By Jude-Ken Ojinnaka
Financial autonomy of Local Government Councils and method adopted by state governors in determining Local Government Council Chairmen has been a contentious issue.
Should Local Government Councils’ allocations be paid directly to their accounts or should the allocations be paid into the joint account maintained by the State and Local Government?
This issue of financial autonomy has been controversial, contested and argued in several fora. State governments operate joint accounts with local government, whereby the States control and disburse funds to local governments to run its affairs.
This system created lots of problems for local government councils as they go cap in hand begging governors for funds to run the affairs of councils. Governors use their position to dictate what goes to local councils.
Most governors select /appoint local government chairmen either as Sole Administrator/ Caretaker committee or arranged/kangaroo local government election conducted and supervised by the State’s Independent State Electoral Commission .
The ruling party in States ensures that party loyalists and stooges are returned as local government council chairmen.
This arrangement gives governors the audacity to issue instructions/ orders to chairmen on how and when to execute projects, award contracts and who gets the contract. Any chairman who goes contrary to the governors whims and caprices is booted out unceremoniously and replaced with someone seen as party or governor’s loyalist.
However, on Thursday July 11, 2024, this impunity by governors was legally put to an end by the Supreme Court of Nigeria upon the suit filed by the Federal Government of Nigeria.
In a historic judgement, the Supreme Court held that henceforth Federal Government allocation to local governments should directly go to local government accounts and not joint account of States and local governments.
Furthermore, there shall not be Caretaker Committee in any of the 774 local government councils in Nigeria. The Supreme Court declared as illegal and unlawful all Caretaker Committees in local government council. Local Government Council Chairmen and councillors shall be duly elected constitutionally.
REACTIONS /COMMENTS
TheNiche gathered reactions, views and comments from senior lawyers and other individuals.
In his views, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Abiodun Olatunji said that the recent Supreme Court judgment which bars governors from retaining or utilizing funds meant for Local Governments and declares the appointment of caretaker committees unconstitutional is a watershed moment in the development of our constitutional democracy.
Olatunji noted that the decision marks a significant shift in the relationship between state and local government administrations, aiming to ensure transparency, accountability, and enhanced development at the grassroots level.
According to the Silk lawyer, the Key Implications of the judgement are:
* End of Governors’ stranglehold on Local Government Administration:
“The decision effectively curtails the pervasive influence that state governors have wielded over local governments. This influence has often led to the manipulation and misappropriation of funds, impeding local governance and development”
* Illegalization of Caretaker Committees:
“The Supreme Court’s declaration that the appointment of caretaker committees to run local councils is unconstitutional reinforces the constitutional mandate for democratically elected local government officials. This eradicates the practice of governors appointing loyalists to caretaker positions, which undermined democratic principles and accountability”.
* Direct Allocation of Funds to Local Governments:
“The judgement mandates that allocations from the federation account to local governments must be directed to democratically elected officials, bypassing the state government’s joint accounts. This change ensures that funds are utilized for their intended purposes, promoting local development and reducing opportunities for corruption”
* Increased Accountability and Transparency:
“With funds going directly to elected local government officials, these leaders will be held accountable by their constituents. This accountability fosters a more transparent and responsible administration at the local government level.
* Conditional Release of Local Government Funds:
“State governors are now barred from receiving funds meant for local governments where no democratically elected officials are in place. This provision ensures that states must conduct local government elections to access these funds, promoting democratic governance.
* Enhanced Local Development:
“With the guaranteed flow of funds directly to local governments, significant improvements in infrastructure, social services, and overall development at the grassroots level are expected. This shift empowers local governments to address the specific needs of their communities effectively.
* Broader Impact on Governance
“The judgement addresses the long-standing issue of state governors’ overbearing influence on local government administrations. This influence has historically stifled development at the local level, with former President Muhammadu Buhari highlighting instances of governors pilfering local government resources.
By affirming the autonomy of local governments and ensuring their financial independence, the Supreme Court has taken a decisive step towards strengthening Nigeria’s federal structure and democratic governance.
“In my final analysis the Supreme Court’s judgement is a landmark decision that significantly enhances the autonomy and functionality of local governments in Nigeria. By eliminating the governors’ control over local government funds and mandating democratically elected officials, the judgement paves the way for more accountable, transparent, and effective local governance. This development promises to catalyze substantial improvements in local infrastructure and services, ultimately benefiting the citizens at the grassroots level.
“I congratulate the President, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, for his courage and the political will to allow such an action to be filed by the Attorney General of the Federation at the Supreme Court. Such political will has been absent since the advent of the current constitutional democracy in 1999. The President deserves the commendation of everyone. I also want to use this opportunity to congratulate the Honorable Attorney General of the Federation for his bravery, strong leadership, and belief in the rule of law and constitutional democracy as well as his unwavering commitment to the ideals of true federalism as enshrined in our constitution. His steadfastness in the face of stiff opposition by all the 36 State Governors to the suit at the Supreme Court is a testament to his exemplary leadership qualities”
Another Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN)
Moyosore Onigbajo said:
“The Supreme Court has done its bit by correctly re-stating and interpreting Constitutional provisions relating to the autonomy and independence of local governments. The Court further tightened the screws against control of LG funds by the States by mandating that LG funds should be released to them directly and not through the States or any joint account.
“All these are very good, but the problem really is in the enforcement of the judgement. Can LG Chairmen look their Governors in the eye and refuse to either send the funds back to the Governor who anointed him/her as the Chairman or use the funds in the manner directed by the Governor. Time will indeed tell. Be that as it may however, the additional hurdles put in the way of diversion of LG funds by States is a welcome development”.
Former Chairman of NBA-SPIDEL, second Vice-President of NBA, Dr Monday Onyekachi Ubani while reacting to the Apex Court judgement on local government financial autonomy said; ‘To me this is the greatest good news for me as individual and as a citizen.
“I have spoken and held press conferences on the subject matter. We can never have good governance, enjoy dividends of democracy and have lives and properties secured if we do not have effective local government administration.
“The Supreme Court of Nigeria has restored hope of Nigerians to this democracy and we as a people must follow up to demand strict compliance to the letters of the judgement”.
Mr Tochukwu Onyiuke (SAN), Lagos based legal practitioner said that in his view, the judgement will work effectively when there is democracy in the local government administration.
“Governors may still be in control of and have influence on the way the funds are used when they appoint Chairmen.
But an Abuja based Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Mr H. Ebere said that he cannot comment on the judgement which he has not seen the copy.
” I cannot give a reaction to a judgement I’ve not seen yet. Everything out there now is mere speculation!”
Meanwhile, the Lagos State House of Assembly has invited the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lagos State, Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN) to appear before it to explain the Supreme Court judgement on local governments in the country.
The lawmakers agreed that there was the need for better understanding of the decision of the apex court in relation to some provisions in the Constitution of the country.
Ruling after a voice vote by lawmakers at plenary on Thursday, the Speaker of the Assembly, Rt. Hon. Mudashiru Obasa, ruled: “There is a need for us to seek clarification and understanding of this judgement. It will be good to invite the Attorney-General to brief us and give his understanding so that we do not run foul of the judgement.”
An erstwhile National Publicity Secretary of the defunct New People’s Democratic Party (nPDP) and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze, also reacted to the Supreme Court judgement on local governments..
He posited that the Supreme Court ruling directing the Federal Government to henceforth pay the allocation due to the Local Government Councils in Nigeria direct to the Council, smacks of sycophancy for those jubilating over the judgement.
He said it is left for the Governors of the 36 States to decide what to do with the judgement as over 95 percent of the states run local government administration through interim administrators and given that the judgement offends Section 162(6) of the 1999 Constitution which provides for a joint state/local government account into which all allocations meant for each state and the local government therein would be paid.
“Let me reiterate that the Supreme Court can only interpret the law but cannot change the law of any country, in this regard, until the National Assembly expunge the relevant portions of the constitution to give life to the Supreme Court judgement on this, those who are celebrating the judgement are doing so out of ignorance”, Chief Eze expressed.