“The military correct one problem but create sundry others” —EM Forster, A Passage to India.
The quote above is not exactly the words of one of the characters in EM Forster’s famous novel on the British Raj (1858-1947). But it captures the exact sentiments.
The issue here is not even the military — brave souls! — and their sweet-sour image, either in junta rule, or when unleashed beyond war and gore, their core competence.
It’s rather applying such military tactics to the Supreme Court verdict on council “autonomy” — hailed, by many, for stopping governors’ pilfering of council funds.
But it is also ardently questioned by a few —Ripples included. That “autonomy” makes Nigeria more unitary than federal, despite the zesty howls over a so-called “third tier” as a federating partner. It is not.
Beyond military whims, unfortunately codified in the 1999 Constitution, there is nothing like local governments partnering the Federal Government for the Nigerian federation — or any federation for that matter. That’s a travesty — and that explains the fight back from the states.
First, it was Chukwuma Soludo’s Anambra. Next, it’s Lagos — incidentally, the first under Governor Bola Tinubu (now President of the Federal Republic), to secure judicial validation for states to create and manage their local governments.
Back then, the Supreme Court found for the state, after bullying President Olusegun Obasanjo had seized Lagos council funds: because Lagos had the temerity to create additional 37 local governments (added to the 20 that the 1999 Constitution listed).
The apex court upheld the constitutional right of states to create local governments.
But it dubbed the exercise “inchoate”, until the National Assembly passed a “consequential listing”, so the new councils could be added to the 774, which the 1999 Constitution had listed. That Supreme Court verdict was on 9 December 2004.
Enter then, the Lagos Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) — until the National Assembly did the needful. But since 2004, no consequential listing had come — and it couldn’t have been otherwise.
“Consequential listing” means the right of the new Lagos councils to draw federal cash. By that, the matter would have morphed from law to finance: and other states, citing Lagos, would have created extra councils, for extra federal cash!
It’s realpolitik: the ugly face of Nigeria’s parasitic federalism, in which the central feudal lord, with gruff unitary temper, feeds the states, but on its own damn terms!
So, the LCDAs — with many states copying that concept — had stayed inchoate, until the “autonomy” verdict of 2024 (by the way, a conceptual opposite of 2004: 20 years later), which just spurred them out of their deep slumber!
Indeed, in his November 3 back-page piece, “LGs in more trouble than Nigerians thinks,” Palladium, The Nation on Sunday columnist, moaned, griped and hissed over how governors were plotting to subvert the Supreme Court’s “autonomy” verdict.
Palladium, as many avid fans of this judicially induced “autonomy”, see the governors as rogues; and Abuja as saint in this matter. From strict morality, maybe yes: soulless governors have diverted council funds for much too long for the owners not to notice!
The proof? Municipal, suburban and rural services, the core duty of local councils, have lagged behind the funding poured down there from Abuja. Too true.
Besides, why near-hysterical reactions, to the verdict, by some governors? Seyi Makinde, the Oyo governor, openly blew his tops. He even tried to instigate an anti-verdict road show by newly (s)elected Oyo council chairs. Futile. Impotent.
Latterly, Soludo’s Anambra again hit its sour anti-”autonomy” mode. A newly elected council chair from Anambra was nabbed in the United States for alleged romantic scams. But Governor Soludo’s Information commissioner threw the poor guy under the bus, claiming Anambra had no dog in the fight — but the man’s electors had — since councils now enjoyed “autonomy”! Talk of chronic sour grapes!
Meanwhile, in the same story — as told in The Nation of November 10 — the nabbed suspect is not only a member of APGA (Anambra’s ruling party), he was also among the candidates Soludo allegedly handpicked prior to the polls, which APGA swept! So, what APGA — and the governor — have put together, “autonomy” has put asunder?
Before the Supreme Court’s July judgment, when the issue came up for discourse at The Nation Editorial Board, Ripples had told co-members that Abuja would likely win the “autonomy” war. Whether it would win the peace thereafter was another question.
So, the current challenge by the states is all about winning the peace.
Abuja used the courts to force out a malady crippling local government administration and development. Noble judicial legerdemain? Hardly ignoble! If the states roar back, by same systemic ploys, it’s hardly ignoble — nor illegal — too!
Indeed, it’s the real war of the federating partners, gaming each other to preserve their turf, under the equal-opportunity eye of the law!
Besides, the Supreme Court’s verdict is hardly a theocracy’s holy grail that must be worshipped and venerated by all, at the mortal risk of heresy! That would appear the view of the pro-”autonomy” lobby. But that’s hardly valid in a democratic republic.
It’s rather the latest legal document, which contesting partners, in a secular federation, can — and should — question. It’s all about thesis and antithesis providing a new synthesis that could work for all. In a competitive federation, that’s hardly a crime.
Let it be clear: governors gypping local governments of their due funds are execrable. But no less damning is a long-term sweet poison to Nigeria’s federal cause.
Whereas the Supreme Court’s 2004 judgment backed states’ federal rights to create own local governments, the 2024 verdict — by implication — all but took away such rights: all to push Abuja’s right to monitor its cash.
Yes, it does solve the problem of governors pinching council funds — or does it? But in doing that, it creates a more fundamental breach that can’t be explained away by the so-called “third tier”. Again, beyond military caprice, that’s hardly federal.
Take the Lagos challenge. It rolled back the LCDAs into the original 20 councils. But it also gave the governor the power to appoint heads and councillors for the inchoate LCDAs — to be funded from allocated federal funds to the Big 20.
How does that appointee power play against the constitutional guarantee of elected local governments? Yet, not even the Supreme Court could “adjudicate” Lagos out of making laws for own councils!
Anambra already passed a law that compels its councils to deposit part of their direct federal cash in a state pool for common services. Hardly an unreasonable move too!
But Lagos has even thrown the LCDAs back at the National Assembly. To ensure elected local governments at LCDAs, pass “consequential listing” the LCDAs had awaited since 2004 — quid pro quo!
This piece will end as the original salvo (See “Autonomy — against who?”, June 18): let Abuja quit its military-messianic complex, charge council funds to states and leave the states to expand — or shrink — their local councils as they deem fit.
Councils are strictly states’ business — no one else’s.
