At last, the Supreme Court has ruled on President Buhari’s Executive Order 10 of May 2020 that sought to force financial independence for the state judiciary and legislature. True, the constitution provides that the executive branch of government at all levels should not arrogate all power to itself, thus separating the legislative, executive and judicial powers. The President thus reasoned that the separation would only be meaningful if each branch controls its finances, hence the Executive Order meant to enforce constitutional provisions.
However, the governors kicked, arguing that the President had overstepped his bounds by seeking to meddle in affairs of the states. While agreeing that the arms of government should be separate indeed, they approached the Supreme Court in a bid to stop the President’s instruction to the Accountant-General of the Federation to allocate funds directly to the judiciary and legislature at the state level. The court accepted the averment and struck down the order. Justice Dattijo Mohammed who read the lead judgment supported by five other justices of the court said the President acted unconstitutionally and ultra vires in making moves to give effect to what he considers a constitutional imperative since most governors have turned the other arms of government to extension of the executive branch, starving them of funds when they deem fit and releasing when those officials are deemed to be doing the governor’s bidding.
However, it was a narrow majority of four of the seven justices who rejected the prayer of the governors that the responsibility for capital projects of the state judiciary should be borne by the Federal Government. That contention stemmed from the fact that the personnel costs are paid directly by the National Judicial Council that is also saddled with appointments, promotion and discipline of all judges of superior courts in the country. The Supreme Court, by the majority judgment, felt to the contrary that it would amount to abdication of responsibility if an arm of government at the state level is totally funded from the centre.
The judgment would appear ambivalent. The equivocation seems to stem from the constitution. Since the National Assembly is reviewing that constitution bequeathed by the last military administration, the contradictions, equivocations and confusion that have constituted booby traps should be weeded out. They have been the cause of conflicts among officials and institutions of state. In this instant, the manner the governors have controlled the other arms of government has left so much to be desired.
It is therefore imperative to strengthen them as workers of the legislative and judiciary have regularly clamoured for. It derogates from the honour of the judiciary when chief judges have to regularly knock at the doors of the executive before basic maintenance work could be done. Where new court rooms are needed, and technology desired to ease the burden on their lordships, there must be a way they could effortlessly draw from funds allocated in the appropriation law for the year. The legislature appears to suffer even more. At some point in the clash between majority of elected lawmakers in Edo State and Governor Godwin Obaseki, the chief executive who takes up the task of fixing even nuts and bolts, got the roof of the chamber removed and loads of sands dumped in the premises, ostensibly with a view to stopping the legislature from sitting. He then moved his faction to the Government House.
While we agree that the law is as interpreted by the courts, especially the apex court in this case, all those involved in running the country should realise that federalism should not be practiced partially. By that pronouncement of the Supreme Court, the Executive Order 10 is dead. So is any order that has been made by presidential fiat, contrary to the spirit of the grundnorm. But, the time-honoured philosophy of federalism and constitutionalism is that decency should prevail in all affairs of state. The general public and civil society organisations should realise that their responsibilities do not stop at the periodic general elections. They should monitor the executive at all levels and ensure that no one does violence to the letters and spirit of our laws.