• Judgment an assault on true federalism, says James Ibori
• SERAP gives govs seven-day ultimatum to return LG funds
• Ruling insufficient to guarantee LG autonomy, says ex-deputy gov
• Soludo: Verdict great but we need money to work for people at all levels
If state governors were birds of prey and local governments (LGs) their hapless victims, then there are indications that yesterday’s Supreme Court verdict might not have entirely set the latter free.
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court had declared it is unconstitutional for state governors to withhold funds meant for local government (LG) administrations.
Justice Emmanuel Agim, while delivering the lead judgment, noted that the denial of financial autonomy to local governments had persisted for over two decades.
This judgment followed a suit, marked SC/CV/343/2024, which was filed by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, which sought full autonomy for all LGs in Nigeria as the third tier of government.
The Supreme Court criticised the use of state joint accounts, saying governors had exploited this system to their advantage.
The court held that local governments should manage their funds independently, and prohibited any further allocation of funds to councils without elected officials.
Justice Agim emphasised that the 774 local government councils in the country must receive their funds directly, bypassing state governors.
The apex court said the decision aimed to ensure that LG funds were not misappropriated by state governments.
Three states, Delta, Ogun and Osun, were absent during the judgment and did not provide legal representation or notification to the court. However, the remaining states were represented by their respective Attorneys General.
Recall that a seven-man panel, led by Justice Garba Lawal, had reserved its judgment since the last proceedings on June 13.
However, delivering its final decision, the Supreme Court mandated the Federation Account to directly allocate all funds to the accounts of local governments, ensuring their financial independence.
The court held that governors cannot dissolve democratically elected LG officials because such actions breach the 1999 Constitution.
The court held that state governors have constituted themselves as a dangerous species to the development of democracy.
WHILE the verdict has got many Nigerians excited, some analysts, however, said not much has changed.
A former governor of Delta State, James Onanefe Ibori, particularly, faulted the judgment, describing it as an “assault on true federalism.”
Speaking on his verified X handle, he maintained that it is constitutionally right for state and local governments to have joint accounts, adding: “It is my sincere hope that the judgment will be reviewed at the earliest time possible because it clearly stands the concept of federalism on its head.”
Ibori said: “The Supreme Court has dealt a severe setback on the principle of federalism as defined by Section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The section expressly provides thus: ‘Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the federal and state governments and the local government councils in each state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
“Sections 6 provides further clarity on the subject matter. ‘Each state shall maintain a special account to be called the 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.’
“The court’s ruling on the matter is an assault on true federalism. The federal government has no right to interfere with the administration of local governments under any guise whatsoever. There are only two tiers of government in a federal system of government.”
Stressing that he is opposed to state governors meddling with the resources of local governments, Ibori nevertheless maintained that the judgment will impede the independence of states as enshrined in the Constitution.
He said: “I am opposed to fiddling with allocations to the joint LG accounts at the state level, but that in itself does not call for this death knell to the clear provisions of Section 162 of the Constitution. The implications of the ruling are far reaching, and the issues that readily come to mind are:
“Constitutional interpretation: The Supreme Court’s ruling appears to contradict the explicit provisions of Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution. This raises questions about judicial interpretation and whether the court has overstepped its bounds in reinterpreting clear constitutional language.
“Balance of power: The ruling potentially shifts the balance of power between the federal government and states. By allowing federal intervention in local government finances, it arguably centralises more power at the federal level, contrary to the principles of federalism.
“State autonomy: This decision could be seen as an erosion of state autonomy. States are meant to have significant control over their internal affairs, including the administration of local governments in a federal system.
“Financial independence: The ruling may impact the financial independence of states and local governments. If the federal government can directly intervene in local government finances, it could potentially use this as a tool for political leverage.
“Precedent setting: This decision could set a precedent for further federal interventions in areas traditionally reserved for state governance, potentially leading to a more centralized system of government over time.”
Similarly, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) urged state governors and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nyesom Wike, to account for and return the local government funds they collected over the years.
In a statement signed by SERAP’s deputy director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “Following the Supreme Court judgment, there is now a clear legal precedent to hold governors and FCT minister to account for how they have spent the local government funds collected by them.
“Implicit in the Supreme Court judgment is the requirement for the governors and FCT minister to immediately account for and return the funds meant for local governments but retained and used or allegedly misused by them.”
“If the governors and FCT minister fail to account for and return the funds meant for local governments in their states and FCT within seven days, SERAP shall consider appropriate legal actions to compel the governors and FCT minister to comply with our requests in the public interest.
“It is in the public interest for the governors and FCT minister to immediately account for and return the funds meant for local governments in their states and the FCT since 1999.”
Civil rights organisation, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), described the verdict as mere symbolism and a “decorated scam” as long as governors are allowed to handpick LG chairmen in their states.
HURIWA, in a statement by National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko, said the Supreme Court should have been asked to expressly order all state governors to adhere strictly to Section 7 (1) of the Constitution by allowing for transparent and credible LG polls in their states.
“For now, most governors simply select their political jobbers and surrogates to head councils, and even when the governors pretend to organise local council elections, those exercises are mere charades.
“There is no guarantee that council funds wouldn’t be automatically rechannelled to the political bosses, the governors, if the funds belonging to their councils are paid to the local councils directly. There is no accountability mechanism to stop the above re-looting of council funds by governors from happening.”
HURIWA urged Fagbemi to go back to the Supreme Court and obtain an order compelling the state Houses of Assembly to put mechanisms in place to ensure that council elections are credible.
Also, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and a former deputy governor of Benue State, Chief Stephen Lawani, said more needs to be added to the Supreme Court ruling to make LGs functional and relevant.
Lawani said the country will continue to labour in vain, as far as elections into local councils are concerned, unless responsibility for the conduct of such polls is taken away from State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIEC) to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
He highlighted a problem he described as “fear of the party in power”, saying “any election conducted by any SIEC under that defining context is useless” and cannot be free and fair.
Similarly, leader of All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Bisi Olopoeyan, commended the judgment but quickly added that it was merely a first among steps to LG autonomy. According to him, the ideal could remain a mirage unless the 1999 Constitution is amended to empower the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to conduct and supervise local government elections directly. “I am not too sure this victory would last,” he said.
On his part, a member of the Igbo socio-cultural group, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Goddy Nwazurike, wondered if governors who still retained the power and privilege to determine who emerges as council chairman through the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) would allow any chairman free financial autonomy.
MEANWHILE, Anambra State Governor, Charles Soludo, said state governors would meet to review the judgment.
He said: “The Supreme Court is supreme. It is the final authority. I am a democrat. I believe in the rule of law. And once the Supreme Court has spoken, it has spoken. But at a fundamental level, yes, we need resources to get down to the grassroots. We need the people’s money to work for them at all levels, whether at the federal or the state and the local government.”
Answering questions on the President’s recent pronouncement to the effect that only elected local government chairmen will access resources, Soludo said: “For me, I promised the people of Anambra that we’re going to have local government elections, and I stated that in my inaugural speech. We have just passed the Independent Electoral Commission Law of Anambra State, and we’re putting together the institutions to be able to organise that.
“When I was elected, that was one of the things I promised our people because in Anambra, we haven’t had… to be honest with you, I think the first local government election we had was in 1998 or thereabout, and then the next one was in 2014 or 2013. And that was it.
“It is a promise I made. I am serious about keeping it. At least, under my administration, we’ve made sure that resources get down to the local governments to address their staff. I mean paying teachers, paying pensioners, and paying primary health workers, and so on.
“We’re going to see how we handle all of that and organise local government elections as appropriate.
“I’m a believer in having a democratic system. I made a firm commitment to that and I don’t say what I will not do.”
Cross Rivers State Governor, Bassey Otu, urged all democratic Nigerians to take the judgment in good faith.
He said: “I don’t think anybody is against development in the local governments. I don’t think so. I have not read the details of the judgment as passed. When we do, I believe that the application of it should add some pep to our local government administration.
“Nigeria is a democratic country, and we know very well that President Bola Tinubu and the Renewed Hope Agenda is a democratic one. And I believe that the judgment as taken in very good faith. All Nigerians should be happy about it.”
Benue State Governor, Rev. Fr Hyacinth Alia, described the judgment as “a welcome development.”
Commissioner for Information and Culture, Mathew Abo, who spoke on behalf of his principal, said the verdict came at the right time, noting that the governor had granted local council autonomy even before the Supreme Court judgment.”
President Bola Tinubu hailed the decision of the Supreme Court affirming the spirit, intent, and purpose of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the statutory rights of local governments.
The President stated that a fundamental challenge to the nation’s advancement over the years had been ineffective local government administration, as governance at the critical cellular level of socio-political configuration was nearly absent.
The President emphasised 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.
He said: “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.”
By Terhemba Daka, Ameh Ochojila, Matthew Ogune (Abuja), Seye Olumide (Ibadan), Silver Nwokoro (Lagos), Samson Kukwa-Yanor (Makurdi)
The post ‘Why LGs have not escaped powerful clasp of governors’ appeared first on Guardian Nigeria News.
