Chief Ibori and Afenifere are relying on Section 162 in the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which authorizes joint operation of LGA funds with the state government which the Supreme Court judgment seems to have obviated.
Justifiably, they worry that the concept of the Federal Government paying LG allocations to them directly would shift the control of LGs from states to the Federal Government and it would amount to FGN throwing state governments under the bus while it takes over the driving seat and steering wheels of the bus.
They suspect that it would make administrators at the subnational and grassroots level be at constant loggerheads as state governments would no longer have any hold on LGs except through the state Houses of Assembly and state electoral commission in charge of conducting elections into LGs, which is an equivalent of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, at the national level.
Then again, the supporters of the Supreme Court ruling would argue that it is a similar type of relationship that the Federal Government has with the states that have just been given the Supreme Court imprimatur.
So just as the FGN has no hand in how states manage their resources also should states not be involved in the management of LGs funds?
Of course, the concern of those opposed to the direct payment to LGs has a valid point because state governors would no longer have control over politics at the grassroots level. As the conventional wisdom goes: ‘He who pays the piper calls the tune’.
But is it not true that the FGN has no control over states except through their respective political party structures?
Again is it right to assume our country is operating a three-tier government as the Supreme Court has ruled?
If the ruling by the Supreme Court negates or contradicts the spirit and letter of Section 162 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that demands that a joint account committee be established between the state government and LG to manage the funds allocated to the latter alongside the former, would that not boil down to a clash between the legislative and the judicial branches of government that puts the lawmakers in conflict with the one that interprets it?
Perhaps owing to the propinquity that currently exists between the three arms of government in the current dispensation, there may be no cause for alarm right now.
However, what happens if and when a National Assembly, NASS, that is unfriendly to the executive branch emerges? Would it not question the authority of the judiciary which is supposed to only interpret the law, but appear to be vitiating the law already made and contained in the statutes book by giving a ruling that undermines the Section 162 embedded in the 1999 constitution?
In light of the above, would it not lead to a lacuna of the sort that arose when then Nigerian President Umar Yar’Adua passed away in 2010 on active duty and without transferring power to then Vice President Goodluck Jonathan and there arose a leadership cul-de-sac?
As it may be recalled, what amounts to a constitutional crisis had to be resolved through the instrumentality of the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ by NASS under the watch of Senator David Mark as Senate President.
Is such a situation looming except the implementation of the new Supreme Court ruling law is warehoused until the ongoing review of the 1999 constitution is concluded with Section 162 which the Supreme Court ruling conflicts with expunged?
Also, that is even assuming NASS votes and affirms that the LGs can receive their allocation directly and our country is operating three tiers of government despite all the fears that necessitated the introduction of the concept of joint account with state governments, which without doubt is being abused by some governors hence the popular acceptance of the epochal Supreme Court ruling.
In any case, the reason that LGs would not be trusted to receive the funds directly still exists.
The fear is that leaders at that grassroots level lack the ability and capacity to manage such huge funds because those in leadership at that level have been bereft of experience for managing such huge financial resources of which they lack the pedigree.
Obviously, the fear is validated by the quality of people, as earlier stated they are usually cronies and hangers-on who are incompetent, yet governors hand them the reins of power in the third tier which is the closest to the people and should be led by experienced men/women to make the much craved positive impact in the rural areas which is home to a majority of Nigerians.
That is even as many political observers allege that some governors ‘anoint’ their lackeys and even thugs as LGA chairmen and councilors on purpose which is to enable the unscrupulous governors to continue to have their sticky fingers in the tills.
It is for the same reason that they prefer to constitute caretaker committees in replacement of elected LGA chairmen and councilors who are costlier and time-consuming to produce.
In any case, after many governors were indicted and even convicted on account of spending LGA funds, they devised a new method to beat the law which is that LG money after being withdrawn is deposited in cash at designated locations in specified buildings from where it is picked up by another official. That is one clever way of ensuring that there is no record of anyone conveying money or receiving funds on behalf of the governor since the funds are collected in cash and deposited somewhere without interactions between the fellow that deposits the money cargo and the one that picks it up after the bringer has departed.
It was such an ingenious fraud process that happens without electronic or paper trails because they have been intentionally bypassed.
To counter that nefarious strategy, the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, NFIU, issued a directive to the effect that not more than N500 million can be collected daily from the joint account between state governments and LGs where the 20.60% of FAAC allocation to LGs are domiciled and directed banks to comply with the order.
One has no idea whether the directive was complied with by the relevant parties before the game-changing Supreme Court ruling.
But one redeeming feature in the seemingly high risk of paying LG funds directly to the councils without oversight from state governments, which presupposes that LG officials would likely be spending recklessly the 20.60% allocated to the 774 councils from FAAC is that, unlike state governors, LG chairmen who are the equivalent of governors are not constitutionally immune.
While governors, who owing to the immunity clause in the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria protect the president and governors in our country from being prosecuted during their tenure in office, so they can only be charged to court after their tenure expires, if any LG chairman or councilor engages in corruption he can get arrested immediately and arraigned in a court of law because they do not enjoy any immunity.
So, as a panacea to the financial recklessness at the state level not being extended to the LG stage, the EFCC, ICPC, NFIU, and other financial crime prevention agencies of government should show intense interest in how the LG funds are managed.
NFIU’s prohibition of withdrawal of LG funds of not more than half a million naira per day should be enforced and the civil society organisations especially those focused on finance such as BudgetlT, Statisense, etc that are fast springing up in our country should redouble efforts in tracking LG funds to ensure they are properly utilized.
In liberal democracies, it is the social crusade organizations of the sort earlier cited that drive positive socioeconomic change.
They are regarded as the fifth realm of the estate after the media, which is the 4th.
In fact, the preponderance of civil society organizations is one of the yardsticks for measuring how liberal democracy is being practised in a country.
It is commendable that their presence has been growing since the days of the Civil Liberties Organization, CLO led by Dr. Olisa Agbokoba in the 1980s during the struggle to restore democracy to our country. It ranges from the ones with omnibus functions to specialized civil society organizations like SERAP, Enough Is Enough, etc involved in civil and human rights issues to the ones focused on financial matters.
The ball is now in the court of the lawmakers in the National Assembly to score the goal of a democracy that delivers dividends to the masses and not to only the few privileged.
As the legislators review the 1999 constitution of the FGN, they might as well look into the crisis brewing between state governors and our monarchs.
Right now, in the pantheon of traditional rulers, there appears to be a mystic flowing through the air as Bob Marley, the reggae maestro, once crooned. So, while the review of the 1999 constitution by NASS is ongoing, perhaps the arrangement through which traditional rulers are paid directly should also be subjected to a review so that directly paying the stipends allocated to our royal fathers would be the new order.
That would grant our traditional rulers a bit of respite and independence from the grip of governors or even LG chairmen who have lately been ruffling their feathers in the pantheon of our traditional institutions.
That is because traditional rulers are currently at loggerheads with state governors who they accuse of not adequately funding them while governors allege that chairmen of traditional councils who receive funds on behalf of their members fail to equitably disburse the funds to their colleagues, resulting in friction.
We see that in Edo State where the state governor, Godwin Obaseki, has been sued by one of the chiefs for withholding or not paying the remunerations to the traditional rulers directly, rather than passing their emoluments through the chairman of the council. HRM Omo n’Oba N’Edo Uku Akpolokpolo, the Oba of Benin.
Another example of the overarching power of governors over traditional rulers is the recent rise in the spate of dethronement and enthronement of traditional rulers typical of which is the case in Kano where Emir Sanusi Lamido Sanusi was enthroned and dethroned by two successive governors, the immediate past Umaru Ganduje, and the incumbent Abba Kabir Yusuf.
With the dust yet to settle as Kano, which currently has two traditional rulers at the same time which is unprecedented, the virus wracking the traditional institutions seems to be spreading around as the ancient throne of the Sultan of Sokoto who is the leader of the Fulani caliphate is looking like the next point where the dethronement hurricane may be making its next landfall.
That is if the current rumble in the land as evidenced by the recent law passed by the Sokoto State Assembly which had stripped the Sultan of the power to appoint district heads is anything to go by.
In my view, the new Sokoto government policy on the traditional council is equivalent to stripping the president or governor of the right to appoint ministers or commissioners, respectively.
Being divested of that authority to appoint district head, the Sultan’s power would be highly diminished because loyalty would be to those who appointed them. He who pays the piper calls the tune rings true in the instance above.
As the saying goes, ‘what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander’.
So, let our monarchs receive their emoluments directly from the FAAC account.
The current chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, who is the governor of Kwara State, has stated that the ruling by the Supreme Court is welcome, adding that his members are awaiting the details.
But he also quipped that in the end, LGs may have the wrong end of the stick by alluding that it is state governments that have been augmenting or propping up LGs.
It would be amazing to see how that is so because some state governor, of course not all, have been combining their 26.72% with LGAs’ 20.60%, giving them a ballpark figure above 47.32% versus the Federal Government’s 52.68 percent of Federation Account, FAAC.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s decision on LGs autonomy is a step forward in our democratic journey which is better than the present situation whereby what is supposed to be a third tier of government has been emasculated in the past 25 years of the return of multiparty democracy.
Any gaps or discomfitures inherent in the apex court ruling would be ironed out between the three branches of government, the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary, for the greater good of all Nigerians.