedurally improper and lacking institutional backing.
In a statement issued on Sunday, the spokesman of the House, Akin Rotimi, said only the House sitting at plenary or the Speaker has the authority to constitute an ad hoc committee with parliamentary status under the Standing Orders.
“No political caucus, whether majority or minority, possesses the procedural authority to establish a committee that carries the status of a parliamentary body,” Rotimi said.
While acknowledging the role of political caucuses in consultation and policy advocacy, he clarified that such groups have no investigative or oversight powers. Any action taken by a caucus in this regard, he said, is informal, non-binding and without legal or institutional consequence.
Rotimi stressed that committees constituted outside the prescribed procedures lack institutional recognition, noting that any interim or final report produced by a caucus-led body cannot be laid before the House or recognised as an official parliamentary document.
According to him, the alleged action by the minority caucus is inconsistent with parliamentary norms and capable of misleading the public, especially as concerns over the tax laws had already been addressed through established legislative processes.
He recalled that in December 2025, the House constituted a bipartisan ad hoc committee, in line with its Standing Orders, following concerns raised over multiple documents claiming to be official gazettes of the tax legislation.
“That committee remains in force and continues to carry out its assignment,” Rotimi said, adding that its report would be presented to the House upon completion.
He further noted that the National Assembly has since published the official gazette and issued Certified True Copies (CTCs) of the tax laws, giving them full legal effect, while disowning any unofficial documents in circulation.
Rotimi warned that the formation of a parallel caucus-led committee and the circulation of purported interim findings could deepen public confusion over an issue he said had been institutionally resolved.
Reaffirming the House’s commitment to transparency and accountability, he stressed that such objectives must be pursued strictly within constitutional and procedural limits, advising the public to regard any caucus-led report as a political initiative rather than an official action of the House.