By Emmanuel Oladesu
The local government system is at crossroads. Since 1999 when civil rule was restored, it has been at the centre of acrimony between the federal and state governments. The 1999 Constitution is deceptive. It is not clear on the status of local government within the lopsided federal structure.
The functions of the local government are critical to the welfare of the local areas.To many Nigerians, many councils are not living up to expectation as vehicles for effective grassroots democracy. Although they are the closest to the people, their impact is not felt by the grassroots because they are handicapped by certain constraints, which have retarded their growth and sustainability.
There are 774 councils nationwide. They were created by successive military administrations, without observing the principles of equity and fairness. There is no evidence to suggest that majority of the councils have become real centres of development, even in the particular region that is favoured by its lopsided distribution . They have largely remained mini-administrative centres and political structures meant to accommodate ambitious politicians who who are yet to make it to federal and state levels.
Apart from the lack on consensus on the status of local government, there is no uniform system nationwide. At a time in some states, elected councils enjoyed a three year tenure. In others, chairmen and councillors were elected to serve for two years.
Local government system has also been a victim of partisan bickering, scramble for influence at the grassroots and intense struggle between the previous Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-led Federal Government and states controlled by the opposition, and vice versa. When there is a change of government at the state level, the council is also a casualty as governors often loathe the presence of council functionaries from opposition parties.
The distant Federal Government is still battling the states for the political and financial control of the councils. Recently, the Federal Attorney-General, Mallam Abubakar Malami, fired a ‘query’ to Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, asking him to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken again his government for the dissolution of ‘elected’ councils.
The Attorney-General of the Federation alluded to a subsisting judgment by the Supreme Court that governors lack the constitutional power to dissolve elected councils.
The states are resisting the Federal Government’s move to curtail their power of control over councils, saying that the ‘Central’ Government is over-stepping its bounds.
To state authorities, local governments are extension of states created for the ease of administration at the grassroots. It is an understatement. The power for the creation of councils is vested in the House of Assembly, which is expected to pass a bill to law in that regard. The power is being curtailed now because of the refusal of the National Assembly to amend the constitution to permit the listing of newly created councils.
Armed with the constitution, Oyo State Attorney-General Prof. Oyelowo Oyewo fired back at the minister. In his response to the curious query, he explained that “it is the Law of the State Government that is to ensure the existence of the system of democraticaly elected Local Government by providing for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils, and not a Federal Law or Act.”
The professor said it is not clear under what Act of the National Assembly the Minister of Justice was acting in writing his memo.
Oyewo offered to lecture Malami on federalism. He said the 1999 Constitution has established a federal system of government whereby the state government is not under the command of the Federal Governmeny; neither is the country in the military era when the Federal Military Government could give a binding order to the state government by mere proclamation and at will.
It was a vague reference to the sordid past characterised by over-centralisation, and when a federal military administration even appointed a federal minister of local goverment.
Across the states, the fledgling councils are being incited against state governments by pro-autonomy crusaders. Local government personnel also want councils to lean on the power-loaded Federal Government for imaginary liberation from perceived oppression by state governments. Local government employees are agitating for council autonomy, or freedom, as if the state is a replica of the colonial master.
Is the constitution ambiguous on the status of councils within the context of the existing flawed federalism? Its interpretation only appears to be the genesis of the discord and confusion.
In the 1999 Constitution, which is the ground norm, there is no elaborate provision for the administration of the local government, except that the councils were listed in the constitution and the law says that democratically elected councils are guaranteed.
The constitution has, therefore, placed the control of the council on the shoulders of the states, which have the constitutional power to create, manage, fund, and control them. Nowhere in the constitution is the local government accorded the status of a component unit or third tier.
In Nigeria, there are only two levels of government-federal and states. According to the federal principle, only states are coordinate with the “central” or “general government,” as postulated by Professor K.C Wheare. Nigerian federalism is not patterned after those of some truly advanced federal countries where there are well defined constitutional boundaries or demarcations. Therefore, if local government in Nigeria is described as a third tier, it is an assumption; indeed, an aberration.
For the local government to achieve autonomy, the constitution must be amended, and the amendment has to be supported by two-third of the 36 Houses of Assembly.
The power of the state over the council is not debatable. But, the focus of local government advocacy and reform should be responsible control of the councils, staff training, proper budgeting and project monitoring. The hand of the state should not be heavy on local governments. They should not be carried along by overbearing state authorities as rural puppet units.
The constitution already provides in Section 162 for the Joint Accounts Committee (JAC), which arguably has become a subject of controversy. Some states have refused to administer the accounts with fidelity. Council funds are either illegally deducted, diverted or misused by some state governments.
There are provisions in Section 162 that when the allocation comes to the joint account, there should be a law on how to share it. Many state governments have refused to enact the law. Although it is expected that states should allocate funds to local governments, apart from the funds accruable to them from the national treasury, there is no evidence of compliance.
The darkside of the constitution is that it does not specify the percentage.
Remarkably, during the Second Republic, former Governor Lateef Jakande of Lagos sustained the fiscal practice of allocating 10 percent of the state revenue to the 23 local governments in the Cenre of Excellence. The governor released the allocation, following proofs of genuine people-oriented programmes being implemented by local government chairmen and their councillors. But, today, the Joint State and Local Government Account (JAC) is monopolised by many states, without consideration for the councils.
The autonomy for councils means that the federal allocations will go directly to the local governments, thereby boycotting the states. The feeling in some quarters is that the measure would foster effective service delivery.
However, without diligent control and scrutiny, local governments, when left alone, can hardly achieve the purpose of grassroots development. Experience has shown that many council chairmen, councillors and their aides have not really conducted themselves as servants of the rural dwellers they were meant to serve.
Besides, the executive capacity of the councils throughout the country is so poor. This has always affected project implementation and evaluation. Many council engineers are mere technical officers without professional qualifications. Some councils do not have qualified accountants as treasurers.
Also, the cankerworm of corruption is worse in the local government. Critics have dismissed councils as avenues for private accumulation and financial aggradisement.
The pervading view among anti-autonomy crusaders is that political, administrative and financial autonomy for councils will aggravate graft in the local governments.
There are allegations that in some councils, chairmen and councillors only meet monthly to share allocations, after payment of salaries to workers. Some council chairmen have also complained that local party chieftains often pressed for unofficial salaries and allowances from council treasury.
While the governor is being monitored by the House of Assembly, the councillors cannot thoroughly monitor the chairmen. The House of Assembly has often slacked in their monitoring of the councils.
Many council chairmen perceive themselves as thin gods at the grassroots, instead of agents of rural transformation. They behave as local lords of manor. Some of them do not reside in their local governments. Thus, they are inaccessible. In some cases, their programmes are not aligned with the vision, policies and programmes of state governments.
The uniformity of remuneration and allowances for councils, and even states, is abnormal. RAMFAC determines the salaries and allowances of political office holders centrally. Why should the chairman of Lagos Island Council earn the same salary as the chairman of Idanre/Ifedore? Why should their employees be entitled to identical salary structure?
Why should emolument not be based on their resources? Why should they not cut their cloth according to their cloth? Why is the local government salary structure not decentralised?
In Nigeria, states are at liberty to create local governments, but the National Assembly reserves the right to list the newly created councils in the constitution. This, according to analysts, is an anathema in federalism. Due to the factor of population and other peculiarities, some communities deserve new councils. States should be free to meet their demands realistically without encouraging proliferation.
Many were taken aback when President Olusegun Obasanjo stopped allocations due to local councils in Lagos State for three years. The move crippled effective grassroots administration; local councils being the closest level of government to the people.
The push for autonomy of local government may continue to polarise the polity. But, what remains of the state when local governments are taken away?
It has been pointed out that some state governments have continued to subject the local government to great manipulations, including suspending their chairmen at will and threatening to dissolve the councils. Under federalism, the development of the local government falls within the purview of the states. But, there must be adequate constitutional provisions and safeguards to ensure a smooth operation of the system and to prevent the abuse of control.
It is also wrong for the Federal Government to deny recognition to councils legally created by the House of Assembly by insisting on their listing in the constitution. This provision should be deleted. It is an abnormality in a federal system.
Councils can act as training grounds for future state and national leaders. The community should ensure that only men and women of character are elected.
Stakeholders should take special interest in how the local government is discharging its duties. The people should have input into council policy formulation. They should hold the chairmen and councillors accountable for poor service delivery. Citizens should pay their taxes and rates regularly and demand for feedback on performance of council responsibilities by elected functionaries.
Local government should conduct need analysis before project initiation and this can be done through synergy between councils and community development associations.
The Code of Conduct should get the material acquisition of council functionaries and measure them against their prior financial status before attaining office.
It will not be a bad idea for the anti-graft agencies to occasionally beam the searchlight on the councils to reduce corrupt tendencies.
Leave a Reply