The conflicting role of BPP

In recent years, the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) has benefitted from grants and donor-supported initiatives, particularly from the World Bank, to conduct procurement training programmes across Nigeria. While these efforts are aimed to strengthen public procurement processes, they raise serious concerns when examined against the legal mandate of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and […]

In recent years, the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP) has benefitted from grants and donor-supported initiatives, particularly from the World Bank, to conduct procurement training programmes across Nigeria. While these efforts are aimed to strengthen public procurement processes, they raise serious concerns when examined against the legal mandate of the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply Management of Nigeria (CIPSMN). Established by Act No. 21 of 2007, CIPSMN is the only body legally empowered to regulate, certify, and professionalise procurement practice in Nigeria.

The CIPSMN Act confers exclusive powers on the institute to regulate the standards and ethical conduct of procurement professionals. Its mandate includes designing training curricula, certifying practitioners, enforcing disciplinary codes, and setting entry requirements into the profession. CIPSMN is Nigeria’s official procurement regulatory institution—comparable to how ICAN regulates accountancy or COREN oversees engineering. This legal status ensures that public procurement is handled by trained, certified professionals, thereby promoting accountability, transparency, and efficiency.

The BPP, established under the Public Procurement Act (PPA) of 2007, serves as the regulatory authority overseeing the conduct of public procurement by ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs). Its key responsibilities include issuing procurement guidelines, monitoring compliance, and enforcing transparency in public procurement. However, BPP’s mandate does not extend to the professional regulation or certification of procurement officers. This distinction is critical: while BPP manages systems, CIPSMN manages people.

Through the World Bank–funded SPESSE project and similar interventions, BPP has coordinated various procurement training programmes, often in partnership with foreign institutions like the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply (CIPS). It also launched the National Procurement Certification Platform (NPCP) to issue procurement credentials. While these initiatives may appear beneficial, they infringe on the statutory responsibilities of CIPSMN. Such overlaps have led to dual training pathways, confusion over professional standards, and erosion of regulatory clarity.

• Jubilation as Shinkafi Volunteer Forces kill Bandit Commander, Danbokolo
• Security operatives order PDP BoT members out of meeting hall

BPP’s direct involvement in training and certification breaches the CIPSMN Act and undermines the authority of an institution established by parliament. This represents institutional overreach and raises constitutional issues.

It also violates Executive Order 5 which emphasises promoting local content and indigenous professional bodies in public contracts. By sidelining CIPSMN in favour of foreign entities, BPP’s actions run contrary to this directive and the president’s Renewed Hope Agenda.

Furthermore, it leads to conflict of interest. BPP, tasked with monitoring procurement practices, cannot objectively assess the very officers it trains and certifies. This conflict undermines transparency and weakens checks and balances in procurement management.

Similarly, uncoordinated training and certifications issued outside CIPSMN’s purview dilute the professional identity of procurement practitioners, confuse MDAs, and diminish the credibility of certifications.

Running parallel systems leads to resource duplication, inefficiency, and donor funds being spent without regard for existing national frameworks. The presidency should direct all donor-funded procurement training to align with existing legislation by working through CIPSMN.

The long-overdue National Council on Public Procurement (NCPP), as stipulated in the PPA, should be inaugurated to oversee coordination between institutions.

BPP must return to its legal mandate—monitoring compliance, not issuing certifications or organising training. Donor agencies like the World Bank should ensure that all support aligns with Nigeria’s legal structures to avoid undermining national institutions.

The National Assembly should reaffirm CIPSMN’s statutory role and sanction any agency attempting to usurp it.

Enhancing procurement capacity is vital to good governance, but it must be done within the boundaries of the law. BPP’s donor-funded training initiatives, when executed without collaboration with CIPSMN, undermine Nigeria’s legal order and institutional development. True reform must strengthen—not weaken—indigenous institutions. The path forward lies in respecting legislative frameworks, fostering synergy between oversight and professional bodies, and aligning all capacity-building efforts with national laws and local content policies.

 

Hussaini Abdullahi resides in Abuja.