Featured, Judiciary
The Supreme Court judgment has been hailed by many stakeholders since it grants financial autonomy to the Local Government Areas in the country. But some lawyers have warned that it is not yet Uhuru as the country is still battling with abuse of power in virtually all sectors, including the three tiers of government.
By Goddy Ikeh
THE mixed reactions that have trailed the judgment of the Supreme Court on the autonomy of the Local government are not unexpected to many Nigerians. Some lawyers, politicians and other stakeholders have raised some cogent issues on the matter. For instance, some lawyers did not see the need to take the matter to the Supreme Court since there is never a dispute on the existence of the three tiers of government and their responsibilities which are spelt out in the country’s constitution.
The major thrust of the July 11, Supreme Court judgment is the pronouncement of financial autonomy for local governments and the recognition of the democratically elected Local Government Councils as against the caretaker local governments which are the creations of state governors.
However, President Bola Tinubu, who took the matter to the Supreme Court, hailed the decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which according to him, affirmed the spirit, intent, and purpose of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the statutory rights of local governments.
The President said that the fundamental challenge to the nation’s advancement over the years had been ineffective local government administration, as governance at the critical cellular level of socio-political configuration was nearly absent.
He emphasized that the onus is now on local council leaders to ensure that the broad spectrum of Nigerians living at that level are satisfied that they are benefitting from people-oriented service delivery.
“The Renewed Hope Agenda is about the people of this country, at all levels, irrespective of faith, tribe, gender, political affiliation, or any other artificial line they say exists between us. This country belongs to all of us. By virtue of this judgment, our people – especially the poor – will be able to hold their local leaders to account for their actions and inactions. What is sent to local government accounts will be known, and services must now be provided without excuses.
“My administration instituted this suit because of our unwavering belief that our people must have relief and today’s judgment will ensure that it will be only those local officials elected by the people that will control the resources of the people. This judgment stands as a resounding affirmation that we can use legitimate means of redress to restructure our country and restructure our economy to make Nigeria a better place to live in and a fairer society for all of our people,” President Tinubu said.
President Tinubu, according to Ajuri Ngelale, special adviser to the President, Media and Publicity, noted that the provision of some essential amenities and public goods, such as the construction and maintenance of certain roads, streets, street lighting, drains, parks, gardens, open spaces, and other residual responsibilities, including community security, has tottered owing to the emasculation of local governments.
The President also affirmed that the decision of the Supreme Court to uphold the constitutional rights and ideals of local governments as regards financial autonomy, and other salient principles, is of historic significance and further reinforces the effort to enhance Nigeria’s true federal fabric for the development of the entire nation.
And reacting to the judgment, Professor Chidi Odinkalu, a well-known human rights lawyer and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, said: “The Supreme Court coming to tell us where Local Government money goes is irresponsible.”
In addition, some politicians and stakeholders believe that it is simply a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, referring to the abuse of power which is now a norm in Nigeria. According to them, the politicians at the federal level are celebrating, while the governors are mourning over the judgment.
They have also warned of the political implications of the judgment and that the governors, who had been enjoying the local government allocations, exercising supreme powers over local government affairs, enjoying the liberty to hire and fire local government caretakers as they embezzled, diverted and looted local government allocations.
According to them, the nation has succeeded in creating in a state with 21 local governments another 21 looters, who will siphon funds meant for the local government areas because they are not going there to serve the people and this development will be impeded. Beyond this scenario, they also believe that there is a bigger plan to use the electoral process to control the local governments and the states in future polls to the advantage of ruling party.
“This is exactly the cries of the state governors,” they added.
However, a former Governor of Delta State, James Ibori, said the judgment that granted financial autonomy to local government councils dealt a major setback on the principles of federalism.
Ibori in his X handle, said: “Supreme Court has dealt a severe setback on the principle of federalism as defined by section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“The section expressly provides thus: ‘Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the Federal and State Governments and the Local Government Councils in each State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
“Section 6 provides further clarity on the subject matter. (6) 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 the Government of the State.
“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 in under any guise whatsoever. There are only two tiers of government in a federal system of government.
“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.
“That Local Governments must be ‘democratically elected ‘goes without saying. Yes, I agree, that’s the position of the constitution but withholding their allocation is not the way to go. It’s wrong.
“In the coming days, we will begin to fully understand the implications of the Supreme Court decision. An assault on the constitution is not the answer to fiddling with the Joint LG Account. If the ruling is saying Governors cannot tamper, touch, or fiddle with the Joint Accounts, that’s fine because they shouldn’t be doing that in the first place.
“But asking the Federal Government to pay Local Government allocations to the account of the Local Government directly will lead to utter chaos and avoidable friction in governance.
Despite the position of Ibori, the Governor of Kwara State and Chairman of Nigerian Governors Forum, AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, said that the governors were happy with the Supreme Court judgment that granted autonomy to local governments in the country.
”We welcome the ruling of the Supreme Court; compliance is a given. Our attorney generals have applied for the enrollment order, which we’ll study carefully. By and large, the governors are happy with the devolution of power concerning local government autonomy. It relieves the governors of some burdens. People don’t know how much states expend in bailing out local governments. It’s not going to affect the state; we’ve not tampered with local government funds.
“What the local governments have to do is to manage themselves, especially with the upcoming minimum wage. They have to manage their affairs and make sure salaries are paid and traditional rulers get their 5 per cent. Those are the main issues. The Forum will meet next Wednesday to look at the issues wholly and then come up with resolutions,” he said.
Apart from the views expressed by the governors, the Northern Elders Forum, NEF, has hailed the Supreme Court judgment that granted financial autonomy to the 774 Local Government Areas, LGAs in the country, insisting that the landmark decision was anticipated to catalyze substantial development at the grassroots level.
According to the group, the judgment will herald a new era of decentralized power and resources within the nation’s governance framework.
In the same vein, the Middle Belt Forum, MBF, said that the autonomy would usher meaningful development at the Local Government level in the country.
The MBF noted that the ruling would pave the way for the conduct of free, fair and credible elections at the third tier of government and that it would also attract the best hands to vie for positions in the elections.
MBF National President, Bitrus Pogu, who spoke in Makurdi said the ruling would usher in meaningful development in the 774 LGAs of the country.
“The ruling was a beautiful victory for democracy. The President does not have to be tied down by the bottlenecks created by the governors.
“I believe that there is going to be development in rural areas; and serious people will now come out and contest to be chairmen and councillors in the local governments and by so doing we will get the best materials for local government administration in this country.
“So it is a victory for democracy and victory for this country. We however have some other battles to fight because there are some imbalances in the creation of Local Governments. But gradually we will know how to address those, but for now it is a victory for democracy, victory for Nigeria and Nigerians.
“With this victory and the eventual conduct of elections by the INEC in the Local Governments, despite how weak INEC is, the right thing will certainly be done,” the report by Vanguard newspaper quoted him as saying.
Meanwhile, all the stakeholders have suggested that some urgent reforms should be effected to ensure the smooth running of the local government administration. One of such reforms is that the Electoral Law should be amended to ensure that “nobody bypasses the electoral process and ambiguities in the electoral law should be removed so that true election will hold and the people’s votes will count.”
They also stressed the need to have strong institutions to monitor the implementation of the judgment to avoid a situation where governors would arm-twist the council chairmen and take their funds.
The need to return the conduct of council polls from the state electoral bodies to INEC should be carried out while the federal government should ensure that the judgment of the Supreme Court was fully implemented and that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, should monitor the funds released to local governments to ensure that funds are not looted, but judiciously utilized.
A.I
July 15, 2024 @ 17:58 GMT
Tags: Goddy Ikeh
