As the deadline approaches for the inter-ministerial committee’s report on implementing the Supreme Court ruling regarding Local Government Areas (LGAs) autonomy, state governors are intensifying their efforts to delay the enforcement of the court’s decision.
The 10-member committee, led by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume, is expected to finalize its findings and submit the report by October 13. This comes in the wake of a regulation by the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) under former President Muhammadu Buhari, which prohibited transactions involving Joint Accounts of State and Local Governments starting June 1, 2019. The directive mandated that funds be directly allocated to local government accounts and limited cash withdrawals to N500,000 per day, imposing penalties on non-compliant banks.
Despite this, governors, represented by the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, opposed the regulation, ultimately leading the NFIU to relent.
In May, the Federal Government, through Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi, initiated legal action to challenge the governors’ control over federal allocations designated for LGAs. The lawsuit aimed to prevent state governors from arbitrarily dissolving elected local councils and replacing them with caretaker committees. The AGF contended that the constitution necessitates a democratically elected local government structure.
On July 11, 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a pivotal ruling affirming the financial autonomy of Nigeria’s 774 LGAs, declaring it unconstitutional for governors to manage and withhold funds intended for these councils. The court also instructed the Accountant-General of the Federation to ensure direct payment of LGA allocations to their respective accounts, deeming the failure of the 36 states to do so unconstitutional.
On August 20, the Federal Government formed the inter-ministerial committee to implement the Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy. The committee comprises key figures, including the Minister of Finance, the Attorney General, and representatives from various government bodies.
In his recent address marking Nigeria’s 64th Independence anniversary, President Bola Tinubu affirmed that his administration is committed to upholding the financial autonomy of local governments, as mandated by the Supreme Court. Sources within the Presidency have indicated that governors are exerting pressure on high-ranking officials to ease the implementation of the ruling. Despite this, the President remains steadfast in his commitment to enforce the Supreme Court’s decision.
Hakeem Ambali, National President of the National Union of Local Government Employees, confirmed that the committee is on track to submit its report by October 11. He expressed confidence that the implementation would commence as mandated.
In response to the governors’ attempts to obstruct the enforcement of the Supreme Court ruling, civil society organizations, including the Centre for Accountability and Open Leadership and the United Global Resolve for Peace, have urged the Federal Government to expedite the implementation process. Debo Adeniran, Chairman of CACOL, criticized the governors for their self-serving motives and called for the unwavering application of the law.
Olaseni Shalom, Executive Director of UGRP, suggested that the President should propose a bill to clarify the legal framework around LGA autonomy and enhance fiscal independence at the state level. He emphasized the need for negotiations between the presidency and state governments to resolve the ongoing tension regarding the law’s enforcement.
Peter Ahmeh, National Secretary of the Coalition of United Political Parties, underscored the urgency of implementing the Supreme Court’s ruling without delay, asserting that the financial autonomy of local governments is essential for accountability and transparency in governance.
As the situation evolves, civil society advocates continue to call for immediate action to ensure local governments can operate independently and effectively, free from undue influence by state authorities.
