…Apex Court Bars Govs From Dissolving Elected LG Councils
…Only Elected Officials Will Control LGs Allocations — Tinubu
…Atiku Describes Judgment As A Win For The People Of Nigeria
…Better Late Than Never, LP Commends Supreme Court Judgment
…Ruling, Severe Setback On The Principles Of Federalism— Ibori
Mixed reactions on Thursday greeted the Supreme Court’s ruling, granting financial autonomy to local government councils in the country.
While some described it as a step in the right direction, others said it is a severe setback to the principles of true federalism.
Justice Emmanuel Agim, leading a seven-man panel of the Supreme Court, on Thursday, had ordered that allocations from the federation account that are standing to the credit of local governments in the country, henceforth must be disbursed to them directly as against the alleged unlawful joint accounts created by governors.
Consequently, the Supreme Court restrained governors of the 36 states from tampering, collecting, withholding, etc funds accruable to local governments from the federation account, declaring such actions, “unconstitutional, null and void”.
The pronouncements were made in a judgment on the suit by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), against the governors of the 36 states of the federation.
In the suit marked, SC/ CV/343/2024, the AGF had specifically sought full financial autonomy for the 774 local governments in the country, which most of the governors, through their various Attorneys General had sought the dismissal of the suit with substantial cost.
More so, Justice Agim, in a lead judgment, held that the “unilateral, arbitrary and unlawful” dissolution of democratically elected local government councils by the governors or anyone using the state powers derivable from laws enacted by the state Houses of Assembly or any Executive Order is unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void.
In addition, the apex court in a unanimous decision stated that the retention of funds belonging to local governments by state governments is in clear breach of the provision of the constitution.
The panel also restrained governors from constituting caretaker committees to run the affairs of local governments as against the constitutionally recognised and guaranteed democratic system, stressing that where such exists, the monies accruable to the council area must be withheld.
In their separate preliminary objections, the 36 state governors had sought the dismissal of the suit with substantial cost.
They contended that the AGF, who initiated the action on behalf of the Federal Government lacked the locus standi (legal right) to do so.
It was the case of the defendants that the AGF violated their right to a fair hearing when he failed to serve them with a copy of a further affidavit he filed in support of the suit.
Besides, some of the states argued that they already have democratically elected local government chairmen in place, insisting that the suit by Federal Government tantamounts to abuse of the court process.
However, earlier in the judgment, the objection by the respondents were dismissed.
During the proceedings, the AGF had pleaded with the Supreme Court to grant all the reliefs sought by the Federal Government in the suit.
However, the governors through their respective state Attorneys General and Commissioners for Justice opposed the request of the AGF, and asked the court to dismiss the suit.
The AGF has asked the apex court to invoke Sections 1, 4, 5, 7 and 14 of the constitution to declare that the state governors and state Houses of Assembly are under obligation to ensure democratic system at the third tier of government in Nigeria and to also invoke the same sections to hold that the governors cannot lawfully dissolve democratically elected local government councils.
The originating summon was accompanied by a 13-paragragh affidavit deposed to by one Kelechi Ohaeri from the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The deponent averred that the AGF drew out the suit against the governors under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on behalf of the Federal Government.
Ohaeri stated among other depositions that local government system recognised by the constitution is a democratically elected local government councils and that the amount due to local government councils from the federation account is to be paid to local government system recognised by the constitution.
Only Elected Officials Will Control LGs Allocations — Tinubu
Reacting, President Bola Tinubu described the Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy as a welcome development, saying the decision affirms the spirit, intent, and purpose of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the statutory rights of council dwellers.
He insisted that a fundamental challenge to the nation’s advancement over the years has been ineffective local government administration.
According to the president, governance at the critical cellular level of socio-political configuration was nearly absent.
He advised the rural dwellers 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 benefiting from people-oriented service delivery.
Tinubu said, “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”.
The president further 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, have tottered owing to the emasculation of local governments.
According to the president, 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.
Atiku Describes Judgment As A Win For The People Of Nigeria
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has welcomed the Supreme Court’s judgment affirming fiscal autonomy for local government councils across Nigeria.
In a statement released on Thursday via X, Atiku described the ruling as “a win for the people of Nigeria” and a step in the right direction.
Atiku criticised the earlier arrangement, stating that it was borne out of politics of hasty compromise.
Advertisement
Expressing his support for the ruling, Atiku said, “I align with the decision of the Supreme Court that the structure of the Nigerian government is portioned in three layers, and of these, the local governments should be centres of development.”
BetterLateThanNever, LPCommends Supreme Court Judgment
The Labour Party (LP) commended the judgment of the Supreme Court over financial autonomy for the 774 local government councils in the country.
The party said that while the resolution of the crisis was late, it was better than never having such an end to the long due crisis where state governors take over funds disbursed for local government administration from the federal coffers.
A statement by LP National Publicity Secretary, Obiorah Ifoh, reads, “We at the Labour Party (LP) welcomed the Supreme Court decision granting financial autonomy to local government councils in the 36 states of the federation including the Federal Capital Territory.
“This decision was long in coming but like the saying goes, it is better late than never.
“It has put to rest the debate as to whether or not local government areas that are the closest level of government to the ordinary people deserve to enjoy some form of autonomy to address challenges facing the masses within their jurisdiction.”
Ex-Presidential Candidates, CDHR Laud Judgment
The presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the 2023 general elections, Prince Adewole Adebayo, hailed the judgment of the Supreme Court on local government fiscal autonomy.
Also commending the judgment, the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) in the last general elections, Prof. Peter Umeadi, said that the judgment is a supreme element of restructuring.
A civil society organisation (CSO), Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR), through its former president, Malachy Ugwumadu, told Daily Independent that the judgment will deepen Nigeria’s democracy.
Prince Adebayo noted that the judgment has given answers to broader interpretation and legal questions as to whether there are three tiers of government, or that the local governments are just appendages of the states. “It speaks to the fact that the LGs are separate and independent,” he said.
The lawyer added, “Corruption is being perpetuated by the state governors using local funds and the security funds.”
On his part, Prof. Umeadi told our reporter that the Supreme Court judgment will have a wonderful effect on the development of Nigeria.
“In the 2023 presidential election, one of the issues on my manifesto was the aspect of true federalism. I did mention that the three tiers of government need to be productively interrelated. In other words, we should entrench separation of powers to achieve proper checks and balances.
“The governors hold the funds of the local government councils, all they do is pay salaries to staff and spend the rest without recourse to the councils. They also collect and spend monies from entities under constitutional controls of the local government councils contrary to the decisions of court of competent jurisdictions.
Malachy Ugwumadu, while commending the judgment, stated that the state government has under the guise of state and local government joint account, hijacked completely the funds of the local governments.
“Now that the Supreme Court has intervened decisively and given judgment in favour of the local governments, mind you this is not the first time this is happening. There are constitutional amendments making it possible not just for judiciary but for the state Houses of Assembly to receive money directly.”
Supreme Court Ruling Hinders True Federalism — Ibori
Meanwhile, former governor of Delta State, Chief James Ibori, on Thursday, said that the Supreme Court judgment that granted financial autonomy to local government councils dealt a severe setback on the principles of federalism.
Reacting to the Supreme Court judgment, 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.
“Sections 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 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 centralises 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 centralised 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.
“Like the Hon. Justice Oputa JSC of blessed memory once said in describing the Supreme Court ‘we are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final’.
“It is my sincere hope that the judgment delivered today will be reviewed at the earliest time possible because it clearly stands the concept of federalism on its head.”