Supreme Court Drama: Governors vs. Local Governments—Who Gets the Money?
In a long awaited and unprecedented ruling on July 11, 2024, the Nigerian Supreme Court upheld the financial independence of local governments, triggering notable reactions from people across the country’s geopolitical zones.
The contended issues were finally put to rest, which says funds shall be allocated to local governments from the federation account. The funds shall be sent without a third party of interference of state governors nor their cronies.
The decision by the apex court of the country gives power to local administrations. It will also reduce bureaucratic interference and increase local government’s independent policies.
Background
Lateef Fagbemi, the Attorney General of the Federation, instituted a lawsuit against the 36 state governors. The lawsuit ignited a legal battle that lasted for months.
The lawsuit said the governors have swallowed local governments and used their power to significantly alter the constitutional setup of the country.
By doing so, the governors mismanaged and misappropriated local government allocations, liquidated their constitutional power, and left it in ruins and disarray. The lawsuit also claimed that 1999 constitution is grossly neglected.
1999 constitution contextually assures independent local governments as a democratic arm and, as such, should be financially independent.
Supreme Court’s Order
Supreme Court of Nigeria admitted that the matter is of importance and should be quickly addressed. In keeping with accelerated hearing, the governors were mandated to properly and timely file their defenses within a short period of time.
It further said that it’s a constitutional matter that needs urgent resolution and worked hard to ensure there is complete representation.
The effort to collectively solve the matter led to the Supreme Court ordering fresh notices to absented states like Sokoto, Bornu, Kogi, Kano, Ogun, Osun, and Oyo Their state attorneys were mandated to be present before deliberations could begin.
The action by the Supreme Court is aimed to avoid the state governors taking advantage of loopholes to delay execution or judgement or further delay adjudication.
Consequences and Reactions
Those in support of local governments’ independence hailed the ruling and praised the Supreme Court’s wisdom. They see the verdict as victory for democracy.
The critics of the state governors said they have largely hampered the development of local governments because they were deprived of the independence needed to function as a government.
They also attributed the actions of the state governors to corruption, saying their intent was to corruptly misappropriate funds and take advantage of the creation of local governments instead of enabling to wax and fulfil its mandate
While AGF of the Federation instituted the case against the governors, President Bola Amed Tinubu is the man behind the action. The president praised the verdict and called it a “crucial move for nationalprogress”. He went further to explain the wisdom of the Supreme Court, saying that working local governments enhances dividends of democracy to the grassroots.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar also hailed the ruling, saying it is victory for the Nigerian people.
He also sided with the President on the critical role local governments’ independence plays in democratic governments. While saying autonomy will help the local government reach its potential of positively impacting grassroots development.
What To Expect
The local governments autonomy will now bring politics to grassroots and give council Chairmen the power to function like the governors in every local government across the country.
With local government elections to be conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission, political conflicts are expected within the states.
Those opposed to the autonomy of the local governments say there are no checks and balances, which would bring about the needed balance in the local government affairs, hence making them dictators in their councils.
Knowing that corruptions and misappropriations are prevalent in the country, unchecked and unbalanced local governments’ leadership will have express road to embezzlement.
Details of the ruling deprived any form of interference from the governors, which brings into question the discharge of governors’ powers as chief security officers of all the local governments.
With now limited powers for governors, the political set up of the country changes. The adaptation and confusion will dawn, with further legal actions to define the ruling expected.
Conclusion
As the Supreme Court’s verdict has taken power off the governors and forced them to a more decentralized government in their various states, new challenges come into effect immediately.
The ruling will promote local government development and put the council in drive. The council chairman will decide the future of his local government without interference.
Implementation of the ruling will need further legal explaining to avoid conflicts and further legal battles from the definition of the verdict during implementation.
Local governments funds will now be handed over to council chairman of each local government, which would put them in authority to mismanage or embezzle, and who sees to the conformity of the council chairman to laws and best practices remains question begging for answers.
Local governments can now embark on building infrastructures like hospitals, schools, renovations, and renewals of infrastructures within their jurisdiction. While it would benefit Nigerians, the tool to enforce good governance within the local governments remains.
