LGs escape clutches of governors. For now
The Supreme Court has come to the aid of long suffering local councils, whose funds were hitherto dispensed at the whims of state governors.
The Supreme Court’s pronouncement on the relationship between governors and local governments was unequivocal. Local Government Areas are not vassals of governors to toy with. They are the third tier of government, and should be so treated, declared the apex court.
Local Governments have been playthings for governors since the inception of the Fourth Republic. The ambiguities in the existence of local governments have been exploited by many of the governors.
Some of the abuses range from appointing their stooges into caretaker committees to manage affairs of the councils, and state-local councils joint accounts where all funds due to the councils are lodged and dispensed at the whim of the governors. In many instances, elections into the councils, when they hold, are travesties.
ALSO READ: All 36 governors assure that better wages for workers will surely come
The judgment of the apex court has at least removed some of these ambiguities. The two most contentious are: Funds must be paid directly to the local councils, and any council without a democratically elected government will not receive funds from the federation account.
Justice Emmanuel Agim, who led the seven-man panel, declared that the 774 local government councils in the country should manage their funds, and that they do not need the help of the governors.
Said Justice Agim: A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable. Demands of justice requires a progressive interpretation of the law. It is the position of this court that the federation can pay LG allocations to the LGs directly or pay them through the states. In this case, since paying them through states has not worked, justice of this case demands that LG allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the LGs. A declaration that the state government has no power or control to keep the local government council money or funds.
The suit that brought about the much needed reliefs for the local councils was instituted by Lateef Fagbemi, the Attorney General of the Federation. The governors, under the aegis of their umbrella group, the Nigerian Governors Forum, challenged the suit, claiming that Nigeria was a federation and that the local councils were appendages of states.
Days before the Supreme Court delivered its judgment, local councils across the country, urged by their union, the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) declared a marathon session of ‘fasting and praying’ for the apex court to deliver the councils from the vice grip of governors.
Many councils have been left comatose as their funds are seized by governors under the guise of joint development, with many of the councils unable to pay salaries nor meet basic needs. Many commentators have long criticised the strangulation of the councils, blaming stagnation at the third tier of governance on the resource drought occasioned by governors.
Justice Agim went further to declare that governors toying with local council funds could be termed an impeachable offence, and that funds meant for the councils must be paid to only democratically elected local government councils. Anything other than this will be taken as a gross misconduct.
A declaration that the state government has no power or control to keep the local government council money or funds. A declaration that the local government council is entitled to the local government allocation. An order of injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, agents or privies from spending local government allocation. A declaration that no state government should be paid any money meant for the local government. An immediate compliance to this judgment.
With this pronouncement, the governors, who many have accused of behaving like emperors, will have to devise clever ways to dip their fingers into council funds. The governors have in the main opposed independence of states houses of assembly and state judiciaries, a departure from the semblance of separation of powers at the federal level.
