In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has affirmed the autonomy of local governments, a ruling that has sparked significant debate and controversy across the nation. This judgment, hailed by some as a victory for grassroots democracy, has also faced criticism from various quarters, raising questions about its implications for federalism and governance in Nigeria.

The apex Court’s judgment reaffirmed the constitutional status of local governments as independent entities, emphasizing their right to receive direct allocations from the Federation Allocation Account. The ruling was in response to a series of legal challenges questioning the autonomy of local governments. The court highlighted that local governments should operate as the third tier of government, distinct from state governments, and should enjoy financial independence.

This ruling is expected to strengthen the administrative capacity and governance at the local level, theoretically enabling better delivery of public services and more responsive governance. Former President Muhammadu Buhari had sought to rescue the councils from the governors’ firm grip by issuing Executive Order 10, which he signed on 22 May 2020, to direct funds straight to the councils, the state legislature, and the judiciary. But state governors challenged his authority in a case filed at the Supreme Court. The former President was not as lucky as the apex court in a split judgment in 2022, the Court said former President Buhari overreached his powers.

While signing the executive order, former President Buhari said: “If the money from the Federation Account to the state is about N100 million, N50 million will be sent to the chairman (of local government), but he (the chairman) will sign that he received N100 million. The governor will pocket the balance and share it with whoever he wants to share it with. Then, the chairman of the local government must pay salaries. Go to hell with development. When he pays salaries, he will put the balance in his pocket. This is what’s happening in Nigeria.”

But the federal government under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, his successor, sought to confront the problem constitutionally by suing the governors. The Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, Senior Advocate of Nigeria ( SAN) approached the Supreme Court in May 2024 seeking to compel the governors of the 36 federating states to grant full autonomy to local governments in their domains in a suit marked SC/CV/343/2024. The suit, anchored on 27 grounds, accused the state governors of gross misconduct and abuse of power. He prayed that the Supreme Court would make an order stating that funds standing to the credit of local governments from the Federation Account should be paid directly to the local governments rather than through the state governments.

Proponents of the judgment argue that it will enhance grassroots development and democratization. By ensuring that local governments receive their allocations directly, the ruling is expected to reduce the bureaucratic bottlenecks and corruption often associated with state-level controls. Advocates believe this will lead to more effective governance, increased accountability, and better resource management at the local level.

Dr Ahmed Raji, SAN said that starving the local government areas of funds could lead to anarchy.“The local council areas need money to run the affairs of government. You cannot starve them of funds in any way because it can lead to the breakdown of law and order.

“When you withhold money meant for the running of the affairs of the government, then you are calling for anarchy, so this simply means there is no power in the federal government or state government to withhold LG funds as pronounced by the Supreme Court.”

Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN said the court’s judgment asking the federal government to pay allocations due to local government areas directly to their account, thereby abolishing the old practices of State-Local Government Joint Account, is timely and courageous “what the judgment has done is more like interpreting Section 162 of the Constitution, which provides for a joint State-Local Government Account.

“In this case, money is normally paid to state governors’ accounts and then for them to disburse to the local governments for them to share. But what has been happening is that, as I noted in 2020, over three years ago, the state governors have been behaving like bandits, waylaying local governments’ funds along the way and thus impoverishing them, leaving them with nothing to work, just a little for salary, and nothing to work for the people whom they represent”, he stressed.

Former president of the Nigerian Bar Association, Chief Olisa Agbakoba SAN described the judgment as a landmark decision that will free the local governments from the undue influences of the governors. “It’s a landmark decision that frees the constitutionally prescribed local government from the stranglehold of their state governors. One can only hope that the financial autonomy granted to local governments will be used to benefit the communities.”

Another legal luminary, Mr. Femi Falana SAN expressed support for the Supreme Court’s decision, instructing state governments to refrain from controlling the federal allocations of local governments. He argued that the judgment was not meant to strip the state government of its influence on the LGAs, but rather, would promote accountability at the grassroots level.

Hear him: “A lot depends on the Nigerian people because right now, it is difficult to talk about the autonomy of the local government. The state’s electoral commissions are manned by appointees of the state governors. And what they have done over the years is to manipulate the local government elections in a way, that only the candidates of the ruling parties would be declared the winners.

“Now, local governments would be expected to fix some schools, tar some roads, and even pay some workers. So, it is not that state governments will no longer participate in the affairs of the local governments…the state governments should create state economic councils and allow the local government to participate in them, just like they are part of the federal economic council.

He, however, advised state governors to study the judgment:” so that everybody will appreciate that what the Supreme Court has done is to promote public accountability at the grassroots levels.”

Civil society organizations and local government officials have widely welcomed the decision, viewing it as a step towards fulfilling the constitutional mandate of local government autonomy. They argue that this autonomy is crucial for addressing the unique developmental challenges of local communities, promoting inclusive growth, and deepening democracy in Nigeria.

Despite the optimism surrounding the ruling, the decision has not been without controversy. Critics, particularly state governors and their supporters, argue that the judgment could lead to fragmentation and inefficiency in governance. They contend that the ruling undermines the oversight role of state governments and could result in a lack of coordination between state and local governments.

Former Governor of Delta state, Chief James Onanefe Ibori, sharply disagreed with the Apex court, saying the judgment had dealt a severe setback to the principle of federalism as defined by section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution.

According to him, the court’s ruling on the matter is an assault on true federalism.

His words: “Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the federal and state governments and the local government councils in each state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.

“Section 6 provides further clarity on the subject matter: Each State shall maintain a special account to be called “State Joint Local Government Account” into which shall be paid all allocations to the Local Government Councils of the State from the Federation Account and the Government of the State,” Chief Ibori argued.

One of the nation’s newspapers of record, The Punch newspaper, on 16 July 2024 wrote an editorial titled: “Supreme Court got it wrong on LG autonomy”, the newspaper said the Supreme Court erred in its judgment as the LGs have no place in a federal constitution. Therefore, one of the fundamental flaws of the 1999 Constitution is to list the 774 LGs in it. This must be corrected.

According to the newspaper, in federal jurisdictions, such as the United States, India, and Brazil, the constitution recognises only the center and province/region/state governments. States fund the LGs as the councils are under them. Thus, the Supreme Court judgment is a conspiracy against federalism.

The newspaper frowned that the Court ruled that state governors do not have the power to dissolve elected LG councils and replace them with caretaker committees. This violates Section 7(1) of the Constitution. While we agree with the justices that the councils should be run only by democratically elected officials, the question of financial autonomy for LGs has no place in a federal constitution.

“The State and Local Government Joint Account was created because council bosses were looting funds and not paying primary school teachers. Since that account was created, primary school teachers are no longer owed salaries. Sadly, paying the monthly allocation directly to the councils would not stop the diversion of council funds”, the newspaper argued.

It advised the Bola Tinubu administration that rather than chasing shadows at the Supreme Court, it should focus on the political and economic restructuring of the country along the lines of true federalism.

“Federalism, as envisioned by the founding fathers, was intended to balance power between the central government and the constituent units, ensuring efficient governance, fostering development, and accommodating the country’s vast ethnic, cultural, and regional diversity” the newspaper stressed, adding that: “the journey towards federalism has been fraught with challenges, inconsistencies, and deviations from its core principles. Nigeria’s federal structure was designed to prevent the concentration of power at the centre and promote regional autonomy”.

State governors have expressed concerns about the potential for increased corruption and mismanagement at the local government level, given the limited capacity and resources available to some local governments. They argue that state oversight is necessary to ensure that local governments adhere to national development plans and maintain fiscal discipline.

Furthermore, some legal experts have raised questions about the practical implementation of the judgment without an amendment to the Constitution.

The Supreme Court’s judgment on local government autonomy marks a pivotal moment in Nigeria’s democratic journey. While it promises to empower local governments and enhance grassroots governance, the controversy and challenges surrounding its implementation cannot be ignored. As Nigeria navigates this complex terrain, it will be crucial to address the underlying issues and ensure that the ruling translates into tangible benefits for local communities across the nation.

Effective implementation of this judgment will require a collaborative effort between all tiers of government. The federal government must take the lead in ensuring that adequate resources and support are provided to local governments. State governments, despite their reservations, must work constructively to facilitate the transition and foster a cooperative relationship with local authorities.

Moreover, the role of civil society and the media will be critical in monitoring the process, holding local governments accountable, and ensuring that the newfound autonomy translates into improved public services and development outcomes.

In essence, the success of this landmark judgment will depend on the commitment of all stakeholders to uphold the principles of decentralization, transparency, and accountability. If managed effectively, this ruling could set a precedent for deeper democratic reforms and more inclusive governance in Nigeria. However, failure to address the potential pitfalls could exacerbate existing challenges and undermine the gains of local government autonomy.

As the nation moves forward, the eyes of the public and the international community will be on Nigeria, watching how this significant legal decision shapes the future of its federalism and the well-being of its citizens. More importantly, Nigerians want to see how this problem would solve the myriad of problems associated with the Local Government Areas. Will they improve on delivery of services and be more responsive attending to the challenges facing the people at the grassroots level?