Godswill Akpabio: Saddled with onerous task of ensuring LG autonomy
By Omoniyi Salaudeen
The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, is now the cynosure of all eyes as history beckons on him to strike a balance between the advocates of local government autonomy and the forces of the status quo.
The prolonged battle to free local council administration in the country from the apron strings of the state governors has assumed a befuddling dimension.
On Tuesday, the Senate plenary ran into a rowdy session over the enforceability of the bill granting full financial autonomy to the local government as a third tier of government.
The bill which is an amendment of Section 124 of the 1999 constitution aligns with the judgment of the Supreme Court delivered in August, which gave full financial and administrative autonomy to the 774 local government areas in the country.
However, since the passage of the bill, the public reactions have been a mixed grill of optimism and cynicism. On one hand are those who want devolution of powers. These expressed confidence that it will end decades of financial hemorrhage that has accounted for the arrested development at the grassroots level. And on the other hand are some legal experts who raised concern over the seeming lacuna arising from the constitutional provision that allows for the old regime of State/LG Joint Account.
For so long, state governors have been opposed to the idea of financial autonomy to the council administration hiding under the State/LG Joint Account as enshrined in the existing constitution to siphon the federal allocation meant for the development of the grassroots.
In the ensuing debate, the lawmakers were said to be divided over the propriety or otherwise of the senate’s intervention in the purported moves by some governors to cajole their respective state assemblies to pass counter laws that will make it impossible to implement the subsisting Supreme Court judgment. The issue of local government autonomy is an intriguing fairly complex situation. For the avoidance of doubt, Section 162(6) of the constitution provides for the establishment of State Joint Local Government Account. It states: “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.”
The state governors have always capitalized on this section of the constitution to muzzle the powers of elected local government chairmen to their selfish advantage.
Under the 1999 Constitution (as amended), local government is generally known as the third tier of government to be run by democratically elected chairmen and councilors who exercise all the powers of government enjoyed by the executive and legislature at state and federal levels.
However, due to the interdependency relationship established between the state and local government, it has become a common practice for governors to dissolve elected chairmen and constitute a caretaker committee to run the council administration. As such, they capitalize on the arrangement to fiddle with public funds meant for grassroots development.
In 2022, following the report of the Senate Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution (Fifth Alteration) Bills, the two chambers of the National Assembly overwhelmingly voted for a bill seeking the abrogation of state joint local government account in favour of a special account where all allocations due to the local governments’ councils, from the federation account and state government, shall be paid.
The bill entitled: ‘Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Abrogate the State Joint Local Government Account and Provide for a Special Account into which shall be paid all Allocations due to Local Government Councils from the Federation Account and from the Government of the State. It was subsequently signed by former President Muhammadu Buhari. Regrettably, it failed to scale through the hurdle of the constitutional requirement of the 2/3 majority votes of the state houses of assembly which are always at the beck and call of the governors.
Following the ruling of the Supreme Court, the concurrent act of the current National Assembly granted full financial and administrative autonomy to all the 774 local council authorities across the country by amending Section 124 of the Nigerian constitution.
The section provides a consequential provision for the making of the local councils a full third-tier government without undue interference from the state governments. The section equally deleted the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) from the constitution thereby vesting the powers to conduct council elections on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Now, there are two issues involved in the matter. One, the bill will need the concurrency of the state houses of assembly to stay.
Some cynics say the National Assembly cannot get up to 2/3 of the state assembly to support the bill. Therefore, the task before the Senate leadership is to mount pressure on the people at the grassroots level to compel their elected representatives in the state assembly to support the bill.
With adequate awareness, it will not be too difficult for the people to pressure on the state governors to drop the old regime that is dictatorial and allows for a waste of resources meant for the development of the grassroots.
The second issue is the imperative of the amendment of Section 162(6) of the constitution which provides for the establishment of State joint local account (SJLGA).
The opinion of some lawyers aligns with the position of the Senate president on this. But there is yet another dilemma.
According to them, the Senate has taken the wrong step by amending the bill without first amending the Constitution. This school of thought insists that it is a wrong approach to pass a bill before the amendment of the Constitution.
A renowned Constitutional lawyer, Dr Tunji Abayomi declared: “They must first amend the constitution before they pass the bill because everything must be in conformity with the constitution. It may be an effort in futility if the constitution is not amended. If the constitution is not amended to give autonomy to local government, the law becomes inconsistent with the constitution. And by the doctrine of repugnancy, the law will fall.”
In another breadth, another argument says that the National Assembly does not need the support of the state houses of assembly to amend the constitution. It will only need the concurrency of the President. According to these proponents, the current Nigerian constitution is a mere law and does not need the support of state houses of assembly to amend. “It is only a constitution that is made by the people that needs the concurrence of the state houses of assembly. But this Constitution was not made by the people; it was passed as a mere law in the exercise of legislative powers by the military. So, the people are confused. And there will always be confusion,” Abayomi posited.
The responsibility is on the Senate leadership under Akpabio’s watch to provide an answer to this befuddling dimension.