On Thursday, July 11, Nigeria’s apex court, the Supreme Court, dropped the gavel on the much-awaited suit marked SC/CV/343/2024, brought before it by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Barrister Lateef Fagbemi, SAN on behalf of the Federal Government.
In the suit, the Federal Government had prayed to the Supreme Court to grant full financial and administrative autonomy to the 774 local governments recognised by the 1999 Constitution, thereby, effectively recognising the councils as the third tier of government in the country. Before that ruling, there had been divided opinions about the status of local governments in the polity. One opinion is official and the other dubiously speculative. The nation has known a three-tier system of governance since the days of the military. The 1999 Constitution attempts to further cement that in Section 7, by guaranteeing democratically elected government at the councils. In the thinking of the constitution, the local governments are presumed to be the third tier of government. The state governments, however, believed that the councils should at best be seen as their appendages. Some state governors openly expressed the view that a democratic system is supposed to operate two tiers of government, federal and state.
In that posture, the states want to eat their cakes and still have them. It is dubious in the sense that while the governors would happily keep the councils under their armpits, they do nothing to object to the allocation of 20 percent of the federation account which accrues to the councils. Rather, they will gladly assist the councils in managing the funds once appropriated. Incidentally, there is no one cube-fit-all model of democracy. Most democratic settings tailor their examples in line with local experiences, history, and culture. In truth, there is no such universality in democratic practice.
So, when President Tinubu asked his Attorney General to drag the 36 state governors to court, it was clear that the apex court would make some landmark decisions. On Thursday, the court unanimously declared in the lead judgment delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, that it was unconstitutional for state governments to tamper with the allocations due to the councils and that the democratically elected governance in the local governments is guaranteed. The judgment ordered the federation account to henceforth pay all monies including shares from taxes and other sources meant to the councils directly to their accounts. The court barred governors from dissolving democratically elected officials of local governments, while also declaring that it is unconstitutional for governors to tamper with council funds. The court said that the 774 local government councils should be allowed to manage their funds. Aside from that, the court also barred the operation of caretaker officials in the councils. The federation account was empowered to withhold funds meant for councils that operate the caretaker system.
READ ALSO: The Geo-Politics Of Nigeria’s Insecurity
The declarations by the Supreme Court have, therefore, affirmed the third-tier status of local governments in the country in line with the 1976 Local Government Reform, which established the presidential system of government in the councils. Several commentators have praised the apex court for the bold move to free the councils from the apron strings of the state governments. In one of such comments the National Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE), which spoke through its president, Comrade Ambali Olatunji, said that the ruling has solved 50 percent of Nigeria’s problems. “We believe that with the local government autonomy judgment, over 50 percent of Nigerian problems have been fixed. Also, we hope there will be financial integrity at the local government levels and all financial transactions will be tracked,” he said. Olatunji’s prognosis can however be said to be too generous. Autonomous councils hold huge benefits for the grassroots but attendant issues remain as potent as the existing situation. It is good to have councils that can address the needs of the people at the local level and serve as avenues for leadership recruitment. But as Olatunji said, there are questions about the sincerity of the council officials in providing quality service. An example is already emerging in the Federal Capital Territory(FCT), Abuja, where no governor is breathing down the necks of the councils, but where the councils hardly embark on any developmental projects. Commendable as the ruling is, there appear some booby traps and some rivers to cross before the nation can reach its desired destination on local government autonomy.
One of the speed bombs is the constitutional provision on the operation of joint accounts between the states and the local government. Section 162(6) of the 1999 Constitution(as amended), mandates the states to operate a State Joint Local Government Account. The Section reads: “Each state shall maintain a special account to be called “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.” In Section 162(7) the 1999 Constitution goes further to mandate each state to pay a percentage of its earnings to the local governments. I suspect there is an assignment for legal minds to dissect the intendment of subsection 6 in relation to the ruling of the Supreme Court. There is also the question of Local Council Development Authorities(LCDAs), which the Supreme Court had declared inchoate as far back as 2006, but which has become a fad among states in recent years. The political system also needs to state clearly the relationship between the councils and the ministries of local governments in the states. Are the councils to be seen as mere departments of the state government, which have to submit files for approval of the governor or they are to operate their presidential system in the real sense of the word?
And with the decision of the apex court, that LG funds must henceforth be paid directly to the councils from the federation account, one would want to ask what use would the State Joint Local Government Account continue to serve. What happens to the balances or liabilities (if any) in such an account while the states ran the show?
One other emerging issue as far as the implementation of the Supreme Court ruling is concerned is the continued existence of the State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), as stipulated by Section 197(1) of the 1999 Constitution. The SIECs are recognised as one of the State bodies, which can only cease to exist via constitutional amendment. Will the states let go of SIECs, which are a potent force that would enable the governors to control the happenings at the councils? It is a well-known fact that in the Nigerian political ecosystem, whoever pays the piper dictates the tune, and that has informed the cautionary note some commentators have chosen to employ in celebrating the Supreme Court ruling. If council elections are still to be conducted by the SIECs, is it not possible we start hearing that candidates are being forced to swear oaths in all manners of shrines before they are made council chairmen?
Even though the Nigerian Governors’ Forum(NGF) has welcomed the judgment of the apex court, the nation is still awaiting a comprehensive response from the governors on this matter. Even at that, it is not yet uhuru, as per local government autonomy.
Taiwo Adisa
