By Owei Lakemfa
THE Supreme Court on Thursday, July 11, 2024 made landmark judgements on local government areas, LGAs, in the country. First, it gave the salutary order that they must be run by elected persons. Its second order that LGAs be paid directly by the centre, seeks more or less, to de-link them from the states they are located. In other words, it gives powers for the centre to deal directly with the LGAs. This of course, strengthens the unitary system of government which military regimes imposed from 1966. Conversely, it is another defeat for federalism which the Constitution proclaims as the system in the country.
Given the LGAs new autonomy, who provides their financial shortfall in terms of salary and pension payments? What happens if a governor asks the LGAs to pay rents, ground rents or taxes? Why won’t an ‘autonomous’ LGA control the traditional ruler it pays 5 per cent of its statutory allocations?
The reality is that many governors cause headache by tampering with local government funds, but the needed medication is analgesics. However, what the Supreme Court has done is to administer psychiatric medications which would cause hallucinations and memory loss such that can make the country forget that it is a federation.
Exactly one month before the Supreme Court judgement, I had argued at a symposium by the National Institute for Legislative and Democratic Studies, NILDS, Abuja that LGAs are not federating units. Rather, that they are administrative centres designed to bring governance closer to the populace.
A participant had challenged my assertion by stating that under the Constitution, LGAs are the third tier of government. He also quoted Section 7(1) which partly states that “…the Government of every state shall ensure their (LGAs) existence under the law…”
But, I explained that a federation presupposes federating units and a centre; in Nigeria, the federating units are the states. So, LGAs which are administrative centres, cannot be federating units. They are also not federating units of the states because the states are not federations. Secondly, that LGAs are the third level of government, does not grant them autonomy.
In fact, in reference to Section 7(1) the Supreme Court has by its judgement, amended the Constitution without going through the amendment procedures.
Some have argued that the Supreme Court is supreme, therefore, even if it is in error, its decision is the law. So, if the Supreme Court were to pronounce the Constitution illegal, null and void, that becomes the binding law? If some adventurers were to hold a gun to the head of the Supreme Court and orders it to proclaim the Constitution void, we are supposed to accept that as the binding law?
It is tragic that the bulk of those who 20 years ago, danced when the Supreme Court refused to nullify the March 27, 2004 elections conducted by Lagos State under then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu into the new local governments it had created, are those today, toasting the new Supreme Court judgement?
Lagos State, despite becoming a mega centre, had only 20 LGAs, whereas, the state government thought it needed more, and could fund them. So it created 37 additional LGAs and conducted elections into them. The Obasanjo administration rejected this and seized the allocations to Lagos State LGAs.
But the Tinubu government went before the Supreme Court to say the seizure is unconstitutional. Its then Attorney General, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, argued that neither the Federal Government nor the President is a trustee of the funds due to the LGAs. Rather, it argued, it is the state governments by virtue of Section 162 (5) of the Constitution. He argued that by virtue of Section 162, subsections 5-8, a state government is not merely a channel for passing funds allocated to the LGAs, but is also the trustee of the funds.
Governor Tinubu, as he then was, told the Supreme Court that it is the State House of Assembly that has the powers to create new LGAs and that once this is done, the creation stands. He added that the power of the National Assembly to amend the First Schedule of the Constitution to recognise such new LGAs, is merely consequential.
So, 20 years ago, President Tinubu was on the correct path on the issue of LGAs, not only on fund allocation, but also on the more fundamental issue of LGA creation.
The fact is that the LGAs are the creation and imposition of the military. The number of LGAs depended not on the needs of the people or the ability to fund them, but the clout of each General in the then ruling military councils. The more number of coup plotters each state had in the ruling councils, the more LGAs it got.
So, Lagos and Kano states, established on the same day, had 20 local governments each. Today, that old Kano State –including Jigawa – has a combined 71 LGAs while Lagos State still has 20. In 2023, Lagos State alone contributed N803.89 billion or 34 per cent of the total Internally Generated Revenue in the country. In comparison, Kano, Jigawa and 30 other states combined, contributed N900.39 billion or 38 per cent. So does it make sense for Lagos State to be forced in a democracy to maintain just 20 LGAs when it needs far more and can fund them?
Is it sensitive or commonsensical for Bayelsa State that produces a third of the wealth in the country to be forced to have a mere eight LGAs when a state like Oyo that contributes very little has 33?
The issue of LGAs has been reduced to mere financial allocation from free oil money and not their relevance, accountability or service to the people. If governors can fiddle with LGA funds, who says LGA Chairmen cannot? Does it make a difference if an overbearing governor is substituted by a dictatorial LGA Chairman?
Do we pretend to be unaware that in most LGAs since the military era, the funds that get to them are mainly shared by the Chairmen, Councillors and traditional rulers after wages of council workers might have been deducted?
Some of the basic challenges we face are poor governance, impunity, insecurity, corruption and lack of vision at all levels of government, including the LGAs.
I supported President Tinubu’s campaign 20 years ago that LGAs are state affairs and that each state has a right to create and fund any number of LGAs it needs. Today, the compass of his administration points to the centre taking indirect control of the LGAs and strengthening the unitary system.
A fundamental difference President Tinubu can make in contrast to other governments since the 1966 coup, is to champion the return of the country back to the pre-coup federal structure.
