By; Abdull-Azeez Ahmed Kadir.
Nigeria operates a federal system of government with sub-national. It has been a long debate if Nigeria operates three tiers of government or two tiers with administrative block as the third. Whatever you believe, the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended, recognises the Federal, State and Local Governments.
Nigeria boasts of 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory with 774 Local Councils. The Local Government is the closest to the people at the grassroots; who constitute the majority of the populace and meant to make them feel the impact of political leadership in terms of physical development and provision of services to better their lives. But ironically, the Local Governments seem the more further from them and development far from them. No thanks to the pocketing of the councils, their leadership and funds by the state governors.
There have been serious advocacy to sever the local governments from the apron strings of the Governors who have used them as conduit pipes of siphoning funds, thereby denying the people the needed development. Attempts to get this by conventional constitutional amendment through the legislature failed. Again, no thanks to the state governors whose grip on the State Houses of Assembly ensured the required number needed was never achieved.
The 11th July, 2024 Supreme Court judgment on the issues as brought before it by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi is a breather, but not yet uhuru as being celebrated in some quarters.
To achieve this and in desperation to ensure the councils were allowed financial autonomy, the closest the previous administration under President Muhammadu Buhari achieved was an executive order. Even that was not obeyed by the Governors.
Ironically, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu who today is being celebrated for what they termed Local Government autonomy albeit financially, following the Supreme Court ruling, as the Governor of Lagos State then under President Olusegun Obasanjo opposed same. Recall Tinubu then created and conducted elections into 37 Local Government Areas which the federal government said was illegal. As a result, President Obasanjo withheld the funds meant for Local Governments in Lagos State.
As the Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice then, Professor Yomi Osinbajo under Governor Tinubu, argued against the federal Government but lost the case at the Supreme Court. The Governors since 1999 had not relented in opposing autonomy for the Local Governments. This last Supreme Court judgement must be a judicial coup by Tinubu against the governors. Coming from and among them, President Tinubu knows better the governors clout in hindering Local Government autonomy.
The obstacles before now are constitutional provisions, political interference and financial problems among others. The Supreme Court judgement seemingly, has solved the financial problems halfway if the governors would obey it, leaving other retinue of the hindrances. Can we then call it autonomy for the councils? The continuous over- bearing role exercised by state governors over local government affairs still possess serious threat to the autonomy of the councils.
Autonomy means a local government must therefore be a legal entity distinct from the states’ and federal government, and ideally administered by democratically elected officials with specific powers and functions and with a degree of autonomy to carry out its functions, and resources to manage them.
As it stands today, section 128 of the 1999 constitution empowers the State House of Assembly to make laws for the administration of the Local Governments. These are the same assemblies in the pockets of the Governors. Section 7(1) of the same constitution mandates democratically elected chairmen and councilors for the council. This too the Governors do not obey and respect, but we wait to see if the they will now with the Supreme Court judgement of denying councils without such funds.
While Governors today are known as leaders of their various political parties in their states, they not only decide who emerge as candidates of their various political parties to run for chairmanship of the councils, the State Electoral Commission SIECOM still conducts election that produce the council secretaries. This election is also funded by the state government. In addition, the states Ministries for Local Governments dictate to the councils; from funds distribution to staff employment and deployment.
Under same constitution, building and administration of markets, motor parks and collections of funds from such places are responsibilities of Local Governments which state have hijacked today to shore up internally generated revenues IGRs, which they often deny the councils. Joint Account is another aberration known to the law which has hindered local government autonomy.
The absence of local Government Legislative Assembly that democratically and legally should checkmates the elected council chairman is another hindrance. This is in addition to absentee civil servants or those without capacity to function optimally but is on the council payroll and only waits to receive salary every month without doing anything.
Certain Local Governments, just like some states are not viable and rely on other councils or even the state government to aid their financial shortfalls in salary and pension.
Until these retinue of impediments and hindrances before the local governments are constitutionally, administratively and democratically addressed, with the office of the citizens operationalised and made proactive to checkmate the emperors the governors have become, the Local Government is far from getting the much touted and needed autonomy.
The Supreme Court judgment, though highly welcomed and a step in the right direction for financial autonomy, is far from local government autonomy as the councils need administrative and political freedom to nurture development and growth at the grassroots.
It is for now, a judicial coup for local government autonomy against the Governors and states.
