Mixed Reactions Trail S/Court’s Ruling On LGs Fiscal Autonomy

61

 …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.”