The Supreme Court made a landmark ruling on Thursday, July 11, 2019, that the Federal Government must henceforth pay funds allocated to the local governments in Nigeria directly to those administered by democratically elected officials. Delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the ruling is said to rid off an executive or constitutional violation that dates back so many years and is binding on a new way of administration for local government funds in the country. Here are the six key takeaways from the judgment:
1. Unconstitutional Practice:
The Supreme Court banned the practice whereby state governors receive and withhold funds meant to be allocated to LGAs as illegal and unconstitutional. The practice, which has been in action for over two decades, was a violation of the constitutional provisions on local government autonomy.
2. Violation of the Constitution:
The court held that the withholding of LGA funds by state governments and other entities amounts to a misapplication of the funds, as Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution had succinctly made provisions for the allocation and transfer of the funds to the local government areas.
3. Direct Payment of Funds:
The court mandated that funds for LGAs be directly paid from the federation account into the banks of the local governments, bypassing the state governments. This means funds will have to be paid directly to the local governments lest the aim of their being dispatched—that is, development and administration of the locals—should go astray.
4. Democratic Governance Mandate:
The judgment therefore emphasized the need for democratic governance at the grassroots. The court ruled that a governor’s act in appointing caretaker committees to run LGA affairs is unconstitutional, reiterating that LGAs must be run by democratically elected people.
5. Obligation of States:
The judgment also held that the 36 states are under an obligation to ensure democratic governance at the grassroots level. This means they have to allow for the election of local government officials and that LGAs operate independently of undue state interference.
6. Repulse of Governors’ Objections:
The Supreme Court dismissed the objection filed by state governors against the competence of a suit before it by the federal government.
This was to secure financial autonomy for LGAs, with the court’s dismissal of the governors’ objections paving the way for enforcement.
The ruling is therefore considered one major step forward toward enhancing the autonomy of the local government and for money allocated for local development to be utilised as it should.
That decision of the Supreme Court is for strengthening democratic processes at the grassroots level also, apart from upholding constitutional provisions. Further developments will ensue as Federal Government and state governments adjust to fall in line with this Landmark ruling.