Niger's Audit Court Reports CFA405.8bn Gap Between Contract Registers

Niger's Court of Accounts says an automated comparison of two public-procurement databases identified a CFA405.797 billion discrepancy in contract registrations. The reported mismatch raises questions about how public contract records are reconciled between oversight bodies, but does not by itself establish any loss of public money.

The figure appeared in an official Court of Accounts statement dated 30 October 2026, describing remarks by the court's president at a Russia–Africa meeting in Moscow on 28–29 October. The court said it cross-checked records held by the public procurement directorate, DGCMP, against those of the procurement regulator, identified in the statement as ARMP. It described the result as a discrepancy in registration, not as money stolen, an unlawful award or a confirmed loss to the treasury.

The court's announcement did not specify which financial years were compared, how many contracts were involved, whether the two datasets covered identical procurement bodies, or how much of the difference might arise from timing, duplicate entries, different classifications or incomplete reporting. Without the underlying reconciliation and contract identifiers, the CFA405.797 billion cannot responsibly be presented as missing public funds. The court's statement supplies the number, but the underlying calculation has not been independently reproduced.

Niger's national news agency reported on the Court of Accounts' 2021 report in April 2022. That earlier, separately dated review described weaknesses in public financial controls, including procurement procedures and record traceability. Those historical observations provide background on the oversight institution, not independent confirmation of the specific CFA405.797 billion difference announced in October 2026. No continuity between individual 2021 cases and the newer database comparison has been established.

The court also said data analysis had helped recover CFA4.057 billion in fees owed to the treasury, referring specifically to its 2021 public report. That is a different, historical recovery claim; the statement does not say those recoveries came from the CFA405.797 billion registration discrepancy. Combining the two figures would misrepresent the findings.

The court described investments in data-analysis tools, specialist staff and a recommendation-tracking system. It said it now requires material evidence, such as payment receipts or signed decisions, before counting an audit recommendation as implemented. Those statements describe the court's reported oversight practices, not independently verified outcomes for the contract-register mismatch.

The next test is documentary. Publication of the DGCMP–ARMP comparison, its audit period, contract identifiers and each institution's reconciliation would show whether the difference reflects incomplete registration, inconsistent accounting, duplicated records or another cause. No specific contractor, official or transaction was accused of wrongdoing in the 30 October announcement.