Now that the Supreme Court of Nigeria has ruled on the contentious local government autonomy issue, the next step is significant. Folks who would ordinarily not vie to become Local Government Area, LGA chairman—simply because the role was essentially a Special Assistant, S.A to the governor position equivalent—would now be keen to do so as the role has become independent of the state governors as it has been freed from their claws.
Further to that, the judgment might even inspire those who had aspired to be governors who may not be able to get elected because of the stiff competition for the plum job,to jostle for the less competitive LGA chairmanship position. That is because given that it is only one man that can become governor in a context and at a period in time, the plethora of contestants who fail to clinch the coveted political trophy (and resort to desperately slugging it out in court) may consider settling for the role of LGA chairmanship positions because of the autonomy that the Supreme Court judgment has conferred on that tier of government.
Delta State, which is my home state for instance, has 25 LGAs and Kano has 44 and Bayelsa has eight, which is the least.
What that implies is that the deluge of politicians who struggle to pass through the very narrow door into governorship positions in their states may be before or instead of bidding for the governorship seat which can only be occupied by just one person at a time as opposed to LGAs that have opening for multiple chairmanship positions, may be motivated to contest for LGA chairmanship courtesy of the new Supreme Court ruling. What that implies is that more high-quality individuals may be vying for chairmanship and councilorship of LGAs which can serve as building blocks to becoming lawmakers, governor or even president.
To put things in context, while there are just 36 states in our country, there are 774 LGAs nationwide.
So, instead of the limited opportunities to become chief executives of governments at the subnational level which is a mere 36 slots, imagine the opportunity that has just been opened for a huge number of 774 well-skilled people, instead of a handful of stooges of governors without the right competencies getting into the political fray of governance at the grassroots level?
In light of the above possibilities ,suffice it to state that the LGA autonomy ruling by the the Supreme Court has the potential to ramp up development in the rural areas which is a situation that has been in very short supply owing to a dearth of leaders with the ability and capacity to lead at the grassroots level of government.
Since, the time the Federal Government of Nigeria, FGN sued the state governors in court in a 27 count ground on May 25 to determine if the Local Government Areas, LGAs are autonomous, adjuncts or subsidiaries of state governments, politicians, especially some state governors have been squirmish and as such they have been holding their breadth as the matter climbed from the lower to the Appeal and finally to the Supreme Court which is the final arbiter. That is because LGA funds have been a sort of gravy pot for some of them as they often dissolve duly elected LGA councils and replace them with their hand-picked men/women who are mere conies and their appointees that are pliable rather than elected representatives of the people as provided in the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
The judgment which had been reserved since Thursday, June 12 was finally presented on Thursday, July 11, 2024 (which is roughly one month after) to the relief of the politicians, particularly governors who have been in anxiety.
The ruling without ambiguity made it clear that LGAs are autonomous and must be treated as such, going forward.
As the Supreme Court has ruled that
LGAs are independent of state governments in the manner that the sub-nationals (states) are insulated from undue interference from the FGN, reaffirming a three-layer government structural framework. Is the coast now clear for a paradigm shift in rural-urban migration?
Put succinctly, would those in the rural areas, going forward have the incentives to remain there than keep moving in droves to the cities (as has been the case) where prospects for work and business are currently higher and abound?
Clearly, with 20.60% of the Federation Account (FAAC Account) going directly into the coffers of LGAs (as opposed to being passed through state governments), there would be more opportunities to entice more Nigerians to live and thrive in the hinterland as the economic activities outside the state capitals would boom as more funds is pumped into LGA headquarters.
In other words, as more money flows into the local governments’ treasuries directly, the chances of folks remaining there would be higher as the prospects of living and working there become more alluring since the development of social infrastructure and basic amenities in the rural areas which are currently in a decrepit condition, where they exist at all and lacking in some LGAs, would be accelerated.
The answer to the earlier question posed on whether rural-urban migration would be stemmed by the Supreme Court ruling decoupling LGAs from the apron strings of state governments appears cynical, but it is germane to achieving the quest for balanced growth of both the rural and urban centers for our country to evolve into a robust and sustainable manner such that our democracy would be secure the future of our country guaranteed.
In my column of July 2, 2024, which is about two weeks ago, the focus of my article titled “How President Tinubu Is Restructuring Nigeria Silently” is on the fact that suing governors to court to secure autonomy for LGAs is part of President Bola Tinubu’s way of restructuring Nigeria without all the hullabaloo associated with the previous attempts to restructure Nigeria which is quite innovative and commendable.
One of the unique things about this restructuring is that it is being done by peeling off the bottlenecks in the current structure layer by layer like peeling off layers of a ball of onion which comprises multiple layers wrapped upon one another.
That is as opposed to trying to restructure the country in one fell swoop which is an approach or methodology that failed in the past-in 2004/5 when then military head of state Gen. Sanni Abacha organized a national conference on the reformation of our country which was inconclusive and unimplemented following his sudden death, and especially in 2014 when then president Goodluck Jonathan after succeeding in organizing a National Conference, was hamstrung to roll out the policy changes agreed upon by the delegates.
That is ostensibly because, then president Jonathan had self-inflicted the unforced error of delaying implementation of the Confab report either because he was relying on the false hope that he had performed well enough to be voted back into office as president or his party and he had planned to rig the 2015 election, but got disappointed or betrayed by those who had imbued him with the dutch courage about his re-election in 2015 being a done deal.
Dear readers, if you do not mind,l would like you to indulge me by allowing a deviation from the main discourse which is about the Supreme Court ruling on LGA autonomy as l digress a bit by stating that it was mind-boggling that then-President Jonathan could have been sold such a dummy at a time that his party, Peoples Democratic Party, PDP was ‘bleeding’ members.
That was because the leadership featuring the likes of former vice president Atiku Abubakar, then senate president Bukola Saraki alongside a handful of governors numbering up to five(5) had decamped to All Progressives Congress, APC, a new coalition of opposition parties with the sole purpose of upending Jonathan’s presidency and ending PDP’s unbroken 16 years reign as the ruling party.
Now, as lofty and popular as the ruling by the Supreme Court affirming the autonomy of LGAs appears to be, some oppose it vehemently.
First to do so is former governor of Delta state Chief James Onanefe lbori, a former governor of Delta state in a statement released immediately after the judgment premised his concern on the following legal grounds:
“I’m opposed to fiddling with the 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:
1. 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.
2. 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 centralizes more power at the federal level, contrary to the principles of federalism.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.”
Obviously, miffed and disappointed Chief lbori concluded his objection by stating that while he denounces the fiddling with LGA funds by some governors with sticky fingers, paying LGAs allocation to them directly is not the ideal solution. He then referenced the wise counsel of late Hon. Justice Chukwudifu Oputa JSC who once offered the following description of the Supreme Court “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final”.
Afenifere, the Yoruba socio-cultural group is on the same boat as Chief lbori as far as the Supreme Court judgment on LGA autonomy is concerned. So, it has also expressed outrage:
“Rather than interpret the constitution to uphold its elementary but overriding federal principle, which recognizes 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 regressive declaration that the power of the government is portioned into three arms of government: the federal, the state, and the local government.
It made its conclusion thus: “For the avoidance of any doubt, 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 1999 constitution.”
One is curious to learn whether other ethnic nationality groups support or denounce the Supreme Court judgment. These include the northern equivalent of Afenifere, the Arewa Consultative Forum comprising of Hausa/Fulani tribes, Ohanaeze Ndigbo which is their counterpart in the east covering the Igbo nation, and PANDEV a parallel in the Niger Delta representing the multiplicity of ethnic groups in the enclave or the Coalition Of Middle Belt Groups(CMBG) which plays a similar role in that region of our country.
Would they endorse or oppose the ruling as Chief Ibori, Afenifere, and a few other stakeholders have done?
Chief Ibori and Afenifere are relying on section 162 in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which authorizes joint operation of LGA funds with the state government which the Supreme Court judgment seems to have obviated.
Justifiably, they worry that the concept of the federal government paying LGA allocations to them directly would shift the control of LGAs from states to the federal government and it would amount to the FGN throwing state governments under the bus while it takes over the driving seat and steering wheels of the bus which is tending towards unitary type of governance.
They suspect that it would also make administrators at the subnational and grassroots level be at constant loggerheads as state governments would no longer have any hold on LGAs except through the state houses of assembly that would make the laws that would guide them and state electoral commission, in charge of conducting elections in LGAs which is an equivalent of Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC at the national level.
My assessment of the apex court decision that LGAs are autonomous and must receive their allocation directly from FAAC is with mixed feelings because it is a double edged sword of sorts.
On one hand it will move financial resources (20.60% of FAAC) to the grassroots where it is needed to provide infrastructure and dividends of democracy. But on the other hand it will enable the FGN to have a stranglehold on government at the grassroot.
For instance, the supporters of the Supreme Court ruling would argue that it is a similar type of relationship that the federal government has with the states that has just been granted the LGAs via a Supreme Court imprimatur.
So, just as the FGN has no hand in how states manage their resources, should states not be involved in the management of LGA funds.
Of course, the concern of those opposed to the direct payment to LGAs is valid because following the autonomy of LGA,state governors would no longer have control over politics at the grassroots level. That is because as the conventional wisdom goes: ‘He who pays the piper dictates the tone’.
So, it would be the FGN that would be wielding influence in the grassroots since the third tier of government which holds sway there would be receiving its allocation directly from FAAC which is under the purview of FGN.
But is it not true that the FGN also has no control over states except through their respective political party structures?
Again is it right to assume that our country is operating a three-tier government as the Supreme Court has ruled?
If the ruling by the Supreme Court negates or contradicts the spirit and letter of section 162 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that demands that a joint account committee be established between the state government and LGA to manage the funds allocated to the latter alongside the former, would that not boil down to a clash between the legislative and the judicial branches of government as the makers of the law would be in conflict with the judges that are supposed to only interpret it?
Perhaps owing to the propinquity that currently exists between the three arms of government in the current dispensation, there may not be not any direct confrontation between them right now.
However, what happens if and when a National Assembly, NASS that is unfriendly to the executive branch emerges? Would it not question the authority of the judiciary which is supposed to only interpret the law, but appear to be vitiating the law already made and contained in the statutes book by giving a ruling that undermines the section 162 embedded in the 1999 constitution?
In light of the above, would it not lead to a lacuna of the sort that arose when then Nigerian president Umar Yar’Adua passed away in 2010 on active duty and without transferring power to then vice president Goodluck Jonathan and there arose a leadership cul-de-sac?
As it may be recalled, what amounts to a constitutional crisis had to be resolved through the instrumentality of the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ by NASS under the watch of Senator David Mark as Senate president.
Could such a situation be looming except the implementation of the new Supreme Court ruling is warehoused until the ongoing review of the 1999 constitution is concluded with section 162 which the new ruling conflicts with is expunged?
Also, that is even assuming NASS votes and affirms that the LGAs can receive their allocation directly and our country is operating a three tier government despite all the fears that necessitated the introduction of the concept of joint account with state governments,which without doubt is being abused by some governors hence the popular acceptance of the epochal Supreme Court ruling.
In any case, the reason that LGAs would not be trusted to receive their constitutionally allocated funds directly still exists.
That is because the fear that leaders at that grassroots level lack the ability and capacity to manage such huge funds is real simply because those in leadership at that level are often bereft of experience for managing such huge financial, material and human resources as they lack the pedigree.
Obviously, the fear is validated by the quality of people saddled with leadership in government , who as earlier stated are usually cronies and hangers-on who are incompetent, yet governors hand them the reins of power.
As the third tier of government which is the closest to the people, LGA leadership should be by experienced men/women who can make the much desired positive impact in the rural areas which is home to a majority of Nigerians.
That is even as many political observers allege that some governors ‘anoint’ their lackeys and even thugs as LGA chairmen and councilors on purpose which is to enable the unscrupulous governors to continue to have their sticky fingers in the tills.
In fact, it is for the same reason that some governors prefer to constitute caretaker committees in replacement of elected LGA chairmen and councilors whose process of being recruited is more costly and time-consuming. The Supreme Court judgment has now striipped governors of such powers.
In any case, after many governors were indicted and even convicted on account of spending LGA funds, they devised a new method to beat the law which is that LGA money after being withdrawn from banks is deposited in cash at designated locations in specified buildings from where it is picked up by another official. That is one clever way of ensuring that there is no record of anyone conveying money or receiving funds on behalf of the governor since the funds are collected in cash and deposited somewhere without interactions between the fellow that deposits the money cargo and the one that picks it up after the bringer has departed.
It was such an ingenious fraud process that happens without electronic or paper trails because they have been intentionally bypassed.
To counter that nefarious strategy, the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, NFIU issued a directive to the effect that not more than N500m can be collected daily from the joint account between state governments and LGAs where the 20.60% of FAAC allocation to LGAs are domiciled and directed banks to comply with the order.
One has no idea whether the directive was complied with by the relevant parties before the game-changing Supreme Court ruling.
Nevertheless,one redeeming feature in the seemingly high risk of paying LGA funds directly to the councils without oversight from state governments, which presupposes that LGA officials would likely be spending recklessly the 20.60% allocated to the 774 councils from FAAC is that unlike state governors, LGA Chairmen who are the equivalent of governors at the third tier level are not enjoy the privilege of constitutional immunity from prosecution.
While governors who owing to the immunity clause in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria protecting the president and governors in our country from being prosecuted during their tenure in office, so they can only be charged to court after their tenure expires, if any LGA chairman or councilors engage in corruption they can get arrested immediately and arraigned in a court of law because they do not enjoy any immunity.
So, as a panacea to the financial recklessness at the state level not being extended to the LGA stage, the EFCC, ICPC, NFIU, and other financial crime prevention agencies of government should show intense interest in how the LGA funds are managed.
NFIU’s prohibition of withdrawal of LGA funds of not more than half a million naira per day should be enforced and civil society organizations especially those focused on finance such as BudgetlT, Statisense, etc that are fast springing up in our country should redouble their efforts in tracking LGA funds to ensure they are properly utilized.
In liberal democracies, it is the social crusade organizations of the sort earlier cited that drive positive socioeconomic change.
They are regarded as the fifth realm of the estate after the media which is the 4th.
In fact, the preponderance of civil society organizations is one of the yardsticks for measuring how liberal is the democracy being practiced in a country.
It is commendable that their presence has been growing since the days of the Civil Liberties Organization, CLO, pioneered by Dr. Olisa Agbakoba in the mid 1980s during the struggle to restore democracy to our country. Civil society organizations range from the ones with omnibus functions like CLO to the specialized ones like SERAP, Enough Is Enough, etc involved in civil and human rights issues to the ones focused on financial matters earlier highlighted.
While the ball is now in the court of the lawmakers in the National Assembly to score the goal of a democracy that delivers dividends to the masses in the rural areas and not to only the few privileged in urban centres by reviewing the issues thrown up by the yea and nay sayers about the Supreme Court’s decision on direct payment to LGAs with the intention to blend them for a more positive and beneficial result for all Nigerians and our nascent democracy, in particular .
Furthermore, as the legislators engage in the ongoing review of the 1999 constitution of the FGN, NASS might as well leverage the opportunity to look into the crisis brewing between state governors and our monarchs.
Right now, in the pantheon of traditional rulers, there appears to be a mystic flowing through the air as Bob Marley the reggae maestro once crooned. That is because the rate at which our traditional institutions are being demystified is alarming.
So, while the review of the 1999 Constitution by NASS is ongoing, perhaps the arrangement through which traditional rulers can be paid their emoluments directly should also be factored into the process so that our royal fathers would heave a sigh of relief from the stranglehold of state governors and even LGA chairmen who lord it over them.
As we may all be aware, many of them are currently at loggerheads with state governors who they accuse of not adequately funding them, while governors allege that chairmen of traditional councils who receive funds on behalf of their members fail to equitably disburse the funds to their colleagues, resulting in friction.
We see that in Edo state where the state governor, Godwin Obaseki has been sued by one of the chiefs for withholding or not paying the remunerations to the traditional rulers directly, rather than passing their emoluments through the chairman of the council. HRM Omo N, ‘Oba N’Edo Uku Akpolokpolor, the Oba of Benin.
Another example of the overarching power of governors over traditional rulers is the recent rise in the spate of dethronement and enthronement of traditional rulers. A typical scenario is the case in Kano where Emir Sanusi Lamido Sanusi was enthroned and dethroned by two(2) successive governors, the immediate past, Umaru Ganduje, and the incumbent Abba Kabir Yusuf.
With the dust yet to settle as Kano currently has two traditional emirs at the same time which is unprecedented, the virus wracking the traditional institutions seems to be spreading around fast as the ancient throne of the Sultan of Sokoto who is the leader of the Fulani caliphate is looking like the next point where the dethronement hurricane may be making its next landfall.
That is if the current rumble in the desert (not jungle) as evidenced by the recent law passed by the Sokoto state assembly which had stripped the sultan of the power to appoint district heads is anything to go by.
In my view, the new Sokoto government policy on the traditional council is equivalent to stripping the president or governor of the right to appoint ministers or commissioners respectively.
Being divested of that authority to appoint district heads, the sultan’s power would be highly diminished because loyalty would be to those who appointed them. Again, the aphorism: ‘He who pays the piper dictates the tone’ rings true in the instance above.
Relying on the conventional wisdom: ‘what is good for the geese is good for the gander’ let us let our monarch receive their emoluments directly from the FAAC account so that they would not continue to be at the mercy of leaders in the subnational and 3rd tier of government. There was a period when this country had the House of Chiefs.
A lot of Nigerians would agree with me that our monarchs back in the days helped in sustaining the security of lives and properties in the hinterland which is currently lacking.
The current chairman of the Nigerian governors’ forum, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq who is the governor of Kwara state has in a media statement informed Nigerians that the ruling by the Supreme Court is welcome adding that his fellow governors are awaiting the details.
But he also quipped that in the end, LGAs may have the wrong end of the stick by alluding that it is state governments that have been augmenting or propping up LGAs.
It would be amazing to see how that is so because some state governors, of course not all, have been combining their 26.72% with LGAs’ 20.60% giving them a ballpark figure of 47.32% compared to the federal government’s 52.68 of Federation Account, FAAC.
Perhaps it is because in reality state governments are combining LGA allocation with theirs therefore receiving only about 5% less than the FGN allocation from FAAC, that they have not been seriously clamoring for an increase in the ratio of the revenue sharing formula that goes to states.
In conclusion, in my considered opinion the Supreme Court’s decision on LGA autonomy is a step forward in our democratic journey which is better than the present situation whereby LGAs that are supposed to be a third tier of government have been emasculated by state governments in the past 25 years of the return of multiparty democracy.
As an optimist ,one is hopeful that the gaps, discomfitures or incongruencies inherent in the apex court’s ruling in due course would be ironed out between the three branches of government-Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary for the greater good of all Nigerians.
–Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.
To continue this conversation and more, please visit www.magnum.ng