The Supreme Court’s Verdict And Implications Of Financial Autonomy For Local Government, By Reuben Hopo

According to Honourable Justice Emmanuel Agim (JSC) in his lead judgement, “I hold that the State’s retention of the Local Government funds is unconstitutional. The demand 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” is unambiguous.

The issue from time with Local Government allocations has been a constitutional crisis after the commencement of the Fourth Republic on whether the contentious allocations should be disbursed directly to the LGs or into the State-LGs Joint Account as provided by the same Constitution. While the Apex Court had delivered its interpretation serially in the past, it gave a verdict this time around.

Given the ongoing democratic experience, it is clear that the elongated tussle between the Federal Government and States was often triggered by perceptual causes that influenced different beliefs, opinions or doubts on the legality of the allocations due to the LGs. Now that the issue is resolved, the hindsight is that, a particular matter may be viewed based on the status or position of someone at a particular time, while the variable later may also influence the outcome of the same matter. It implies that what is good now may not be, as time goes on. The law of nature holds that “change is constant” in life has been proven by the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

According to Niccolo Machiavelli, “The end justifies the means” illustrates the political will of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, and his demonstration that the verdict aligned with his Administration’s “Renewed Hope Agenda” cannot be said to be wrong, but a victory to strengthen democracy in  Local Government’s Administration as a tier of the State with democratically elected councils (not the presumptuous third-tier of government) in the federal system. However, the clauses in the ruling are heavier.

One, the verdict places a burden of extra vigilance on the State, political parties, and the electorate to profile who to present and vote for as a democratically elected Chairman of Local Government Council to forestall a repeat of the reckless spending, inept leadership, and maladministration that broke down the entire Local Government Administration that caused the heinous backlogged of salaries arrears that were owed teachers of public primary schools that led to their nationwide strikes during the defunct third republic under the two-party- system of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republican Convention (NRC) introduced during the infamous regime of the former Military President, General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida between 1991-1993. The crisis then spilled into the botched Mr. Ernest Shonekan-led Interim National Government installed by the former Military President as he stepped aside.

During that same era, the widespread stenches oscillating from indiscriminate refuse dumbs within streets, compounds and public squares coupled with lack of expertise, efficient mechanized resources and will to maintain a friendly environment made some of the States’ Government to establish refuse collection boards or agencies to enhance a clean environment across their States. The opportunity of the States taken over some legitimate responsibilities of the Local Government did more good to a State like Lagos than harm.

Two, the Supreme Court had given express approval to the States’ Government to ensure continuous “democratically elected local government councils in their various States implies that they have the Constitutional right to conduct general elections into their Local Governments through the States’ Independent Electoral Commission (SIECs). This responsibility is unique and the conduct of the general elections would always determine the outcome of the political administration usher into the Local Governments in their States.

Three, the party leaders must raise the bar to see themselves as the hope of the masses against fraudulent individuals who have nothing to offer the grassroots, by preventing monetized politicking of people who may go power drunk if they eventually find themselves at the helm of affairs. So, the party leaders should be impartial arbiter to save the party and the masses now, and at the end of the day if they could thoroughly test the credibility and personalities of the various aspirants for the Chairmanship election of a Local Government and come out with a choice that proves to be competent, trusted and people-oriented. When the party hierarchies failed sometimes to control inordinate ambition for power, it resorts to chaos, mayhem, and other vices in party primaries. So, it must impose order to maintain the stability and progress of the parties.

Last but not least, to prevent the reality of the opinion of the Pan-Yoruba socio-political association, Afenifere whose position on the Apex Court’s Verdict led by its Leader, Chief Ayo Adebanjo and National Publicity Secretary, Prince Justice Faloye reflected the thinking of some others as “a mere judicial conspiracy” (as reported), the internal democracy within the parties requires a transparent electoral process that could screen each aspirant, and amicably present the result to him (or her) as well as declare the results in the party for members and their followers to view how their preferred aspirant stands in the contest, and the need to strengthen the party cohesion must hold supreme. The reason is that power in the local government is too volatile, and if not diligently controlled during the electoral process, the results would not be far-fetched.

The conclusion is that the electorate will be more at the mercy of their respective Chairmen of Local Governments than the Governor in the State if stakeholders should fail to apply due diligence.