The just-concluded weekend presented 8.2 billion people on the planet with a potpourri of issues, from the “supposed assassination escape” of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the celebration of the world’s population.
On the home front, the media industry was awash with enthusiasm, eulogy, admiration, and encomiums celebrating the academic giant and literary colossus, the first African Nobel Laureate in Literature, Prof. Oluwole Soyinka.
But the most outstanding event for social thinkers and lovers of good governance was the decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, granting local government councils autonomy.
Imagine waking up one morning to see your street replaced with smooth asphalt, the local market filled with fresh and affordable produce from nearby farms, not wilting imports and the community centre no longer looking like a dusty relic, but now a hub of activity, with after-school programs and adult education classes. Sounds like a fantasy, right?
Well, this dream could become a reality for millions of Nigerians thanks to a recent Supreme Court ruling that granted financial autonomy to Nigeria’s 774 local governments (LGAs).
But hold on, before we go too deep into those imaginations, there’s a catch (isn’t there always?).
This ruling hands over the purse strings – a whole lot of them – to your local government. The same local government that, well, let’s just say hasn’t always been known for its stellar financial management.
BREAKING: Governors Prohibited from Dissolving LG Councils, Supreme Court Rules
So, the question on everyone’s mind is this: will this bring enhanced local development, or lead to financial disaster that leaves your street looking more like a moonscape than a smooth highway?
Well, the road ahead for local government autonomy looks to be a wild, bumpy, and undeniably interesting ride. Will our dreams come true, or is a nightmare waiting to happen?
While leaders, like Kwara State Governor AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, and Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State view it as a positive step towards empowering local communities, others, like human rights lawyer Liborous Oshoma, raise talks about possible pitfalls.
Governor Oborevwori asserts that the decision aligns with the principles of local government autonomy, while AbdulRazaq emphasises the need to carefully study the ruling to understand its full implications.
Oshoma, in his interview with ARISE NEWS, stressed the importance of effectively implementing existing laws. He argued that the ruling simply reaffirms constitutional provisions often ignored in practice.
According to Oshoma, the real challenge is not the absence of laws but the consistent failure to enforce them properly.
Impact on Grassroots Democracy
The judgment is seen as a stimulus for enhancing grassroots democracy, as granting local governments more control over their finances and decision-making processes, will enable them to address local needs more effectively and efficiently.
Governor AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq of Kwara State, also the chairman of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF), said this could strengthen local governance, however, the newfound autonomy comes with its challenges.
One major issue is the potential for financial mismanagement and corruption at the local level.
While increased financial control can lead to more direct and responsive governance, it also brings the risk of misuse of funds. As Liborous Oshoma pointed out, the problem often lies in the implementation of laws and the competency of local officials.
Effective governance at the grassroots level will require stringent anti-corruption measures and solid financial management systems.
State vs. Local Government Power Dynamics – A Change in Control
This development weakens the financial control state governments have traditionally held over LGAs, leading to a more balanced relationship between state and local authorities.
With less financial leverage, state governors may be less inclined to interfere with local decision-making, allowing LGAs greater autonomy in pursuing their own development priorities.
As LGAs retain autonomy over local projects, states could provide guidance and technical assistance while focusing on broader development strategies without the burden of micro-managing local affairs.
Examples from countries like Brazil, where states play a very important role in regional development, could be instructive.
However, this change may also create friction between state and local authorities. The issue of who should conduct local government elections is a case in point.
Currently, State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs) oversee these elections, but there are calls for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to take over this responsibility.
It’s been indicated that INEC’s involvement could ensure fairer and more transparent elections, reducing undue state influence.
Economic Implications – Direct Federal Allocations and Local Development
One of the most obvious economic implications of the ruling is the direct allocation of federal funds to local governments. This change is expected to have a huge impact on local development projects and service delivery, as disbursement processes will now be streamlined, potentially leading to faster access to resources for local development projects.
This could accelerate economic growth at the grassroots level, particularly in previously neglected regions. LGAs can prioritise and execute projects that address the immediate needs of their communities.
However, with financial autonomy comes the need for accountability. Effective use of these funds will require local governments to implement strong financial management systems.
As Oshoma noted, while the law provides for financial autonomy, the key challenge lies in its implementation. Ensuring that funds are used effectively will necessitate strong oversight mechanisms and a focus on transparency.
Local Government Autonomy??? And So What???
Like a coat of many colours, the Supreme Court verdict also declared that caretaker local government chairmen and committees are illegal.
Currently, no fewer than 21 states in the country are without duly elected local government councils, a clear-cut aberration of the constitution.
These states are running the affairs of local government councils with caretaker committees appointed by state governors, a situation that goes against the provisions of Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the operation of local government by democratically elected officials.
We are of the opinion that subsequent events following the Supreme Court stance should drive development at the local government level, all things being equal, which may or may not be based on several factors.
As a topical issue akin to the developmental drive and a sine qua non for organic emancipation conceived by the heroes of democracy, the verdict has registered the opinions of notable figures in the legal field, social commentators, politicians, and public affairs analysts alike.
Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict, Barrister Mike Agbedor Abu Ozekhome (SAN) noted that, “Section 7 of the constitution is clear about how the local government should come into being. It has been going on in almost all the states of the federation.
We have also witnessed it since 1999, where state governments dissolved local governments that were duly elected by the people and for the people, thus putting their surrogates as caretakers and chairmen. There is nothing like local government caretakers in the constitution; it is an aberration.
What the Supreme Court is saying is henceforth we would only pay money to the local government chairmen, but these local government chairmen have to be democratically elected, not handpicked as caretaker chairmen.”
Femi Falana, human rights activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria lauded the Supreme Court’s judgment granting full financial autonomy to the local governments, saying the judgment would promote accountability at the grassroots level.
The judgment by the apex court on Thursday declared it illegal and unconstitutional for state governors to continue to receive or retain funds allocated to the local councils under the State and Local Government Joint Account.
However, faulting the verdict of the apex court, former Governor of Delta State, Chief James Ibori, said that the financial autonomy granted to local government councils has dealt a severe setback to the principles of federalism.
Reacting on his X handle, Ibori said: “The Supreme Court has dealt a severe setback to the principle of federalism as defined by Section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). 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. 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.”
For us, amid the cacophony of opinions and the pros and cons of the subject matter, while the verdict of the Supreme Court still holds, we strongly believe that accountability, transparency, awareness, proper political education, and a willingness to serve will help the masses benefit maximally from the said autonomy.
While the foredoom lasts, let’s collectively and individually do the needful.
Authors
