Follow Us on Google
Emmanuel Onwubiko
Hence, the definition of local government was made more clear by Kirk Green in (Ola and Tonwe) who submitted thus: Each unit of local government in any system is assumed to possess the following characteristics: a given territory and population, an institutional structure for legislative, executive and administrative purposes, a separate legal identity, a range of powers and functions authorized by delegation from the appropriate central or intermediate legislature and lastly, within the ambit of such delegation, autonomy, subject always, at least in Anglo-American tradition, to the limitation of common law such as the test of reasonableness”.
Omogui Okaru the then head of Federal Inland Revenue Service says: “The high rate of corruption at local government level Is as a result of overdependence on oil revenue, with its attendant laxity on the part of the three tiers of government to explore other sources of revenue. Revenue generations and its effective management are critically important for the survival of local government councils”.
According to her, local government administration has abused the weak tax regulatory system for personal gains, a situation which had complicated the tax system and led to cases of multiple taxation in the economy (Onwuemenyi). Mrs. Omoigui-Okaru also condemned some local government officials for instituting personal and unofficial revenue generation machinery thereby encouraging multiple taxation and placing heavy burden on tax payer. She noted that, many local chairmen generate personal taxes for personal gain using the so called levy collectors who themselves have multiple receipts ( Onwuemenyi,).
Also along this line, Arowolo (2008) opined that, hard earned and limited resources accrued to and raised by local government are always mismanaged. Priorities are misplaced; projects are done not according to or as demanded by the people but regrettable in tune with the selfish end and aggrandizement of the political leadership in collaboration with senior bureaucrats at the local government level of administration.”
“Generally, wide-scale embezzlement by officials of the grassroots has made the needed development of grassroots a tall dream and has rendered them financially incapable to discharge their constitutionally assigned responsibility (Arowolo, 2008). Adeyemi, O. Oluwatobi, made references to all the aforementioned. The Supreme Court reinforced the essence of constitutional autonomy of the local government somehow when it recently voided laws enacted by the states’ Houses of Assembly which allow governors to sack elected Chairmen of Local Governments and Councilors and replace them appointed administrators.
The media recall that it has of recent become a tradition among governors to dissolve the Executive Councils of the states’ LGs and replace them with their appointees and croonies, who they call caretaker committees.
But in a landmark unanimous judgment of five Justices of the Supreme Court, the apex judicial body described the practice as “executive recklessness”, which must not be allowed to persist. The judgment by the five-man panel, led by Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour was on the appeal in relation to the dissolution of the 16 Local Government Executives in Ekiti State, during Kayode Fayemi’s tenure. The appeal marked: SC/120/2013 was filed by the Ekiti State Government. It had Prince Sanmi Olubunmo (Chairman of Ido Osi LG and Chairman of Association of Local Governments of Nigeria – ALGON, Ekiti Chapter and 13 others as respondents.
Fayemi, when the verdict came was Minister of Mineral Resources reportedly announced the dissolution of the councils in a radio announcement on October 29, 2010, when the elected council officials still had up till December 19, 2011 to end their three-year tenure. Fayemi ironically is back in office as governor.
The Supreme Court, in faulting the law purportedly relied on by Fayemi, held that Section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which empowered the governor to dissolve local government councils, whose tenure was yet to expire, violated section 7(1) of the Constitution from which the state House of Assembly derived the power to enact the local government law. Justice Centus Nweze, in the lead judgment, said: “There can be no doubt, as argued by the appellants’ counsel, that the Ekiti State House of Assembly is empowered to make laws of Ekiti State.
“However, the snag here is that, in enacting section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which empowered the first appellant to bridge the tenure of office of the respondents, it overreached itself. “In other words, section 23(b) (supra) is violative of, and in conflict with section 7(1) of the Constitution (supra).
“Hence, it is bound to suffer the fate of ll laws which are in conflict with the Constitution, section 1(3) thereof.” The judge Said Section 7(1) of the Constitution seeks to guarantee “the system of local government by democratically-elected local government councils and conferred “sacrosanctity on the elections of such officials whose electoral mandates derived from the will of the people freely exercised through the democratic process”.
“The implication, therefore, is that section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which was not intended to ‘ensure the existence of’ such democratically-elected councils, but to snap their continued existence by their substitution with caretaker councils, was enacted in clear breach of the supreme provisions of section 7(1) of the Constitution.
“To that extent, it (section 23(b) supra) cannot co-habit with section 7(1) of the Constitution (supra) and must, in consequence, be invalidated. “The reason is simple. By his oath of office, the governor swore to protect and not to supplant the Constitution.
“Hence, any action of his which has the capacity of undermining the same Constitution (as in the instant case where the first appellant, ‘Governor of Ekiti State and others’ dissolved the tenure of the respondents and replaced them with caretaker committees) is tantamount to executive recklessness which would not be condoned,” the judge said. Justice Nweze said the tenure of the local government councils could not be abridged without violating the supreme constitutional provisions.
“Simply put, therefore, the election of such officials into their offices and their tenure are clothed with constitutional force. They cannot, therefore, be abridged without breaching the Constitution from which they derive their force. “The only permissible exception, where a state governor could truncate the lifespan of a local government council which evolved through the democratic process of elections, is ‘for overriding public interest’ in a period of emergency.”
He upheld the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal on the issue and adopted the orders made by the Court of Appeal on the case in its judgment delivered on January 23, 2013. The Appeal Court had among others, ordered the Ekiti State Government to compute and pay all the allowances and salaries accruable to members of the dissolved councils between October 29, 2010 and December 19, 2011, both dates inclusive. Justice Nweze directed the Attorney- General of Ekiti State to ensure that the orders of the lower court (Appeal Court) affirmed in his judgment, are complied with.
What we must do is to complete the constitutional amendments process to make local government councils autonomous because if they are autonomous the chances of seeing public procurement practices that are relatively crime free is high. The chances of the local economy coming back on stream and providing the enabling environment for a revived sound local economy and job opportunities will significantly address some of the fundamental causes of insecurity and instability.
Concluded
Onwubiko heads Human Rights Writers Association Of Nigeria (HURIWA)
