As Nigeria creepily becomes an impossible country. It does not really matter what the Supreme Court rules or what the Constitution actually says, governors will continue to rape the third tier of government, governance will continue going to the dogs and Nigeria will remain an impossible country until Nigerians insist on having transformational leaders unencumbered by foul smelling skeletons in their closets.
In his 1994 book, “The Impossible Country: A Journey Through the Last Days of Yugoslavia,” Brian Hall related his encounters with Serbs, Croats, and Muslims – real people, likeable people – he said, who had tragically been overcome with suspicion and anxiety about one another.
He painted the eerie picture of a country, its politics, its history, and its seemingly insoluble animosities. Reviewing the book, Atlantic Monthly, the iconic American magazine founded in 1857, said it was “a tragic portrait . . . presented with sympathy and frequently with humor . . . (of) a disparate people who were never united except by their resentment of a foreign conqueror.”
The question that concentrates my mind each time I read Hall’s book is whether Nigeria, like the ill-fated Yugoslavia, has become an impossible country. Why is it that nothing works in the real sense? Why are there no statesmen who hanker after public good? Instead, there is a glut of wayward, errant political actors and there is a world of difference between the politician and statesman because as James Freeman Clarke, the 19th century American author poignantly noted: “A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of his country. The statesman wishes to steer, while the politician is satisfied to drift.”
Nigeria increasingly epitomises Yugoslavia in its dying days with citizens that have become paranoid with mutual suspicion for one another orchestrated by self-serving and dubious leaders who cling to power by ensuring that the people unceasingly tear into each other.
The only difference between the disintegrating Yugoslavia that Hall encountered and a terribly challenged Nigeria is that while as Yugoslavians were never united except by their resentment of a foreign conqueror, “Nigerians,” as Chinua Achebe, one of the greatest personalities of world literature and unarguably, the father of modern African literature, once noted “will probably achieve consensus on no other matter than their common resentment of the Igbo,” which makes the Nigerian situation even more precarious.
READ ALSO: LG autonomy: Supreme Court judgement divides former Governors Ibori, Kalu
Nyesom Wike, the ugly face of Nigeria’s ‘democracy’
Nigeria is drifting and every issue is viewed from the prism of politics, which is why the Supreme Court ruling on Thursday, July 11, 2024, granting financial autonomy to the 774 local governments in the country has become an albatross. Those who went to Court to procure the judgement have their eyes on the next election rather than the next generation.
In the unanimous judgement of its seven-member panel, the Supreme Court upheld the suit brought by the federal government to strengthen the independence of local governments in the country, by granting them financial autonomy.
Insisting on what it termed the demand of justice which requires a progressive interpretation of the law, Justice Emmanuel Agim, who read the judgement said: “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.”
Of course, the Justices of the apex court know that their claim is not true. Instead, what is unconstitutional is their decision which flies in the face of Section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Yet, the people welcomed the judgement because over the years, acting with impunity, governors, typically, had made a huge mess of what ought to be an easy constitutional task.
By granting financial autonomy, the Supreme Court ordered the federal government to pay the 20.60 per cent monthly allocation of the 774 LGs directly to their exclusive accounts and not to accounts controlled by governors. The Court also ruled that state governors do not have the power to dissolve elected LG councils and replace them with caretaker committees as that violates Section 7(1) of the Constitution.
Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, former governor of Abia State, ululated thereafter: “The Supreme Court judgement on the autonomy of local governments is one that should be hailed and applauded especially for the courage and independence shown by the judiciary. The Supreme Court being a policy court did what is right and beneficial to the society.”
How independent Nigeria’s judiciary is especially in the current dispensation remains to be seen. But those in Kalu’s corner have a point. Since 1999, governors have fouled up the local government system by not only fiddling with the allocations to the Joint LG Accounts, but also, contrary to the dictates of the Constitution which states unequivocally that local governments must be democratically elected, continue to run them with caretaker committees.
But some Nigerians like Chief James Ibori, former governor of Delta State, demur.
Ibori, who together with Kalu belong to the Class of 1999-2007 governors with President Bola Tinubu, said on the contrary, the judgement is a coup against true federalism.
“Supreme Court has dealt a severe setback on the principle of federalism as defined by section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended),” Ibori lamented, adding, “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.”
Ibori believes that if the judgement subsists, it will erode the powers of the state governments and give more powers to the federal government, contrary to the principles of federalism. This, he contends, will be a dangerous precedent because “if the federal government can directly intervene in local government finances, it could potentially use this as a tool for political leverage.”
That is the crux of the matter – lack of political altruism. While it is true that governors have made a mess of the purpose for creating local governments, Tinubu, who created 37 local council development areas in Lagos, is not a great apostle of local government autonomy. The fact that his administration as governor of Lagos State unilaterally and unconstitutionally reallocated money meant for the 20 local governments in the state to entities unknown to the law is probably the beginning of the malaise he pretends to be fighting today.
What Tinubu is saying today is that President Olusegun Obasanjo was right in seizing the funds meant for Lagos State. So, not being a believer in the autonomy of local governments given his antecedents, the judgement is more political than legal. Could it then be that the executive railroaded the judiciary into handing Tinubu control of local governments for the purposes of 2027 elections?
But how far can the president go? He who plays the piper dictates the tune. Even if elections are conducted as mandated by the Conducted, as long as governors control the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs) created by section 197 of the constitution, there is not much anyone can do. They will decide who wins elections at that level and LG autonomy will continue to be a mirage.
In fact, in their brazenness, most governors routinely dissolve SIEC boards put in place by their predecessors and reconstitute them with their own loyalists as soon as they assume office.
The credibility and quality of elections into local governments have to be sorted out if LG autonomy is to be guaranteed. But how can that be when the Secretary of Local Government and other key administrative staff are appointees of the state government? Besides, the state Houses of Assembly which exercise oversight on local governments are still strongly tied to the apron strings of their respective governors and could be used to witch-hunt any LG chairman or councillor who fails to do their bidding.
Some have suggested that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should be saddled with the responsibility of conducting LG polls. But with what the Prof Mahmud Yakubu-led INEC has become, there is little or no difference between SIEC and INEC.
And that takes me back to Brian Hall’s book. Nigerians are right now overcome with suspicion and anxiety about one another, a disparate people never united, not even by their collective misery inflicted on them by the ruling class – their oppressors.
To make matters worse, there are no statesmen. All we have are desperate politicians adept at gaming the system, people who will do everything no matter how egregious to win the next election. That is why barely one year after wangling themselves into office and making a total mess of governance, all permutations are towards 2027.
So, it does not really matter what the Supreme Court rules or what the Constitution actually says, governors will continue to rape the third tier of government, governance will continue going to the dogs and Nigeria will remain an impossible country until Nigerians insist on having transformational leaders unencumbered by foul smelling skeletons in their closets.