For days, the controversial local government financial autonomy verdict arising from the civil action of the Federal Government through the Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) against the 36 states of the federation has dominated public discussions.
To the Asiwaju Bola Tinubu presidency for whom diversion of citizens focus on the present living conditions has become an administrative strategy, this development which is working better in that regard than the change of the National Anthem is welcome.
However, like the anthem change, the impact of this diversionary stunt, has been rendered masturbatory by the alleged instances of extravagant government spending in the face of biting hardship. Even the staccatos of choreographed compliments generated by the verdict are petering out, unable to numb the focus of the citizenry on the hardship in the country or weaken the alleged resolve of Nigerian youths to stage peaceful protests.
To reinforce the stunt, the FG has mooted plans to hook the 774 local government areas up to the Single Treasury Account. The local government financial autonomy verdict has been criticised by pundits as a usurpation of the constitutional duties of the Nigerian legislature by the Judiciary.
Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), separated and assigned powers to the three main arms of the Federal Government. In effect, while the Legislature has the powers to make and amend laws vide section 5, section 6 confers the Judiciary with the powers to “interpret” laws.
It has been alleged that through the verdict under review, the Supreme Court strayed outside its mandate and merely amended or suspended (as some argue) the operations of sections of the 1999 CFRN.
It is trite that laws or the constitution are amended by the legislature while only the military dictators are wont to suspend sections of the constitution. With due respects to the Nigerian judiciary, I dare to add that their Lord Justices of the Supreme Court are neither usurpers nor dictators, and so should not hide under the guise of infallibility to create a constitutional crisis.
The verdict, apart from being inchoate, is bound to have centrifugal impacts and create confusion in the functionality of the local government system in Nigeria. For instance, the Supreme Court did not reconcile the verdict with the rights of the government of every state to “ensure their [democratically elected local government councils] existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance, and function of such councils” under section 7(1) of the 1999 CFRN.
The provisions of section 162 (5,6,7&,8) of the 1999 CFRN which have not been repealed by the apex court makes the financial autonomy verdict superfluous, leaving the federal government with options to either remit the federation account allocations of local government areas either directly to the respective local government area bank accounts or to the states.
In the event of direct remittance to respective local government area bank accounts as President Tinubu’s administration is likely to do, no consequential orders were made by the Supreme Court to guide the local government councils in spending the funds.
This leaves the local government councils with no options than to fall back on the financial laws of the respective states! What if the state governments, pursuant to Section 7 of the 1999 CFRN, enact laws requiring the local government areas within their domains to remit the funds directly credited to them into the state and local government areas joint account before it could be redistributed to them; or requiring the council areas to spend the funds on specified projects in a specified manner or financial procedure?
This Supreme Court verdict, which is largely seen by analysts as a product of political expediency, is more of a vote of no confidence on the Nigerian anti-graft agencies.
Recall that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC), are organs of the Federal Government dedicated to checking financial crimes, corruption and misappropriation of public funds.
It is the view of many that the local government autonomy suit and the concomitant verdict could not have arisen if the anti corruption agencies had been alive to their responsibilities of enforcing financial probity and accountability in the local government system. Nigeria is supposedly a federation.
Administratively, federations consist of the federal or central government and the governments of the respective federating units or states. Beyond these, other administrative set-ups are subsumed under the federating units or states like Sections 7 and 162 of the 1999 CFRN has done in the Nigerian Federation.
Among all the federations in the world, there is the highest concentration of power in the Federal Government of Nigeria. Hence, the agitations for true federation or the devolution of powers of the Federal Government of Nigeria on the governments of the states of Nigeria.
Others want a return to the regional administrative set-ups. The local government financial autonomy verdict and the call in some quarters for the transfer of the power to conduct local government area elections from the states to the Federal Government is an attack on true federalism; and it has capacity to turn Nigeria into a unitary state with a unitary constitution and government!
A man of deft political acumen at the echelon of power as Nigeria currently has can easily use the council chairmen and councilors to control or manipulate access to political offices or power. This ‘political value chain’ is condemnable for the fact that it will naturally foist a totalitarian government on the country and possibly make the helmsman a dictator.
Therefore, this piece is designed as a resource material for the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, the State Houses of Assembly and all patriots. It is intended to stir them to rise and halt this inglorious drift to totalitarianism by mobilising support against further mutation of 1999 CFRN to give more powers to the already too powerful Federal Government.