IT’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR GOVERNORS TO HOLD LOCAL GOVT FUNDS–SUPREME COURT
…state governors have no power to elect caretaker committees
This page is supported by Shell Nigeria. Click here for
The Supreme Court on Thursday, in Abuja declared that it is unconstitutional for state governors to hold funds belonging to local government administrations.
Justice Emmanuel Agim led the panel of seven, in the judgment that declared that the 774 local government councils in the country should manage their funds themselves.
According to the Supreme Court, the power of the government is portioned into three arms of government, the federal, the state and the local government.
The court further declared that a state government has no power to elect a caretaker committee and a local government council is only recognisable with a democratically elected government.
“A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable,” the court said.
The court ruled that state governments are perpetuating a dangerous trend by refusing to allow democratically elected local government councils to function, instead appointing their loyalists who can only be removed by them
The Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Federal Government, seeking to grant full autonomy and direct funding to all 774 local government councils in the country.
The 36 state governments, through their attorneys general, filed a counterclaim, arguing that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case.
In Thursday’s ruling, Justice Agim affirmed that the AGF has the legal authority to initiate the lawsuit and uphold the constitution.
Justice Agim said, “I hold that the plaintiff’s request is hereby approved and all the reliefs granted.”
The suit is hinged on 27 grounds that the Constitution of Nigeria recognises federal, state and local government as three tiers of government.
It also averred that the three recognised tiers of government draw funds for their operation and functioning from the federation account created by the constitution.
The originating summons read, “That by the provisions of the constitution, there must be a democratically elected local government system and that the constitution has not made provisions for any other systems of governance at the local government level other than the democratically elected local government system.
“That in the face of the clear provisions of the constitution, the governors have failed and refused to put in place a democratically elected local government system even where no state of emergency has been declared to warrant the suspension of democratic institutions in the state.
“That the failure of the governors to put democratically elected local government system in place is a deliberate subversion of the 1999 Constitution which they and the President have sworn to uphold.
“That all efforts to make the governors comply with the dictates of the 1999 Constitution in terms of putting in place a democratically elected local government system has not yielded any result and that to continue to disburse funds from the federation account to governors for non-existing democratically elected local governments is to undermine the sanctity of the 1999 constitution.”
The AGF asked the apex court to invoke sections 1, 4, 5, 7, and 14 of the Constitution to declare that the governors and state houses of assembly are under obligation to ensure democratically elected systems at the third tier.
