The Nation Newspaper

Tag: local government autonomy

  • Local government autonomy critical to national development

    Local government autonomy critical to national development

    “When you are in local government, you are on the ground, and you are looking into the eyes and hearts of the people you are there to serve.” – Valerie Jarrett, a former Senior Advisor to former President of the United States, Barack Obama

    About two weeks ago, on the 18h of December. 2025, during the15th National Executive Committee meeting of the All Progressives Congress, held at the State House Conference Centre, Abuja; President Bola Ahmed Tinubu reiterated his commitment to ensuring that the Supreme Court’s judgment affirming the financial independence of local governments is implemented.

    Mr. President, stated that the failure of the governors to fully comply with the Supreme Court’s judgment may force him to take other executive decisions.

    I commend and support Mr. President’s position on the autonomy of the 774 local government in Nigeria, and decisions he will take in this regard. It is trite in law, that local governments are Should be funded directly from the Federation Account. But for over 40 years since the second republic, Governors have been taking the funding allocations on behalf of the local government administrations in violation of Section 7 and other relevant sections of the 1999 Constitution as amended. By approaching the Supreme Court last year and securing the judgment in favor of local government autonomy which is an affirmation of Section 7 and other relevant sections of the 1999 Constitution as ammended, surely, Mr. President has cleared clear the way for accelerated growth and development and the grassroots of Nigeria.

    It is worthy of  note that President Tinubu is living up to his campaign promises as outlined in his Renewed Hope campaign Manifesto build-up to the 2023 presidential elections. In Page 69 of the manifesto, Mr. President promised to, “Embark on a review of the federation revenue allocation system to recalibrate the division of funds amongst the three tiers of Government: Federal, State and Local. More funds should be allocated to the States and Local Governments so that they can better address local concerns and fulfill their expanded constitutional obligations to the people……. This promotes stronger governance at the state and local levels, thus reducing political congestion and competition for resources at the federal level. The performance of federal, state, and local governments shall improve while the people will benefit by having more political democracy and economic development more closely at hand.”

    Taking Development closer to the people:

    It is worthy of note that according to the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), the current revenue-sharing formula is as follows: The Federal Government takes 52.68 % of the revenue share, states get 26.72 %, while local governments get 20.6 %. So far, Governors have taken 46.78%, i.e. 26.72% + 20.6% – with no commensurate tangible impacts to show for the masses of Nigeria, i.e. the grassroots.

    Read Also: Filmmaker Chinneylove dismisses Lily Perez’s plagiarism allegations

     A very worrisome situation in Nigeria is the lack of deepening commitments and impacts at grassroots levels where the majority of Nigerians reside and live. The acceleration of the provision of basic infrastructure like pipe-borne water, basic roads, waterways, culverts, health care facilities, agriculture support systems and investments, etc. have eluded our people at the local governments and hinterlands due to a lack of direct funding to our local governments. Therefore, we must ensure effective financial and operational autonomy at our local government levels, going forward.

    A good example of the importance of the role of local governments is that local governments remain the critical platforms for our Agricultural value chain and its socio-economic contributions. There is currently no active development process flow between the Federal Government interventions and direct local government initiatives. 

    I am very glad to hear that the perennial issue of undercutting or stifling the cash flow of local government administrations in Nigeria will come to an end soonest. Because this has been one of the key banes of the progress of this Country. For over 40 years, the State Governors have been holding the local government administrations hostage, and rendering them at the beck and call of the Governors. Suffice it to say that the refusal of successive state administrations  is a testament to the hypocrisy of our expectations as a nation.

    The sustained choke-hold of the Local Governments of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by State Governors is not just for the control of the financial inflows of the Local Government Areas (LGAs), but also to ensure continuous political control of the local government areas to perpetuate their control of the political structures of the local government areas for political supremacy, while and after leaving office as governors. The choke-holds on the LGAs have further stunted the growth of local government areas across Nigeria, and more importantly blocked the delivery of good governance. Over time, the local government administrations have become voiceless, powerless, and almost useless. The local government management and operations have been almost comatose, and therefore, they have not been able to add tangible values to the growth and development of Nigeria. The LGAs are mere appendages of the State Governors, while their offices are more or less liaison offices of the Governors. That is why the local government chairmen/ sole administrators sit out their tenures without making any impacts on the communities. 

    Due to the aforementioned reasons, there is so much opaqueness in the administration of local government administrations in Nigeria. Most of the local government chairmen also end up helping themselves from the remnant of funds credited to the coffers of the local government – that is what bad leadership at the top does – i.e., “when the head is rotten the body subsequently rots away. In the end, the citizens of Nigeria are systematically and consistently short-changed. Consequently, year-on-year we do not see any serious developments taking place at local government levels; rather, what we see are multi-dimensional retrogression and poverty. 

    Indeed, a visit to local government headquarters around Nigeria will evidence how bad things are; the offices are shadows of themselves, the operations are comatose and there are basically no structures for people to lean unto in demanding the delivery of good governance.  Therefore, I am very happy to hear that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is ready to deliver one of his campaign promises to ensure that local governments do not just get autonomy on paper, but that the autonomy is actualized and made fully operational.

     Furthermore, one of the key reasons why we do not witness major and tangible developments at state levels is because the inactivates at local governments are due to undue interference by the state Governors to the extent that, it is only the local governments that are of interest to the Governors that experience of measure of development. 

    It is an established fact that “politics is local”. That is why everywhere democracy has thrived, and everywhere leadership has been effective and impactful; it is because the local governments are autonomous and fully operational – across the three arms of government at that level, i.e. Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary. It is because politics is local that is why LGAs are where the votes are garnered to ultimately achieve political success. Accordingly, the grassroots should not be abandoned after campaigns and elections. The people at grassroots levels MUST be catered for, if we want this Country to make any form of progress. The only way growth and socio-economic development can be achieved at grassroots levels is to eliminate poverty and strife by fully operationalizing the independence of local government. 

    Sadly, most of the projects we witness at state levels are around the State capitals with a lot of “white elephant” projects situated at the local government levels. This is why most of the Councillors are not making impacts, but basically exist by titles they hold and by the little “change” and “crumbs” they pick out of whatever remains from the “financial leftovers” that trickle to their pockets from the coffers of the local government administration.

    It is important to note that, just operationalizing the local government administrations and giving them full autonomy will not enough to ensure the delivery of good governance at the grassroots level. Citizens should also actively demand for good governance from Governors and local government administrations – to put the local government chairmen on their toes so that they do not feel entitled and take things for granted.

     Nigerians look forward to a fully autonomous, and functional local al government administrations in line with the provisions in the 1999 Constitution, of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and ensuring that the local government administrations are rescued from the stranglehold of the State Governors of Nigeria. I am very hopeful that when that is done, we will witness better performance of President Tinubu’a and subsequent administration, while as citizens we will directly hold the local government administrations to account.

  • Unfinished battle for local government autonomy

    Unfinished battle for local government autonomy

    SIR: In countries where governance works in favour of the people, citizens always look forward to progress and innovation. In contrast, Nigeria often clings to nostalgia, with many—including those who never lived through certain eras—romanticizing what they fondly call the “good old days.”

    Believing that the past was always better than the present, some advocate for a return to free education and overseas scholarships. Others yearn for the days of kobo coins, arguing that Nigeria’s economy thrived when they were in circulation and the naira held strong against the almighty dollar.

    The era of Native Authorities, which largely financed themselves through poll taxes and prioritized education, is also missed. Back then, local administrators ensured students were transported to and from school dormitories at the beginning and end of each term, reinforcing a system that valued structured governance and community welfare.

    These administrative units, established under British colonial rule, eventually gave way to local governments (LGs). Initially, the LGs performed well, maintaining orderly markets, paying teachers’ salaries, and addressing essential grassroots needs.

    However, over time, they lost autonomy and are now seen as mere appendages of state governments. Recognized as the most crucial level of governance due to their proximity to the people, successive administrations have made efforts to grant LGs full autonomy.

    Yet, these efforts have consistently faced resistance. In 2012, former President Goodluck Jonathan declared his commitment to local government autonomy, emphasizing that meaningful national development was impossible without functional local councils. He argued that empowering LGs would have mitigated the rising insecurity at the time. Jonathan also opposed the state-local government joint account, insisting that councils had a pivotal role in his administration’s “Transformation Agenda.”

    At one point, he took legal steps to actualize this vision, but the dream of autonomy remained unrealized. Former President Muhammadu Buhari also pursued this goal. In May 2020, he signed an Executive Order granting financial autonomy to the judiciary, legislature, and local government councils.

    Experts hailed this as a landmark move toward a more people-centred governance structure. Buhari’s rationale was grounded in Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates LGs to oversee primary, adult, and vocational education, develop agriculture and natural resources (excluding mineral exploitation), and maintain key public services.

    Their responsibilities also include street naming, house numbering, waste disposal, public convenience maintenance, and the registration of births, deaths, and marriages—basic yet crucial civic functions that remain poorly executed in today’s Nigeria.

    Additionally, LGs are tasked with assessing and collecting tenement rates, regulating outdoor advertising, and overseeing public health and alcohol control. However, despite Buhari’s efforts, his administration’s push for LG autonomy, much like Jonathan’s, ultimately failed.

    Now, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu finds himself at the centre of this enduring struggle. He successfully secured a Supreme Court victory affirming LGs’ constitutional rights and their role in advancing grassroots governance. He hailed the judgment as a win for democracy. However, what initially appeared to be an achievement is beginning to feel like a setback. Many believe that state governors—who have long controlled local government resources—are deliberately frustrating the implementation of this autonomy for personal gain.

    The requirement that LGs must conduct elections to receive direct allocations has further complicated the issue, as state governments continue to manipulate the process to maintain dominance.

    Read Also: Agitation for new local government areas intensify as House passes bills for second reading

    Local government, by its very nature, should be the most accessible level of governance, open to all—from the ordinary citizen who walks barefoot to the community leader who mobilizes residents for communal projects.

    Yet, it has become a political chessboard where governors install their loyalists as council chairmen or caretakers, reducing them to mere appendages rather than independent administrators. Governors have historically played a decisive role in shaping Nigeria’s presidential politics.

    With the 2027 elections already casting a long shadow, party defections and quiet coalition-building are well underway. This leaves President Tinubu in a precarious position: will he stand firm on his commitment to full LG autonomy for sustainable economic development, or will he yield to political pressures and look the other way as 2027 approaches?

    The battle for local government autonomy remains unfinished. The question now is whether Tinubu will see it through or let history repeat itself.

    • Lawal Dahiru Mamman, Abuja.
  • ‘Local government autonomy will reduce security threat’

    ‘Local government autonomy will reduce security threat’

    • Sanwo-Olu wins Best Governor award

    The National President of Association of Ex-Local Government Chairmen of Nigeria (ASELGON), Albert Asipa, has said that local government autonomy would reduce crimes in the country.

    Speaking during ASELGON Annual Retreat/Award at Golfview Suites & Conference Centre, Lagos, Asipa hailed Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu for aligning with the association on local government autonomy.

    He noted that the autonomy will drive grassroots development and curtail the insecurity bedeviling every state.

    “The challenges of insecurity will be eradicated as every local government will have the financial capability to engage security personnel to fight the menace,” he said.

    At the event, Sanwo-Olu received Best Governor in Support of Local Govt Autonomy award.

    The governor, represented by Commissioner for Local Governments and Chieftaincy Affairs, Bolaji Robert, said local government autonomy is essential for bringing government and economic development closer to the good people.

    He said by devolving power and resources to the third-tier of government, government can unlock the potential of various councils and create opportunities for sustainable development.

    He said that Lagos State, which is the case study, is a shining example of what can be achieved when councils are empowered to take charge of their own development.

    “From the innovative solutions we have provided to traffic management and waste disposal, to the investments in education and healthcare in tandem with the THEMES PLUS Agenda of the State Government, Lagos State has demonstrated the impact that effective local governance can have on the lives of citizens,” he said.

    Read Also: Federalism and the local government autonomy verdict

    Vice President of ASELGON, Abiodun Mafe, reiterated the need to sensitise Nigerians about the autonomy of the local government, noting that Lagos State benefited immensely from council autonomy for the past 20 years.

    “We are saying it boldly to states that are contesting the local government autonomy that, we have practised it in Lagos State and we are successful. If you go around state, you will see numerous infrastructural developments achieved through local government autonomy.’’

    He noted that the retreat is to educate other states on how to implement the autonomy to gain immensely from it.

    Chairman, Organising Committee and Chairman of Lagos State Local Government Service Commission, Kamal Bayewu, said Lagos State is enjoying autonomy and that is why there is growth and development at the grassroots.

    “The government of the grassroots is being felt in Lagos State and that is why we are imploring our colleagues in all other states to come around, make Lagos a case study, so that when they get back to their various states, they can let the people know what Lagos is enjoying.

  • Judgment on local government autonomy not a wasted effort, says AGF Fagbemi

    Judgment on local government autonomy not a wasted effort, says AGF Fagbemi

    The Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) has stated that efforts leading to the recent judgment on financial autonomy to local governments were not wasted.

    Fagbemi observed that some have continually argued that unless the task of conducting local government elections is transferred to another body, the Supreme Court judgment may not have any meaningful impact.

    The AGF said his view has always been that such issues would be addressed when they arise.

    He tasked the various anti-corruption agencies to be up and doing because they are required to oversight the deployment of funds at the Local Government level.

    “I told them that when we get to that bridge, we will cross it. But, one thing that I keep saying is that the governors have immunity, but local government chairmen do not. The councilors don’t have.

    Read Also: FCE Katsina to commence degree programmes in 2025

    “So, it will be very easy to put them where they belong. In any event, we need activities at the Local Government level.

    “They are not to be over-sighted by anybody, except by the critical anti-corruption agencies – the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practice and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU), the police and others, when the need arises.

    “And, as often as the need arises, we will deal with that aspect.

    “So, if a governor asks you to go and commit a crime and you accept, he will not follow you to Kuje or Kirikiri. No, you are on your own.

    “So, this is a challenge to the anti-corruption agencies and I know that they are up to the task,” Fagbemi said.

    He argued that it was unnecessary to preach to those who will be at the helm of affairs at the local government level because they are expected to be able to read and write and differentiate right from wrong.

    “You don’t have to preach to anybody. Those who would become Chairmen and Counsellors, at least should be able to read and write. They will know that it is a crime to steal and that if you steal, the penalty is there,” he added.

    Fagbemi spoke in Abuja on Friday during at opening session of the validation meeting of the National Anti-corruption Strategy (NACS) Action Plan 2022 – 2026.

    He said the vision of the NACS is to ensure “a Nigeria that is free of corruption for sustainable human development,” while the mission statement is “to provide a holistic national anti-corruption strategy for all sectors and stakeholders in the fight against corruption.”

    The AGF recalled that the first NACS was for between 2017 and 2021 adding that the NACS Action Plan was developed, validated, and adopted by relevant stakeholders on the 26th March 2018.

    He explained that at the expiration of the initial NACS, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) considered and approved the extension of the implementation of NACS 2017-2021 for another four years.

    The AGF explained that the NACS) Action Plan 2022 – 2026 is a product of a series of consultations and collaborations between the 22 ministries, departments, and agencies (MDAs) of the Federal Government with anti-corruption and accountability mandates.

    He added that the framework for the NACS Action Plan implementation is focused on five pillars which serve as the driving force for both the public and private sector and the national and subnational levels of government.

    Fagbemi identified the five pillars to include prevention of corruption, public engagement, campaign for ethical re-orientation, enforcement and sanction, and recovery and management of proceeds crime.”

  • Federalism and the local government autonomy verdict

    Federalism and the local government autonomy verdict

    What is federalism? To answer this question, let us look at Princeton University’s Encyclopedia Princetoniensis, which has an entry on “Federalism and federation” authored, ostensibly around 2015, by Brendan O’Leary, a distinguished Professor of Political Science and, according to his biography, “the inaugural winner of the Juan Linz prize of the International Political Science Association, for research on federalism and democracy in multi-national states.”  According to Professor O’Leary, “a federation may be defined as a political system in which at least two territorial levels of government share sovereign constitutional authority over their respective division.” Federalism could therefore be described as a political philosophy or system which recognises two or more territorial levels or tiers.   

    The Nigerian federation, as indicated in the 1999 constitution, has three tiers: the federal, the state and the local government. Encyclopaedia Britannica, in an entry on Nigeria, written by Toyin O. Falola and Reuben Kenrick Udo, and last updated on 17 July, 2024, observes: “The functions of the government at the local level were usurped by the state government until 1988, when the federal government decided to fund local government organizations directly and allowed them for the first time to function effectively.” The direct transmission of local government funds to them was later terminated. According to former Vice-President Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, “the decision by the Federal Government to consolidate disbursements of local councils’ revenues into the state government accounts was a decision that was borne out of politics of hasty compromise.” This decision has resulted in a slew of problems.

    Since part of the functions of the Supreme Court is to interpret provisions of the constitution and resolve disputes between different tiers of government, the Federal Government approached the Court in respect of the undermining of the autonomy of local governments by state governments. On 11 July, 2024, the Court ruled in favour of the Federal Government, as follows, in the lead judgement delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim: “It is the position of this court that the federation can pay local governments allocations directly to the local governments or through the states. In this case, since paying them through the states has not worked, justice demands that local governments allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the local governments.”

    Justice Agim further declared: “I hold that the states’ retention of local government funds is unconstitutional.” Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled that it is illegal for state governments to dissolve elected local government administrations and replace them with Caretaker Committees, and that local governments run by such constitutionally-aberrant unelected committees are not entitled to allocations from the federation account until democratically-elected officials have been emplaced.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu responded to the judgement as follows: “My administration instituted this suit because of our unwavering belief that our people must have relief and [the] judgement will ensure that it will be only those local officials elected by the people that will control the resources of the people. This judgement stands as a resounding affirmation that we can use legitimate means of redress to restructure our country and restructure our economy to make Nigeria a better place to live in and a fairer society for all of our people.”

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, who instituted the suit on behalf of the Federal Government, also said: “I call it local government emancipation judgement … and I hope that local government officials will look at it as an opportunity to develop their various local governments. The ball is in the court of the governors. Let us see what they will come out with, but the judgement is clear as to what they should do. The judgement is clear as to what consequences will be attached to failure or refusal to follow the judgement of the Supreme Court, which takes immediate effect.”

    Even Opposition leadaer Alhaji Atiku Abubakar declared: “The court’s ruling is a step in the right direction and a major corrective action in greasing the wheels of national development across the country.  … I align with the decision of the Supreme Court that the structure of the Nigerian government is portioned in three layers, and of these, the local governments should be centers of development.”

    Read Also: Local government autonomy and federalism

    In an unsparing response to the Supreme Court judgement, in a 14 July, 2024 report in The Punch, titled “Tinubu’s govt will be remembered for confronting govs’ criminality against LGs – SAN”, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and former Dean of the Faculty of Law at Nile University, Abuja, Prof Abdullahi Shehu Zuru, said: “In my view, the verdict was awesome and very unambiguous. … Every cogent observer of our democratic politics will admit painfully that the governors have succeeded in surreptitiously destroying the third tier of government in Nigeria because they have strangulated … the local government. So, what the judgment has done is to resurrect the local governments from the ashes of death.”

    Professor Zuru further observed: “Recall that during Ibrahim Babangida’s administration when the local governments were receiving their allocations and had the freedom to budget as well as earmark developmental projects at their level, this created what you might call the economic class at the local government level as there were contractors who were working for the local governments, and supplying foods to schools.” The validity of this claim is established by the fact that you can still see today some of the developmental projects which local government administrations executed before they became financially and logistically hamstrung.

    The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Tajudeen Abbas, noted that the decades-old efforts by the National Assembly at constitution review, to enhance local government autonomy, a seemingly unrealisable goal, had eventually been rewarded. Specifically, he said: “Today that impossibility became a reality. Everyone is happy and we are looking forward to local governments that will work functionally, and … extend goodwill to their own people undisturbed by the excesses by the state governors.” The President of the Nigerian Senate, Godswill Akpabio also remarked: “… the Supreme Court has spoken and we have no option than to abide by the Supreme Court ruling. So, I will just call on all states of the federation to respect what the Supreme Court has done and then we will go back to the legislature and see where we can dot the i’s and cross the t’s to ensure the full implementation.”

    In spite of the widespread praise of the Supreme Court judgement, there have been strident voices of opposition to or condemnation of the verdict. One interesting thing about these dissenting voices, who range from senior academics to lawyers to governors and to media personalities or even entire media establishments, is that they all, to a large extent, seem to have predicated their condemnation on the claim that the judgement is an affront to the concept of “federalism” or what they call “true federalism”.

    In a representative and magisterial articulation of this claim, The Punch editorial of 16 July, 2024 titled “Supreme Court got it wrong on LG autonomy” stated:  “In its latest judicial intervention … the Court declared that the government is portioned into three tiers – federal, state, and local. This is a blatant assault on the tenets of federalism. … The Supreme Court erred in its judgement as the LGs have no place in a federal constitution. Therefore, one of the fundamental flaws of the 1999 Constitution is to list the 774 LGs in it. This must be corrected. In federal jurisdictions, such as the United States, India, and Brazil, the constitution recognises only the centre and province/region/state governments. … Thus, the Supreme Court judgement is a conspiracy against federalism.”

    Those who oppose or condemn the Supreme Court judgement seem to be unanimous in insisting on the twisting of Nigeria’s legitimate version of federalism to align it with their narrow definition of federalism rather than broadening the definition of federalism to accommodate the Nigerian experience. In a 2017 article by Dr. Dele Babalola titled “50 shades of federalism – Nigeria: A federation in search of federalism,” the author notes: “Federalism, like most Social Science concepts, has no standard definition as it ‘may mean different things to all [people].’” He further observed: “In Nigeria, true federalism means different things to different people. The newfound phrase could be better understood using a geo-political lens.”

    In clinging unyieldingly to the narrow concept of federalism, opponents of the Supreme Court judgement on local government autonomy also engage in the fallacy of appeal to authority, by citing equally narrow definitional examples. Moreover, consistent with the logically-weak fallacy of red herring, some of these opponents shift focus and begin to dwell on matters not central to the original or specific issue of debate. They also find ad hominem arguments handy, preferring to engage in abuse rather than logical argument.

    The point being made is related to the fact that the precise meanings of words are context-dependent, and as contexts vary, the meanings of words change. Such changes could involve the broadening or narrowing of meaning as conditioned by different epochs or different events. With respect to this phenomenon, Richard Nordquist in Thoughtco.com notes as follows in a 4 November, 2019 article: “Semantic change may also occur when native speakers of another language adopt English expressions [e.g., ‘federalism’] and apply them to activities or conditions in their own social and cultural environment.” In other words, ‘federalism’ is not a semantically-fossilised word, and much of the controversies surrounding the Supreme Court judgement on local government autonomy, with respect to its consistency with the principle or definition of ‘federalism’ or ‘true federalism’, amount to mere grandstanding. Insisting on only the definition of ‘federalism’ as a two-tier political principle or system is therefore semantic tyranny.

    If we have any true hope for a redirection of our society for positive growth, the Supreme Court judgement provides a genuine justification. Local governments have been bedridden, and a new medicine has been found which has saved them from outright death. To aid full recovery, local governments must be trained on how to walk again, through robust reorientation programmes for their elected and career officials.

    The present state of affairs raises a question: “What can be done to counter the travesty that’s called State Independent Electoral Commission or SIEC-organised local government elections, which are, in many cases, popularity-or-performance-independent, and, in fact, have been referred to as coronations by “Emperor-Governors”? As the Supreme Court judgement has shown, wisdom never gets so completely used up in the world that we would need to go looking for more in heaven. So says the Yoruba proverb “Ogbón ò kìí tán l’áyé ká wa lo sí òrun.” And what does its English equivalent say? “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”

  • Governors lose financial control over local govt

    Governors lose financial control over local govt

     • Supreme Court orders direct payment of councils allocation

    • No funding for councils without elected officials

    • 479 out of 774 Councils lose access to federation account cash

    Proponents of local government autonomy scored a major victory yesterday as the Supreme Court stripped governors of financial control over councils.

    The highest court effectively freed the third tier from the control of the state governments by restraining governors from further managing or utilising allocations meant for it.

    It held in a judgment that it was wrong for a state government to retain and utilise local governments’ statutory allocations paid through them.

    A seven-member panel declared unlawful the running of local governments by non-elected and appointed officials.

    The court declared as gross misconduct the dissolution of democratically elected local governments by governors, whose responsibility, under Section 7 (1) of the Constitution, is to ensure their existence.

    It barred the Federal Government from releasing funds to local governments managed by undemocratically elected officials, such as caretaker committees.

    The judgment was on suit SC/CV/343/2024 filed on behalf of the Federal Government by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), with all the 36 state attorneys-general as defendants.

    The Supreme Court, in the lead judgment by Justice Emmanuel Agim, held that the suit had merit. It granted all the reliefs sought.

    The apex court issued an order of injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their privies, agents, officials or howsoever called, from receiving, spending or tampering with funds released from the Federation Account for the benefit of local government councils when no democratically elected local government system is in place.

    Read Also: FULL LIST: 20 States with local government caretaker committees

    The court also ordered the Federal Government, through its relevant officials, to commence immediately the direct payment to local government councils the amount standing to their credit in the Federation account.

    It ordered that henceforth, no state government should be paid any money standing to the credit of the local governments in the Federation account.

    The apex court also issued an order of immediate compliance by the states through their elected or appointed officials and public officers with the terms of the judgment and orders.

    Successive state government officials and public officers must also comply, it held.

    Justice Agim faulted the contention of the states that allowing the Federal Government to pay allocations directly to the LGAs would amount to a breach of the provisions of Section 162 (5) & (6) of the Constitution, requiring that such allocations must be paid through the states.

    The sub-sections provide: “The amount standing to the credit of local government councils in the Federation Account shall also be allocated to the State for the benefit of their local government councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.

    “Each state shall maintain a special account to be called ‘State/Joint Local Government Account’ into which shall be paid all allocations to the local government councils of the State from the Federation Account and from the Government of the State.”

    Justice Agim noted that where the literal and narrow interpretation is adopted in constructing the word “shall” in sub-section 5, it will impose a mandatory duty on the Federation to pay local governments statutory allocations from the Federation account only through the states.

    Justice Agim added that where such literal and narrow interpretations will cause injustice or create an unworkable situation, a purposive or teleological interpretation should be adopted to allow for discretion on the part of the Federation in determining the most appropriate mode of paying the allocations of the LGAs to them.

    He said the adoption of a purposive interpretation would mean that the Federation could pay Local governments’ allocations to them either directly or pay to them through the states.

    He added: “In this case, since paying them through states has not worked, the justice of this case demands that the local government allocations from the Federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the LG councils.

    On whether state governments or governors could lawfully dissolve democratically elected local government councils, Justice Agim held that it is a mandatory duty of the state government or governor, under Section 7(1) of the Constitution, to ensure their existence.

    He said what obtains today is that the states, in the abuse of their powers, have continued to work against that provision of the Constitution.

    Referring to past decisions of the court, Justice Agim held that a democratically elected local government does not exist at the pleasure of the governor or the House of Assembly.

    He added it was common knowledge and needs no proof that governors want to hold on to and manage council allocations and, therefore, do not want the existence of democratically elected chairmen.

    Justice Agim noted that the governors also do not want to leave council allocations to the control of elected chairmen.

    He added: “Therefore, their unconstitutional takeover of the control and management of the local government allocations from the Federation account is the impetus for their preference for caretaker committees or by whatever name call over democratically elected local governments and their refusal to build the capacity of the State Independent Electoral Commissions to be independent enough to hold truly democratic elections.

    “They create the absence of democratically elected councils by not allowing the State Independent Electoral Commission to conduct local government elections and use that as an excuse to appoint caretaker committees or administrators or dissolve democratically elected local government councils and appoint caretaker committees or administrators. Such appointments cannot be justified in any sense.”

    According to the jurist, under the Constitution, a state government or a governor has no power to constitute, appoint or determine a local government other than as prescribed in Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution.

    The section provides: “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to Section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils.”

    Justice Agim declared that the 36 states, acting through their governors and or Houses of Assembly, are under obligation to ensure democratic governance at the third tier of government, namely at the local government level.

    He also declared that the states, governors or Houses of Assembly, cannot, using state power derivable from laws enacted by the state Houses of Assembly or Executive Orders or other actions, anyhow so-called, lawfully dissolve democratically elected local government councils within the same state and replace with caretaker committees or whatever they are called.

    Justice Agim declared as unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void the dissolution of democratically elected local government councils using powers derivable from laws enacted by the Houses of Assembly or executive orders.

    He declared that a state government or the governor of a state has no power to constitute or appoint a caretaker for a local government other than as prescribed by Section 7 (1) of the Constitution.

    The Supreme Court granted the following reliefs:

    *A declaration that the amount distributed to and standing to the credit of the local government councils in the account of the Federation can be paid by the Federation directly to democratically elected Local Government councils since the states that have been collecting same for them have persistently refused to hand over the money to the owner, but rather retain them.

    *A declaration that the amount distributed to and standing to the credit of the local government councils in the Federation account must be paid by the Federation to only democratically elected local government councils and no other body.

    *A declaration that any elected official of the 36 states, who through the instrumentality of either a state law or executive directive or order, dissolve or cause the dissolution of any of the democratically elected local government councils has gravely breached the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and has by that token committed a gross misconduct.

    *A declaration that by virtue of Section 162(3) and (5) of the Constitution, the amount standing to the credit of the Local Governments in the Federation account should be distributed to them or paid directly to them, the reason being that the state, either by itself or the governor or other agency has no power to keep, control, manage or disburse in any manner allocation from the Federation for the Local Governments.

    *A declaration that the former practice of the state in keeping, controlling, managing and disbursing local government councils’ allocations from the Federation account is unconstitutional and illegal.

    *A declaration that a local government council is entitled to a direct payment from the Federation account of the amount standing to its credit in the said Federation account since the state governments have persistently refused or failed to pay the amount received on their behalf to them.

    Tijani Gazali (SAN), Director of Civil Appeals at the Federal Ministry of Justice, who represented the AGF in court, thanked the Supreme Court for finally proclaiming financial autonomy for the local government councils.

    “My lords, on behalf of the federation, we thank the court for finally putting this issue to rest,” Gazali added.

    Attorney-General of Abia State, Ikechukwu Uwanna (SAN), his counterparts in Adamawa and Akwa Ibom states – Afraimu Jinji (SAN) and Uko Essien Udom (SAN) noted that although the decision did not go in their favour, they will have to abide by it since the Supreme Court is the final court in the land.

    Tinubu hails verdict

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu hailed the verdict, saying it aligned with his administration’s Renewed Hope Agenda, which prioritises the people’s interests.

    He stressed that the onus is now on local council leaders to ensure that the broad spectrum of Nigerians living at that level are satisfied that they are benefitting from people-oriented service delivery.

    According to a statement by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Ajuri Ngelale, the President hopes that council funding will now be transparent and services provided without excuses.

    He hailed the judgment as a significant step towards restructuring the country and economy, making Nigeria a better and fairer society for all.

    The statement reads in part: “The Renewed Hope Agenda is about the people of this country, at all levels, irrespective of faith, tribe, gender, political affiliation, or any other artificial line they say exists between us. This country belongs to all of us.

    “By virtue of this judgment, our people – especially the poor – will be able to hold their local leaders to account for their actions and inactions. What is sent to local government accounts will be known, and services must now be provided without excuses.

     “My administration instituted this suit because of our unwavering belief that our people must have relief and today’s judgment will ensure that it will be only those local officials elected by the people that will control the resources of the people.

    “This judgment stands as a resounding affirmation that we can use legitimate means of redress to restructure our country and restructure our economy to make Nigeria a better place to live in and a fairer society for all of our people.”

    President Tinubu noted that the provision of some essential amenities and public goods, such as the construction and maintenance of certain roads, streets, street lighting, drains, parks, gardens, open spaces, and other residual responsibilities, including community security, have tottered due to the emasculation of local governments.

    The President affirmed that the decision of the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutional rights and ideals of local governments as regards financial autonomy, and other salient principles, is of historic significance and further reinforces the effort to enhance Nigeria’s true federal fabric for the development of the entire nation.

    President Tinubu commended the AGF for his diligence and patriotic effort on this important assignment.

    “This administration remains committed to protecting the principles of the charter governing citizens, institutions of government, arms, and tiers of government in furtherance of building an efficient and performance-driven governance system that works for every Nigerian,” the statement adds.

    Senate President Godswill Akpabio, House of Representatives Speaker Abbas Tajudeen and Attorney-General of Federation Lateef Fagbemi all commended the verdict in separate statements.

    The Association of Local Government of Nigeria (ALGON), Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees and National Councillors Forum of Nigeria(NCFN) gave kudos to the apex court for the landmark judgment, which according to them, will fast track development at the grassroots.

    ALGON lauded the  judgment  as the “birth of a new democracy” in the country.

    Local Government workers   welcomed   judgment affirming councils’ full autonomy , saying it signposted  a ‘’new dawn to prosperity” at the  grassroots.

    NCFN hailed the judgment as the best thing that has ever happened since the return of democracy in 1999.

    Not less than 479 out of the 774 local governments spread across 22 states are run by unelected officials and will henceforth go without allocation from the federation account in view of the apex court judgment.

  • Still on the local government autonomy debate

    Still on the local government autonomy debate

    SIR: The quest for local government autonomy in Nigeria is caused by the urgent developmental objectives; the be-all-and-end-all of which is the progressive amelioration of multi-dimensional poverty of overwhelming majority of Nigerians.

    We must however understand that in a state, military or federal, the autonomy of the lower tiers of government can never have absolute expression or import. It is relative, however, whatsoever. The suit instituted by the attorney general of the federal republic of Nigeria, against the thirty-six states of the federation, on the interpretation of the provisions of the constitution of Nigeria on local government autonomy, is outside the scope of this discourse. My concern is not the judicial interpretation or construction of the respective constitutional provisions. What is my concern here, is what ought to be the constitutional provisions as regards autonomy for the local government tier in Nigeria. And not, parse, what, at present, are the respective constitutional provisions. Whether or not the respective provisions of the constitution are desirable in the pursuit of the developmental objectives is an issue that ultra-vires, beyond the authority of the Supreme Court or any other court. This is a matter ultimately within only the purview of the legislature, by the way of the constitutional amendment powers vested in the legislature.

    There are various arguments for and against local government autonomy in Nigeria. However, what many scientists make oversight of is the cardinal ground for our submission here; and it is that the formulation of governance model, or constitution, is experimental. Accordingly, in the overall analysis of the governance experience of Nigerians, our conclusion is that local government should be given such extent of autonomy as full as practicable. This would deepen democracy, and would amount to empowerment of the people, in this ultra-capitalist system that Nigeria is. The local government councillors should have substantive legislative powers over the local government budget, award of contracts of any amount, remuneration, salaries, wages and remuneration of local government officials in each local government, construction of roads, determination of levies and fees for provision of social services. However, can each local government be given full powers over primary education, employment of primary school teachers, promotion and remuneration of teachers, formulation of curriculum of primary education, primary health care services, etc.?

    Read Also: It is good that states have countersued on local government autonomy

    The matter of local government autonomy in Nigeria requires holistic analysis of constitutionalism and development, together. The federal government is advised to organize a national conference on local government administration in Nigeria; as well as set up an ad-hoc commission of about 10 experts on local government administration, including experts on jurisprudence, development economics, political economy and sociology. A special input of the Institute of Chartered Local Government and Public Administrators, must be mandated. Local government autonomy can only be functionally relative and a balance has to be struck, after classical consideration of the contemporary socio-economic and political circumstances of Nigeria. It is, in the over-all analysis, the over-centralization of powers in the central, the so- called federal government that necessitates, the relative autonomy of the local government. Otherwise, in a truly federal system, the state government, that is the government of the constituent unit, each has full control of its local governments, invariably.

    • Eni-Iyi Ojekunle Wasiu (Mcpa.) wasiuojekunle15@gmail.com
  • It is good that states have countersued on local government autonomy

    It is good that states have countersued on local government autonomy

    Funny enough,  some people, including some APC members, are clamouring for local government autonomy which will take Nigeria back many decades from what a true federation is. There is no federal system in the world where you have three federal units. In the U.S where we copied democracy from, their counties don’t go to  Washington  to collect money directly.

    Each state must have the power to design the kind of local government system it wants. That is what is called true federalism”. –Governor Charles Soludo at Platform Nigeria 24, a programme by a Lagos-based church, Covenant Nation,to mark the 2024 Democracy Day.

    I haven’t the slightest shame confessing that Democracy Day 24 was the first time I completely sat through any of Platform Nigeria’s events.

    And was it worth it?

    Absolutely.

    Of the many weighty issues discussed at the event, this article  will touch only on  Local Government Autonomy over which a fresh debate recently ensued when very surprisingly, the Federal Government   headed to the Supreme Court, asking that the apex court give the totally anti – federalist conjecture its legal backing.

    Uncle Bola Ige, of blessed memory, would, as a lawyer and politician,  be most distraught, and disappointed, by the action of the otherwise cerebral Attorney – General and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, on account of this professional misstep. 

    This is not a guess because I  know that I am standing on solid ground when I make that claim. In confirmation, please permit me to press the inimitable  Cicero into service, albeit posthumously.

    Welcome then to my article of  28 July, 2017 titled:

    Constitutional Amendment:An Absolutely Self-Serving National Assembly.

    It reads as follows:

    “Any action, whether legislative or executive in this country today that is not programmed to respond to the yearnings of the populace will amount to an excise in futility”. – Ohanaeze Ndi-Igbo

    Should the National Assembly ever have its way with these convoluted constitutional amendments, Nigeria will be guaranteed to make no headway, whatever, this entire century.  Nor would the members be bothered whatever happens to the country. They showed this total disdain for the country’s well-being when they shut out devolution of powers to states which a rational National Assembly should have realised is the most assured way to stem the fissiparous tendencies mushrooming all over the country, and tearing at the very heart of the nation.  Equally, were they perspicacious enough, they should have known that it was disingenuous of them to situate  their approval of Local Government autonomy on the laughable excuse of fighting  state executive- induced corruption  because, were that to be true, then there would have been  no justification for having a national assembly which has turned oversight functions to an avenue for corruption, harassing and intimidating heads of federal agencies in order to have their way.

    Rather than appreciate that only a truly Peoples’ constitution can turn Nigeria back from its present perilous road to Golgotha, they are more interested in having immunity, becoming members of the Council of State and subordinating even the  president to themselves in constitutional matters. Are they so remiss they don’t know that federating units are only limited  to federal and state?  From where, therefore, did they manufacture autonomy for local governments? If INEC continually bungles     national elections, how reasonable is it to now have inflicted on it the additional burden of conducting Local Government elections? Or in which part of the civilised  world is this the norm?

    If the intention is to stop state governors from tampering with local government funds, who will, in turn,  protect Nigerians from these  legislators whose humongous allowances owe nothing to the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission? Nigerians have not forgotten how Speaker Dimeji Bankole and the House leadership, rather than the RMAFC,   self- awarded to themselves the outrageous allowances to which their senate counterparts not only acquiesced, but went on to borrow to pay even when it was not appropriated in that year’s  budget.

    It is apposite here to invite Uncle Bola Ige, unarguably one of Nigeria’s most knowledgeable politicians of any era,  to put these legislators through a learning curve.

    Writing in his column in the Tribune of 27 April, 1996 he asserted as follows, just as Charles Soludo would incisively postulate at Platform Nigeria 24 on Wednesday, 12 June, 2024 that:”In a federal set-up, the federal government must have nothing to do with the creation or running of local government. Nigeria is the only federation in the entire world where the federal government decides how, where, and when a local government council must run. In all civilized countries, and in all democratic countries, it is the state or provincial or regional government that legislates on local government”.

    He wrote further: “Unfortunately, the Murtala-Obasanjo federal military government began the nonsense that has remained with us ever since when it set  up the  Ibrahim Dasuki  commission whose recommendation is the worst disaster to happen to local government system in Nigeria because it was there that the idea of uniformity in size, scope and administration was introduced”.

    Of course, the ever perspicacious legal guru naturally suspected a hidden agenda, which he said, was to “strengthen the administrative stranglehold of the North over  the whole of Nigeria”.

    Without a doubt, that same Northern agenda is in play in this Local Government autonomy affair. It is, in fact, as I will show below, now more urgent than ever  before, in this era of  grazing land seeking, murderous Fulani herdsmen.

    I shall now proceed to a write up, which I did not author, but shared on my Face book wall during the past week.

    Titled: Local Government Autonomy, Abrogation of  State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) and Why the  Federal Government Must Reliquish Responsibility for Creation of Local Government Councils, the author wrote:

    “We are all aware of the efforts to make Local Governments autonomous. We are told it is to curb ‘corruption and ensure development at the grassroots” because state governors do not allow their funds to reach them thereby stagnating growth at that level. There is equally a strong move to abrogate State Independent Electoral Commissions [SIEC].

    Let us now analyse the hidden objectives of this sweet smelling idea, to see if  it is the way to go in a federation.

    Firstly the Federal Government creates Local Governments a preponderance of which has gone to the North. Secondly to be deemed an indigene of a state, one’s Local Government must formally confirm your status.  Thirdly the State Independent Electoral Commission is responsible for Local Government elections. To contest an election, your status as an indigene must be confirmed by your Local Government.

    Impact of  Local Government Autonomy:

    Immediately it becomes law, Federalism, as we know it, ceases to exist and Nigeria, in effect,  becomes a unitary state with 774 Local Governments and 36 State Governments. We will  then have 36

    governors and 774 Local Government Chairmen, all running to Abuja to collect  money, thus rendering state governors irrelevant in  states which they were elected to govern.

    Since the Federal Government   creates  Local Governments, let us assume it decides to create Local Governments in Lagos state.

    If Hausas in Obalende or Agege are inspired, by federal forces, to begin an agitation for whatever reason, or Agege is broken into two Local Governments, and the Federal INEC now conducts LG elections, Hausas  are guaranteed to get a distinct local government in Agege where they are an obvious minority.

    1.That will be a first step for Hausas in Agege, or Igbos in Festac, to become ‘Indigenes’ of Lagos state, and so can, effortlessly,  contest the state’s governorship election.

    Meanwhile, that will never happen in Kano or Enugu.

    2. Before we know it, a bye-law can be passed whereby the new Local Government becomes sharia compliant in an LG area where Muslims are in the minority.

    3. They can then legislate to have an Emir or Eze as the LG’s number one traditional authority; all in another man’s land.

    4. They will now be able to receive funds directly to fund their activities, qua activities, in other peoples’ states.

    5. The Local Governments could then become Abuja’s staging post for their next moves, whatever these are, in states belonging to other people.

    6. This cannot  happen in the north where they will be chased away, at best, or in the East where, as a stranger, you cannot now buy a plot of land. Some Igbos are even refusing a Pope – appointed Igbo bishop, for not coming from their own state.

    The most dangerous scenario, however, will be where the Federal Government desires to pursue an objective which the State government objects to, either for religious or cultural reasons, or on  principles of federalism, but which the Federal Government, relying on such Local Government chairmen in the state will get done, regardless, since he who pays the piper dictates the tune.

    Read Also: Attorney general and local government autonomy

    Some citizens would thus have lost the ability to protect their traditional institutions,  especially land, even religious affinity in their own state.

    The consequences are better imagined, especially in Southern Nigeria, as dipping the Koran in the Atlantic ocean, as long prophesied by Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sadauna of Sokoto, may no longer be a mirage, only delayed.

    Concluding, if the urge for autonomy for Local Governments  was the mindset of the Muhammadu Buhari administration, I cannot, in my wildest imagination, fathom its attraction for the Tinubu government unless we are being told that they know, in advance, the mindset of all future Nigerian presidents.

  • Attorney general and local government autonomy

    Attorney general and local government autonomy

    Last week, the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi dragged the 36 federating states to the Supreme Court. His suit seeks  to “compel the 36 states to grant full autonomy to local governments in their states, prohibits state governors from unilateral, arbitrary and unlawful dissolution  of democratically-elected local government leaders for local governments and restrains the governors, their agents  and privies  from spending and tampering with funds released from the federation accounts for the benefits of the LGAs” when no democratically elected local government system is put in place in the states.

    Finally, it seeks “an order stopping governors from constituting caretaker committees to run their affairs of local governments.”

    I think if the essence of law is to serve the end of justice, the respected legal luminary is chasing shadows. In any case, the problem is not legal but political. Again, to understand what is at stake, we must return to the spot where the rain started to beat us.

    Read Also: Murder allegation: Court orders Kano to pay Doguwa N25m damages

    Colonialism and military rule are two sides of a coin. The irony however is that the former seemed to have had more respect for Nigerians than our military adventurers with their messianic mentality. For instance, the latter pretended to know what we wanted without consulting us and went ahead to foist ill-digested policies which some have likened to brain waves on the country. Such policies include Structural Adjustment Programme, (SAP) which unfortunately turned our nation to importer of the labour of other societies, ‘decreed political parties’ that gulped a whopping N531m as take-off grant with N3b party headquarters later taken over by reptiles, ‘new breed’ politicians that bred only corruption and trading our working four region federal structure with unwieldy and unviable 36 states and 774 LGAs created without objective criteria.

    On the other hand, the honest and well-thought out policies of the former, including their constitutional engineering from the 1920s to 1959, were true reflections of our nation as a multi-cultural and heterogeneous society.

    “Our vision for Nigeria”, Oliver Stanley, declared in 1920, was a “national self-government that secures to each separate people, the right to maintain its identity, its individuality and its nationality, its own chosen form of government, which had been evolved for it by the wisdom and accumulated experiences of generation of its forbearers.” 

    The British imperial powers remained faithful to their avowed undertaking even if they had to apply the ‘stick and carrot’ approach during the constitutional debate that heralded the nation to independence in 1960. Although local government as a concept of government at grassroots level existed long before their arrival, but with some modifications, they allowed the Northern Region and the Western Region to maintain the system of local government they inherited. For the acephalous Igbo society of the Eastern Region, they found temporary solution in warrant chiefs, an experiment that did not endure.  For them, LGA is the tier of government administration that coordinates the activities of citizens at the local community levels and it was a regional affair.

    Thus while the  1914-1950 Native Authority or Indirect Rule reform, was initiated because the traditional rulers who ‘executed delegated policies of the colonial power ‘had no power to meet the demands of their people’ and the 1950 to 1966, Local Administration system stemmed from 1947 policy thrust of the last colonial Secretary of State, Lord Creech-Jones,  that “the key to resolving the problems of African administration lay in the development of an efficient and democratic local government that is close to the people”, Obasanjo’s Local Government  1976 reform was designed not to create but to share the resources of more resourceful states among less resourceful  states to create uniformity, which in itself is an aberration in federalism.

    Of course, Obasanjo like his fellow military adventurers suffers from messianic complex. Hear him: “When in 1976, we brought in local government reforms, it was meant to be the third tier of the government and not meant to be subjected to the whims and caprices of any other government”.

     He ignored the fact that the states are not appendages of the central government but coordinates, operating on the basis of a constitution which allocates power to both tiers of government. It was because of such display of arrogance that many believe the 1976 LGA reform was designed to buy legitimacy for LGAs while undermining state governments as against vehicles for development of the rural areas as canvassed by the then military government.

    What, if one may ask are the objective criteria for creating 413 councils for the north and 355 to the south? What is the argument in support of (Kano and Jigawa that used to be one state with same population as Lagos having federally-funded 71 Local Government Councils to Lagos’ 20? What is the logic in creating uniformity in minimum wage between some states that collect in one month, an allocation some others will collect in one year?

    In any case, trying to separate the local government from the states is like trying to cut the umbilical cord between a foetus and a pregnant expectant mother. The LGAs are the life-wire of the states. The state exists through its creative management of the resources of the local governments. The state without the local governments is an orphan. Let us for a moment accept we want to run a federal system as against the current unitary system where all the federating states go cap in hand to Abuja to collect monthly allocations, where will the state generate funds from if we say the LGAs are independent of the states?

    It is therefore disingenuous to complain that states after collecting their 26.72 per cent share of the Federation Account and proceed to appropriate LG funds under numerous guises. The states own the funds. The federal government is a parasite.

    The federal government by funding local governments that do not report to it indirectly admits it is as interloper. I guess this was why Chukwuma Soludo as CBN governor complained aloud that “Nigeria is the only known federation in the world where the centre funds the local governments that do not report to it”.

    In deed many have also argued that the fact that each state has a ministry of local government and chieftaincy affairs headed by a commissioner, and an elaborate body of laws to guide the operations, is seen as a tacit endorsement of state control.

     It is also on record that President Tinubu’s ACN took the federal government to court over local government financial autonomy. The party’s argument then was that local government could not have financial autonomy because they are not federating units of the federation.  This position was to be upheld by the 2014 Jonathan’s CONFAB that recommended that the federal government only fund the federating states and not LGAs.

    It is therefore an aberration for President Obasanjo, the Attorney General and other ‘mainstreamers’ to continue to refer to the local government as the third tier of government. Such claim is antithetical to the concept of federal arrangement just as it defies the United Nations concept of LGAs as “a political subdivision of a nation or a state in in a federal system.

    The idea of an independent third tier in a nation of two federating units was a brain wave of those with military mind-set of sharing looted resources of conquered territories. Now with little left to share, we must embrace productivity through fiscal federalism.