S’Court’s judgment fails to seal LG autonomy seven months after verdict

 even months after the Supreme Court delivered its landmark ruling granting full financial autonomy to local governments, implementation remains stalled amid political maneuvering and bureaucratic bottlenecks, ISMAEEL UTHMAN and OLUFEMI ADEDIRAN report

The implementation of local government autonomy has faced numerous hurdles seven months after the Supreme Court judgment.

Legal practitioners have expressed concerns that the delayed implementation of the Supreme Court ruling was disrespectful to the apex court and showed how the Nigerian government often seeks to circumvent judicial decisions.

On July 11, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered that local government allocations must be paid directly to them, as requested by the Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, in a suit filed at the court.

Fagbemi had instituted the lawsuit on behalf of the Federal Government, seeking to grant full autonomy and direct funding to all 774 local government councils in the country.

He urged the apex court to issue an order prohibiting state governors from unilaterally, arbitrarily, and unlawfully dissolving democratically elected local government leaders.

However, the 36 state governments, through their attorneys general, filed a counterclaim, arguing that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case.

They further contended that the AGF lacked the locus standi to institute the suit on behalf of the local governments.

Despite this, the Supreme Court affirmed its jurisdiction. In a judgment read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the court ruled that states’ retention of local government funds is unconstitutional.

“The demands of justice require a progressive interpretation of the law. It is the position of this court that the federation can pay local government allocations directly to the LGs or through the states.

“In this case, since payment through states has not worked, the justice of this matter demands that LG allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the LGs,” the court ruled.

The Supreme Court further granted an order of injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, or privies from spending local government allocations. It also declared that no state government should receive funds meant for local governments.

Additionally, the court ruled that state governments have no power to appoint caretaker committees and that only democratically elected local government councils are legally recognised.

“A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable,” the court affirmed.

Above all, the apex court directed the Federal Government to comply with the judgment immediately.

“An immediate compliance with this judgment,” the Supreme Court ordered.

However, rather than complying with the Supreme Court verdict promptly, both the Federal and state governments have been manoeuvring around the ruling and making efforts to circumvent its implementation.

Legal practitioners have raised concerns that the Federal Government’s reluctance to enforce the Supreme Court’s ruling undermines the authority of the judiciary.

The Supreme Court is the final appellate jurisdiction, and its judgments are binding on all lower courts and concerned parties, in accordance with Section 233 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Sunday PUNCH notes that the first attempt to frustrate the implementation of local government autonomy was the three-month moratorium granted to governors by the Federal Government in August 2024.

The Federal Government and state governors had agreed to the moratorium over concerns regarding its impact on salary payments, operational viability, and the conduct of local government elections, among other issues.

As a result, direct payment of allocations to local governments was scheduled to commence in October 2024.

In anticipation of the deadline, many states hurriedly conducted local government elections, with ruling parties in those states winning most of the contests.

In further attempts to frustrate LG financial autonomy, some governors moved to enact laws requiring local government councils in their states to remit allocations into a joint account.

For instance, the Anambra State House of Assembly passed the Local Government Administration Bill 2024, despite condemnation from civil society groups and opposition parties, including Labour Party lawmakers in the assembly.

Defending the bill, Governor Charles Soludo argued that the law did not contravene the Supreme Court’s ruling on local government autonomy.

He challenged anyone who disagreed to seek redress in court.

The controversy surrounding the implementation of local government autonomy deepened when the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation claimed that it was not directly responsible for enforcing the Supreme Court’s judgment.

According to the AGF, the responsibility for implementing the ruling and ensuring direct allocation to local governments falls under the purview of the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation.

This stance has further fueled concerns that the Federal Government may be deliberately stalling compliance with the Supreme Court’s order.

Adding to the complexities, the Central Bank of Nigeria introduced a new condition requiring all 774 local governments to provide at least two years of audited financial reports before they could receive their allocations directly.

The apex bank insisted that the local governments must meet this requirement before opening accounts for direct remittance of their allocations.

The condition raised concerns among local government officials and legal experts, who argue that it serves as yet another bureaucratic hurdle to delay the implementation of financial autonomy.

Meanwhile, the Federal Government, through the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Public Communications, Sunday Dare, assured that local governments would start receiving direct allocations by January 2025.

However, there has been no official update on local government autonomy, leaving stakeholders worried about further delays.