Quite a significant number is celebrating over the Supreme Court position on local government administration in Nigeria. In a well-oiled judgment it delivered last week, the court ruled that funds meant for local government areas should be paid directly into local government accounts. It also declared the appointment of caretaker committees or sole administrators by state governors to oversee the affairs of local governments as illegal. Consequently, it ordered that state governments should take urgent steps to ensure that democratically elected chairmen and councillors take over the affairs of local governments. The court made a number of other orders, which, in its wisdom, will grant local governments across the country the autonomy they desire and deserve.
These pronouncements from the Supreme Court, as I have earlier noted, excite many. But not a few are taking the declarations with a pinch of salt. Those who belong to this latter category are not excited. If anything, they are suspicious. They see what has come out from the apex court as a plot aimed at taking the wind out of the sails of those who are currently luxuriating with local government funds. They are livid about it all. Ultimately, they do not believe that the judgment will, in any way, improve the fortunes of local governments. This bipolar response of Nigerians to the judgment under consideration certainly deserves some consideration.
To situate this issue properly, we must acknowledge the fact that nothing has changed in the local government administration law. In other words, what the constitution provides for as the way and manner the local government system should operate has not changed. What happened was that successive state governors, over time, altered the modus operandi of local governments to suit their purpose. This has gradually and systematically led to abuses, the type that has reduced local governments to appendages of state governments.
Part of this abuse is the appropriation by governors of funds meant for local governments and diverting them to other uses that are hardly in the service of the people for whom the funds are meant. That has been the situation for some two decades now.
So, what is about to happen now? In attempting to answer this question, what comes to mind first is the interest of President Bola Tinubu in the matter. Why did he direct his Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, to go to court over the way local governments are administered by governors? What is his motivation? Is he driven by good governance or is there more to the matter than meets the eye? These curious questions are at the root of what is going on. To help Tinubu’s cause, the Supreme Court has, at the instance of the President, waded into the matter. But rather than straighten issues, the court has brought some complexity to bear on what is supposed to be a simple issue clearly spelt out by the Constitution without any form of ambiguity. Where does this complication lie?
The Supreme Court, in its judgment, seems to have glossed over aspects of the constitutional provision on local government administration. The most obvious is the State Joint Local Government Account as provided for in Section 162, subsections (6) and (8) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Subsection (6) states as follows: “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.” Subsection (8) on its part provides that: “The amount standing to the credit of local government councils of a state shall be distributed among the local government councils of that state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the State”.
It should be further noted that the Supreme Court judgment did not just gloss over the provision on State Joint Local Government Account, it pretended as if it did not know that Section 162, subsection 8 exists. This subsection provides a role for State Houses of Assembly in the administration and application of local government funds. But for the apex court, these funds should be paid directly into local government accounts for the use of the local governments without recourse to the executive or the legislature in the state. This is the complication we are talking about. By its judgment, the Supreme Court has compounded the issue of autonomy for local governments. If it set out to unshackle the local governments, it has , wittingly or unwittingly, introduced fresh drawbacks that will cripple them the more. Simply put, funds meant for local governments cannot be paid directly into their accounts. In the same vein, such funds cannot be utilized without the input and directives of state legislatures. To do otherwise will be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, therefore, erred when it sought to subordinate, and indeed subordinated, the provisions of the Constitution. This is one constitutional aberration that state governments will not ignore.
This brings us back to the Tinubu motive in all this. Those who have been following Tinubu’s governance style know that he is primarily driven by a self-serving agenda. He is out to conquer the political space, using all manner of subterfuge. All of this is aimed at ensuring that he returns as President in 2027.
The latest in this scheme is the allocation and administration of local government funds. Those who see beyond the surface believe that Tinubu has plans. He has an agenda, which he will use local governments to execute in the coming years. What he is doing now is to prepare the ground for the devious plot.
But there is another layer of challenge. How will the President slug it out with the governors? This deserves further interrogation. To start with, state governors, except those who feel that they are in office at Tinubu’s pleasure, will not obey the illegality that the Supreme Court wants to foist on them. They will remind all concerned that the provisions of the Constitution remain superior to Supreme Court judgments. Having settled that, the state governors will move to the next stage. They will ensure that only those who have unquestionable loyalty to the governors get elected as chairmen and councillors. The governors will not have any problem executing this plan since local government elections are conducted by state electoral commissions whose chairmen and members are appointed by the governors. Given this scenario, we expect a battle royale between the Presidency and the state governments. This scramble for space and control in the affairs of local governments is about to begin. But it will certainly not augur well for the local government system in Nigeria.