In the last few weeks, I have intervened consistently on the issues confronting local government administration in the country; ranging from the structure to the administration; the election and the development issues. In all, I had summed up my position that the local government administration in the country is a colossal failure as it failed to be impactful on the lives of the people at the grassroots.
This position of mine was validated by the apex court decision on direct remittance of the statutory allocation to the local government councils endorsing having to by-pass the gatekeeper Governors who had turned local government funds into items for diversion, misappropriation and, in many cases, outright theft. It is my conviction that if we can get things right at the local government council level, otherwise known as the grassroots, rapid development at other levels will automatically occur. It is in the light of this conclusion and in order not be a cosmetic critic engaged in such for the sake of criticism, that I had opted in this discourse to interrogate the ways and means of safeguarding and using the resources of the local government councils in a beneficial manner to the people.
The starting point of this discourse is accountability. Are the managers of the various local government councils accountable to anyone? ME THINK NOT! By the structure of the local government administration democratically designed in our Constitution, there ought to be the executive arm as well as the legislature. The former of which consists of the Chairmen and their Vice Chairmen inclusive of the supervisors or supervisory councilors by whatever nomenclature chosen. On the other hand, is the legislative house comprising of the elected councilors representing each of the wards in the constituency or local government areas.
In the light of the constitutional provision and various apex court decisions, the local government, as a third tier of government, is primarily accountable to the legislative house and the people at large. In some states, it is a fact that the state administration, both at the executive and the legislative houses, hijacks the role of monitoring equally. This absurdity of illegal venture into local government council affairs is extended at times to the suspension and removal of elected managers of the local government administration by both the executive and the legislature at the state level. A recent example was the illegal attempt to remove, by way of State House resolution, the chairman of Alimosho Local Government Council in Lagos State.
Anyway, where the system is allowed to work, the Local Government Chairmen and, by extension, the executive council are meant to be accountable to the legislative houses at the local government levels.
This the legislative house does by way of appropriation, budget performance appraisal and oversight functions. The functionality of the legislative houses however largely depends on their independence, stemming from the mode of election.
It is only when credible election is carried out to elect council leaders that the councilors are likely to be independent and able to demand accountability from the Chairmen. The fundamental snag relates however to the internal democratic process of the sponsoring political parties. A situation in which the party ‘dealers’ and their cohorts are the instruments of emergence of the candidates at the local government elections, cannot guarantee the required independence essential to the demand for accountability. Thus, the first solution is to address this quagmire by ensuring that we straighten this electoral misnomer.
The electoral laws at the state levels, at least for now that the States Independent Electoral Commissions are still managing the elections, must guarantee internal democratic process by mandating the conduct of credible primaries, barring which candidates of such political party will be disqualified. If this feat is achieved, then the legislative house can then function efficiently as a check on the local government Chairmen. The other organ that can demand accountability is the people of the area.
The creation of the local government in the first instance, as well as the accruable resources are meant for them. Hence, they are not only entitled to the accounts but they are under obligation to ensure probity. These are the basic organs of accountability. Complimentary to these basic canons and towards ensuring transparency is accountability by the leader intuitively.
A true leader of the people must realize and appreciate that he is accountable to the people he serves. As I remarked elsewhere in one of my leadership series, I am not aware of any legal instrument mandating the exhibition of transparency in the dealing with the resources at the local government levels. Leadership must, at all times, consider transparency as a non-negotiable feature in dealing with the people’s resources. The exhibition of these traits reinforces the integrity of a leader.
As a matter of fact, most dealings at the local government level are opaque for reasons known to the state actors. The attraction for this lies in the absence of legal enabling instrument for accountability. Notwithstanding this grave omission, corporate governance principles demand such transparency and accountability.
Although this lack of transparency is not peculiar to the local government councils as several other organs of government are afflicted by the same vice. I am sure we recall the case of the tertiary institutions exposed recently by a civil society group. I am also aware of the accusations and allegations against the judicial arm for a while now. It took the recent directive of the Honourable Minister for Education, Dr. Maruf Tunji Alausa, to mandate the tertiary institutions at the federal levels to start disclosing their financial records to the public. Much earlier than those interventions, I had, in several of my past interventions, raised identical issues in the discourses on leadership.
In the recent survey I conducted amongst the local government councils in Lagos State, there is total absence of transparency. I have not seen where financial statements of local government councils are displayed on their websites (where such exists) nor in public spaces; neither have I seen where the procurement process is elevated to that status. Where then do we go from here, particularly in waging war against corruption in public offices? Do we really need to start waiting for individualized acts or steps as in that of Dr. Alausa? I certainly do not think so.
To this end, it is either we develop an enabling legal instrument of parliament commanding and compelling such display of statement of account of the local government councils on their websites as well as display through other media platforms or public spaces, or the anti-corruption bodies come out with policy statement or instrument to this effect.
I am aware that the apex court has endorsed this approach, and in this respect, I commend the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Agency which has taken step in that direction in prohibiting cash transactions and monitoring the accounts of the local government councils. We certainly need to do more. There must be a bold and courageous policy directive to that effect.
The presidency can equally wade in by way of executive order. As this is advisory, I still will strongly recommend the enactment of legislation to that effect.
The beauty of such legislative intervention is the dispensation with the frustration of obtaining such information under the Freedom of Information Act. Except we are pretending, the snail speed of our litigation process remains a clog to the reaping of the benefits of the Freedom of Information Act.
Truth is that except the people have access to this information, the agitation of issues of misappropriation and corruption is impossible. The genuine civil society groups must equally be unrelenting in the pursuit of this goal. Nothing prevents the coalition of the group from drafting and ensuring the passage of such laws ensuring transparency. Access to information will even enhance the operation of the whistleblowers law. it is only in a situation where detection is possible and real that many people comply with laws which means it is not a matter of volition for them but, at least, the fear of detection and punishment. It is imperative to factor into consideration all these in order to attain the level of probity we need and desire.
Lastly, by way of conclusion, the office of the Auditor General for the Local governments can equally be of assistance in not only designing a robust procurement framework but in unveiling frauds as may be perpetrated from time to time. It is imperative that we trigger the process as we cannot continue to entrust the huge resources coming to the grassroot to some of the cheats and charlatans that have crept into the system. The recent demand by the Central Bank of Nigeria that all local government councils in Nigeria who want to access their allocations should, in addition to opening accounts with the CBN, present two-year audited report is to ensure transparency. Although this decision of the CBN has been criticized as an addition to the decision of the Supreme Court in the revenue allocation case, it is clear that the spirit behind the policy is one dictated by probity and accountability. This will reveal how the funds allocated to the Local Government Councils had been spent in the past as to reveal the actual culprit frustrating grassroots development. Thus, it is safe to conclude that all hands must be on deck if we desire to kill corruption otherwise corruption will surely kill us.