- Bolaji Adebiyi
The political option becomes expedient in the face of the difficulty the constitution amendments needed to align properly the councils as an autonomous third tier of government may have. To consolidate the financial autonomy of the councils, they must have political autonomy, which can only be brought about by a free and fair electoral process. This is impossible without an electoral reform that will whittle down the powers of the governors over the composition of the state election management bodies.
Seyi Makinde, governor of Oyo State, could hardly conceal his anger. The landmark judgment of the Supreme Court asserting the financial independence and the democratic rights of local governments in the country had riled him. He said the apex court’s decision was a distraction from the substantive issue of lack of productivity in the country, adding that the judgment was misdirected as it gave the impression that the Federal Government was superior to the states.
Although his outburst contradicted the reaction of Abdulrahman Abdulrazak, chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, who said the governors were thrilled by the judgment because it had removed a huge burden off their necks, it betrayed the emperor-like attitude of state chief executives to governance. Overindulged since the advent of the Fourth Republic, governors had become Lords of the Manor, iron-gripping their states to the extent that citizens’ right of dissent had been virtually annulled.
The Supreme Court had on penultimate Thursday interpreted Section 162 (6) and Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution, as altered, and declared that the finances of the local councils should not only go directly to their accounts but also that only democratic councils are entitled to funds from the Federation Account. The judgment was widely hailed by public policy analysts who said it would liberate the councils from the iron grip of the governors, who had taken undue advantage of the lacuna in both constitutional provisions.
Without doubt, the apex court applied the progressive interpretation rule to settle the dispute brought forward for adjudication by the Federal Government. It could have ruled otherwise since the wording of Section 162 (6) is clear that council funds are to pass through the State Joint Local Government Accounts. But given the proven abuse of that provision by the governors, the court was left with no other option than to enforce the spirit of the Constitution, which intended the funds to be utilised by the councils for their constituents’ benefit.
To consolidate the financial autonomy of the councils, they must have political autonomy, which can only be brought about by a free and fair electoral process. This is impossible without an electoral reform that will whittle down the powers of the governors over the composition of the state election management bodies. So, will the governors allow an amendment process that will reduce their influence? It is not likely.
President Bola Tinubu deserves commendation for authorising the suit filed earlier in the year to seek a less complex way to free the councils from the stranglehold of the governors. About two attempts to amend the Constitution and delete Section 162 (6) that created the joint accounts, through which the governors had been pilfering the council funds, had been frustrated by them, forcing President Muhammadu Buhari to sign Executive Order 10 in May 2020.
The order, which sought to pay council, legislative and judicial funds directly to their respective accounts and withhold funds for undemocratic councils, was vigorously opposed by the governors, who claimed that it was an unconstitutional interference in the affairs of the states. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court upheld their legal challenge and ruled that the president overreached his powers by issuing the order.
Meanwhile, as the governors withheld the council funds and its debilitating effects on the standard of living of the people at the grassroots manifested in the form of the lack of basic social amenities, including basic education, health and road, it is the president that the suffering people held responsible for their woes.
Whilst it is tempting to say the president deserved the wrong accusation because of the overbearing character of the Federal Government, which dabbles into virtually everything, including basic policies, the more sobering realisation is that it offered evidence of the general lack of presence of the governors in most of their domains.
The evidence is there for all to see. Beyond the government-reserved areas (GRAs) of the capital of most states, there is hardly any evidence of governance in most parts of the states. All sectors – education, health, housing, and agriculture – are in shambles, raising the question of what exactly the governors utilised their states’ financial resources for in the face of massive underdevelopment in the polity.
To the extent that functional councils could catalyse rapid development at the lower levels, the president needs to apply politics to persuade the governors not to resist the impending reform that the judicial interpretation has set in motion. One way of doing this is to enlist his All Progressives Congress to support the initiative by reining in its governors who control 20 of the 36 states of the federation. This should not be a tall order since it is in the enlightened self-interest of the party.
So, Tinubu’s ingenuous approach in seeking and getting a progressive, if not activist, judicial interpretation of the much-abused sections of the Constitution deserves praise. However, he would have to do more to enforce the decision of the apex court, given the veiled hostility of the governors who are known to use underhand tactics to beat the law and have their ways.
To the extent that functional councils could catalyse rapid development at the lower levels, the president needs to apply politics to persuade the governors not to resist the impending reform that the judicial interpretation has set in motion. One way of doing this is to enlist his All Progressives Congress to support the initiative by reining in its governors who control 20 of the 36 states of the federation. This should not be a tall order since it is in the enlightened self-interest of the party. It is a no-brainer that the councils could become development centres if properly structured and funded. With the people having a new lease of life, the 2027 electioneering will be a less difficult exercise. The president could also approach the National Council of States in a bipartisan move for support.
The political option becomes expedient in the face of the difficulty the constitution amendments needed to align properly the councils as an autonomous third tier of government may have. To consolidate the financial autonomy of the councils, they must have political autonomy, which can only be brought about by a free and fair electoral process. This is impossible without an electoral reform that will whittle down the powers of the governors over the composition of the state election management bodies. So, will the governors allow an amendment process that will reduce their influence? It is not likely.
The failure of the political option will leave the president with the strict application of the law, using the appropriate institutions, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit to enforce probity in the affairs of the councils to serve as a deterrent to anyone who might be tempted to intimidate council chiefs to surrender their purses surreptitiously.
Bolaji Adebiyi is the media assistant to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu.
