The Supreme Court has effectively freed the Local Governments from the control of the State Governments by restraining the states from further taking control or utilising allocations meant for the third tier of government.
The apex court, in a judgment on Thursday, held among others that it was wrong for state government to retain and utilise Local Governments’ statutory allocations paid through them for onword tranfer to the councils.
A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court also declared unlawful the running of Local Governments by non-elected officials and those appointed by the state government or governor.
The court also declared as a gross misconduct the dissolution of democratically elected Local Governments by governors, whose responsibility, under Section 7 (1) of the Constitution is to ensure the existence of democratically elected Local Governments.
It barred the Federal Government from releasing funds to Local Governments being managed by undemocratically elected officials.
The judgment was on the suit marked: SC/CV/343/2024 filed on behalf of the Federal Government by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), with all the 36 states’ Attorneys General as defendants.
The Supreme Court held that the suit has merit and proceeded to grant all the reliefs sought.
In the lead judgment by Justice Emmanuel Agim, 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 put in place in the state.
The court also ordered that the Federation or the Fed Govt, through its relevant officials, forthwith, commence 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 made in this suit; and successive compliance by successive s
State Government officials and public officers.
Justice Agim faulted the contention of the states that allowing the Fed Govt to pay allocations directly to the LGAs will amount to a breach of the provisions of Section (162(5) & (6) of the Constitution, requiring that such allocations muat be paid through the states.
He noted that where the literal and narrow interpretation is adopted in constructing the word “shall” in seb-section 5 of Section 162 of the Constitution will imposed 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 LGs to them.
He said the adoption of a purposive interpretation will mean that the Federation can 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 LG allocations from the Federation account should helnceforth be paid directly to the LG councils.
On whether or not state governments or governors could lawful dissolve democratically elected Local Government councils, Justice Agim held that it is a mandatory duty on the state government or governor l, under Section 7(1) of the Constitution, to ensure the existence of democratically elected Local Governments.
He said what is exists 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 that the fact is common knowledge and needs no prove that state governors want to hold on to and manage allocations to Local Governments from the Federation account, therefore, do not want the existence of democratically elected Local Government councils.
Justice Agim noted that the governors also do not want to leave Local Governments allocations from the Federation account to the control of the elected Local Government councils.
He added: “Therefore their unconstitutional takeover of the control and management of the Local Governments allocations from the Federation account is the impetus for their preference for LG Caretaker Committees or by whatever name call over democratically elected Local Governments and their refusal to build the capacity of the State Independent Electoral Commission to be independent enough to hold truly democratic elections.
“They create the absence of a democratically elected councils by not allowing the State Independent Electoral Commission to conduct Local Government elections and use that as 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.”
He added that under the Constitution a state government or a governor of a state has no power to constitute, appointed or determine a Local Government other than as prescribed in Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
Justice Agim proceeded to deckare that the 36 states of Nigeria or anyone of them, acting through their/or its respective state governor and or state Houses of Assembly are under obligation to ensure democratic governance at the third tier of government in Nigeria, namely at the Local Government level.
He also declared that the 36 states of Nigeria or anyone of them, acting through their/or its respective state governor and or state 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.
He issued a declaration that the 36 states of Nigeria, acting through their respective state governor and or state Houses of Assembly, cannot use state powers derivable from laws enacted by the state Houses of Assembly, anyhow so called or Executive Orders or other actions, to dissolve any of the democratically elected Local Government within the state and replace the with caretaker committees or by whatever they are called.
Justice Agim also issued adeclaration that the dissolution of a democratically elected Local Government councils by the 36 states government or anyone of them, using state powers derivable from laws enacted by the state Houses of Assembly or Executive Orders or other actions are unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void.
He declared that a state government or the governor of a state has no power to constitute, appoint caretaker for a Local Government other than as prescribed by Section 7 (1) of the Constitution..
Other reliefs granted included:
*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 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 officials 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 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 amd 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.
Reacting to the judgment, 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.
