The Supreme Court verdict, which grants financial autonomy to democratically elected local governments, has elicited a flurry of reactions. Assistant Editor EMMANUEL BADEJO examines the issues involved
The recent Supreme Court ruling granting financial autonomy to local governments has elicited varied reactions among Nigerians. Many have hailed it, saying it is a move in the right direction by the Bola Tinubu-led administration, while others argue that the intention behind may be good but in practice it would not work. Some of the questions that are being asked in the wake of the Supreme Court judgment are: Can the verdict be implemented to the fullest without first amending the 1999 Constitution, which cannot be done without the backing of the 36 state Houses of Assembly? Will the judgment translate to a verdict without a corresponding power? Time will determine all of these and more concerns trailing the judicial pronouncement.
In the unanimous judgement of its seven-member panel, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the suit brought by the Federal Government to strengthen the independence of the 774 local governments in the country. Emmanuel Agim, who delivered the court’s lead judgment, held that the local governments across the country should henceforth receive their allocations directly from the Federation Account, through the Accountant-General of the Federation. He ruled that it is illegal and unconstitutional for governors to receive and withhold funds allocated to local government areas (LGAs) in their states.
Agim said, ordinarily, the 1999 Constitution permits the Federal Government to pay local government allocations directly to them or through the state governments. However, he added: “Demand for justice requires a progressive interpretation of the law. It is the position of this court that the federation can pay local government 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. I hold that the states’ retention of local government funds is unconstitutional.”
He then ordered that “the amount standing to the credit of local government councils must be paid by the federation to the local government councils and not by any other person or body”. He added: “An order of injunction is hereby granted restraining the defendants from collecting funds belonging to the local government councils when no democratically elected local government councils are in place; an order that henceforth, no state government should be paid monies standing to the credit of the local government councils; an order for immediate enforcement and compliance with these orders by the state governments and successive governments henceforth.”
The new arrangement ordered by the Supreme Court empowers the Accountant-General of the Federation to bypass the state governments in the monthly disbursement of federal allocations to the local governments. The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, filed the suit in May. Afterwards, the panel of seven justices of the court, led by Garba Lawal, heard the suit on June 13 and reserved judgment.
The local government is Nigeria’s third tier of government and the closest level of government to the grassroots. But this tier of governance has almost become incapacitated for over two decades, as the governors seize their federal allocations and only release funds to them piecemeal to barely keep them going. This has allegedly been a tool in the hands of many of the state executives to suppress democratically elected council officials. For instance, in the states, governors withhold local government funds in the controversial joint accounts that supposedly operate jointly with the local governments.
However, the umbrella body of all local government chairpersons across the country has said most members do not have access to the controversial accounts in their states. It is common knowledge that many of governors arbitrarily dissolve elected local government executives, despite repeated court decisions adjudging such an action as illegal. Where the tenure of the elected officials lapses, most governors have failed to ensure another election for the councils. Instead, the governors appoint caretakers to take charge of the councils.
This explains why more than 450 councils in the country located in more than 20 states do not have elected officials.
Similarly, since it is the state independent electoral commissions (SIECs) that organize local government elections, the exercise in most states has become the ruling party’s show, as governors impose their preferred candidates on the people at will.
In all the states, the ruling parties clear almost all the local government elections, leaving the opposition parties on the fringes. This has ignited calls for transferring the responsibility of conducting local government elections to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In May, the INEC chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, lamented about how local government elections are conducted, describing it as the coronation of candidates of ruling parties. He also called on the 36 state governors to “allow the SIECs to have greater capacity for independent action”.
He added: “In some states, the SIECs are either not properly constituted, have no security of tenure or their critical functions have been taken over by government officials. Some SIECs are only constituted on the eve of elections and dissolved thereafter. They are also severely under-resourced to the extent that some of them rely on INEC even for basic facilities such as ballot boxes and voting cubicles.”
Yakubu said the situation has compelled INEC “to reconsider some aspects of our relationship with the SIECs”, adding that the commission’s support is now largely restricted to the voters’ register as provided by the constitution.
Even if state executives comply with the apex court declaration, how about the local government elections? Reacting to the verdict, the pan-Yoruba socio-political association, Afenifere, which condemned the judgment, described it as judicial conspiracy. In a statement, the Afenifere leader and the National Public Secretary, Chief Ayo Adebanjo described the Supreme Court verdict as Tinubu’s grand conspiracy against democracy and true federalism in Nigeria.
Adebanjo said the judgment was against the principle of true federalism. He added that the Supreme Court had played to the gallery in delivering such a judgment. The statement reads: “Afenifere views the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case filed by the Federal Government on the so-called local government autonomy as a sheer judicial conspiracy in cahoots with the Tinubu administration against the Nigerian state and its foundational principles of federalism.
“Rather than interpret the constitution to uphold its elementary but overriding federal principle, which recognises only a two-tier federal structure of the central government and federating states, the Supreme Court played to the gallery and wittingly allowed itself a most retrogressive declaration that the power of the government is portioned into three arms of government, the federal, the state and the local government.
“For the avoidance of any doubt, the Afenifere makes bold to say that in line with its negotiated basis of existence, Nigeria is a ‘Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory’, as affirmed by Section 2 (2) of the 1999 constitution. While Afenifere frowns at corruption and misuse of public funds at levels of government, it condemns in most unmistaken terms the subjugation of the states and their constitutional roles including the local government system to the whims and caprices of the federal government by any means including obvious manipulation of the federation account as in the present case.”
The group also alleged that the Tinubu administration has been practising a unitary system in some of its policies since its inception. It maintained that the only way forward for the country was to practice true federalism.
In his reaction, former Deputy National Chairman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Chief Bode George tasked President Bola Tinubu to ensure the restructuring of the country is total. George, who commended the Supreme Court on the ruling, said the judiciary has, “once again, proved that it is the last hope of the common man”.
In a statement, the PDP leader urged the president to ensure a complete “overhaul of the polity”. He said: “I want to advise the president that he must go further because what Nigerians want is a complete overhaul of the polity. That is the only way Nigeria can work. Nigerians want total restructuring.”
Former Governor of Cross River State, Donald Duke, said the autonomy of local government can only be effective if the constitution is amended to suit that purpose. He said that the Federal Government is not more responsible than the states. He added that since the constitution mandates states to conduct local government elections, the third tier of government remains within the purview of the states.
Duke who spoke in Port Harcourt, said: “I have my reservations about the Supreme Court judgment. I think for the judgment to be effective, we need a constitutional amendment. Is the local government a federating unit? If we are going to operate true federalism, the local government should be guided by the laws, not by the Federal Government because it is the creation of the state. The Constitution talks about the responsibilities of the federal and state governments. It does not talk about the responsibilities of the local government.
“We are not saying that there should be no local government, of course, there will be local government but it will be guided by the state. The problem they are trying to avoid is to give full autonomy to the states. We also know that the Federal Government is not even more responsible than the states. Don’t think you are better than the other one.
“Whatever you want to achieve, amend the constitution appropriately to suit it. If you want local government autonomy and at the same time you say the governor is the chief executive and in charge of the security of the state, there cannot be that kind of autonomy. They have to be responsible to the superior organ and that organ is the state House of Assembly.”
Senator Mutalubi Adebayo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), who hailed the verdict, tasked the National Judicial Council (NJC), judges, particularly at the state High Courts and the Nigerian Bar Associations (NBA) to rise to the challenge of safeguarding the constitution.
He added: “It is now left for our legal practitioners and the bar associations in the country to also live up to their responsibilities as the defenders and promoters of constitutional liberties, democracy and good governance by stoutly resisting and refusing to allow themselves to be used as tools by any governor to whittle down the consequential effects of the judgement and or to frustrate same through the filing of unprofessional actions and litigations.
“The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and all her branches across the country must be alert and be ready to be the watchdog of the judiciary in general and in particular our state high courts to guard jealously their independence and promote the rule of law. All other courts of records in the country and most especially our high courts which are arguably known and reputed (mostly) to be knight errands of their respective state governors and governments must also now be ready to defend our Constitution by adjudicating on cases brought before them fairly without fear or favour no matter whose ox is gored.”
“Like we all know, heaven will never fall. They should adhere strictly to their oaths of office and allow justice to flow freely. The NBA at all levels must promptly report and petition the National Judicial Council against any judge(s) who dispenses justice contrary to judicial oath or in contravention of the constitution and or against the settled decision of the Supreme Court on this issue of local government autonomy.
“The NJC must also live up to its responsibility by bringing the full weight of the law down heavily on such erring judicial officers to ensure their dismissal from our scared bench. The NBA also must initiate disciplinary proceedings against any of its members (no matter highly placed) who may try and attempt to render ineffective the apex court judgement of the Supreme Court.”
The Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide has called for the immediate dissolution of Southeast Governors’ appointed Caretaker Chairmen and the expeditious conduct of local government elections in the Southeast. It said: “The recent Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy is a monumental victory for democracy, a triumph that cannot be understated. It marks the end of nefarious manipulations by governors on local government funds, putting an end to the continuous pilferage and diversion of LGA allocations.
“However, the implementation of this ruling is paramount in ensuring that the autonomy of the 774 local government areas in Nigeria is fully realized and safeguarded. To achieve this, INEC must be granted the constitutional authority to oversee local government elections. By empowering INEC to conduct these elections, transparency, fairness, and accountability will be upheld, deterring governors from exerting undue influence and control over the electoral process. The days of governors using SIECs to install their cronies and stooges as local government chairmen for personal gain, must come to an end.
“Ohanaeze Ndigbo calls upon Southeast governors to accept the Supreme Court ruling with grace and compliance by organizing credible, transparent, and free local government elections in the 95 LGAs of the Southeast, the governors can play a pivotal role in bolstering democracy and addressing pressing security challenges at the grassroots level. We are cognizant of clandestine endeavours aimed at perpetuating the siphoning of LGA allocations in the Southeast, and we remain vigilant in monitoring these developments.”
Meanwhile, the Adamawa State Government has instituted a suit at the Supreme Court, challenging the Federal Government over the revenue distribution formula.
In a statement, the Chief Press Secretary to Governor Ahmadu Fintiri, Humwashi Wonosikou, said the state is seeking an interpretation of Section 162 (1), (2) and (3) of the constitution regarding the distribution of revenue from the Federation Account. The state argued that “the entire sum in the federation account must be distributed among all levels of government without deductions, except as permitted by law”.
