The Nigeria 1999 Constitution (as amended) appears confused as to the status of the 774 Local Government Areas (LGAs) spread across the country. For instance, while Section 7(1) of the Constitution envisioned the local governments as the third tier of government, Section 162 (5) of the same constitution provides inter-alia direct allocation to the councils, it, however, subsumes it under the supervision of every state government, under the auspices of the State-Local Government Joint Account (SJLGA). a move that completely erodes the council areas of financial autonomy and makes them subservient to state-level authority.
Similarly, Article 7 of the same constitution empowers state governments to enact legislation about “the establishment, structure, composition and functions” of democratically elected local government councils. The Fourth Schedule also assigns some critical functions to local government. But the confusion is further extended by Section 7 (6b) which states that “the House of Assembly of a state shall make provisions for statutory allocation of public revenue to local government councils within the state”. …
Moreover, a close perusal of the Fourth Schedule of the 1999 constitution, where the functions of local government are listed, reveals that local government councils are effectively administrative units of state government. For example, item 2(d) referring to the functions of local councils provides that: “The functions of a local government council in the government of a state as respects the following matters… and such other functions as may be conferred on local government councils by the House of Assembly of the state” (writers’ emphasis). This provision grants state governments unfettered discretion to decide on what local governments within their state can or should do, or to usurp some of the specific local government functions set out in item 1 (a)–(k).
In a similar vein, the attempt by the reform of 1976 to accord financial autonomy to LGs was undermined by the 1999 Constitution through the introduction of the State Joint Local Government Account (SJLGA). In the 1976 reform, it was envisaged that democratic federalism would start by extending popular participation to the unit of government closest to the people, i.e. local government. This would require a workable degree of financial autonomy recognised by the constitution. However, the creation of the contentious SJLGA has frustrated attempts to establish the third-tier status of local governments.
If the constitution is confused as to the position of local government administration with regards to its power and authority, the 36 state governors don’t share in this confusion. State governors, without exception, see and run local governments as appendages (or at best an extension) of state authority. This finds expression in the control of funds meant for the supposed third-tier government. Federal allocations due to the local government are handed out based on the whims and caprices of the state chief executives. It is an open secret that most local governments across the country (if not all) do not receive their total entitlements even though such funds were duly released by the federal government.
Also, state governors not only decide when and how elections are held into offices at this level of government, no thanks to the appointment of State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs) officials, they decide who occupies these offices. Little wonder then that ruling parties at the state level, more often than not, win more than 95 per cent of available positions whenever a sitting governor is gracious enough to allow election at that level of government.
While there is no gainsaying the fact that the intendment of the framers of the Constitution is to bring governance closer to the grassroots, entrench citizen participation in the democratic process and inculcate democratic ethos to the grassroots and make the local government a bedrock for socio-economic and political development, facts on the ground are disappointedly quite the opposite.
As a way to strengthen this tier of administration and make it truly independent, several suggestions have been put forward. While a school of thought opined the abolition of SJLGA and remit allocations meant for the councils directly into their accounts, others have suggested that SIECs be scrapped and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) be made to handle elections into council areas.
These suggestions, and a lot of others, though appear plausible, are open to manipulation if implemented. The most viable option, in my candid view, is to expunge the 774 local government areas from the Constitution; make the council areas sole responsibility of the states where they exist. Since the advent of civil rule in 1999, several states have attempted (and still attempting) to create additional council areas in their states. These attempts have often met brick wall going by the provisions of Section 8(3) of the 1999 Constitution which envisaged a role for the National Assembly in the creation of new council areas by any state government. It’s no brainer, therefore, to say such a move has created tension in the polity. A case in mind is the seizure of funds meant for the 20 local government areas by the federal government during the administration of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. The “sin” committed by the Bola Ahmed Tinubu led Lagos State Government was the creation of additional 36 council areas. Several states have since toed the line of Lagos State.
Let states be at liberty to create as many council areas as desired. The funds meant for existing council areas be remitted to their states, and no one should bother his/her head as to whether the state government actually remits these funds to the concerned local governments, or how many local governments are indeed sharing the funds. The act of splitting applications meant for one local government with two or more council areas is fraudulent and antithetical to the spirit and letter of the 1999 Constitution.
Let the local governments be solely state affairs. So a particular state could decide to make every street in its state a local government. Similarly, the existing sharing formulas could be retained (although I have an issue with the structure of federalism being practised by the country). Ditto for the number of seats in state Houses of Assembly, Federal House of Representatives and Senate. Existing constituencies could be retained, regardless of the number of new council areas created by any state.
The constitution of the United States of America, where Nigeria’s presidential system of government is fashioned, does not mention local government. Instead, the 10th Amendment reserves authority giving powers to the states. It is instructive to further point out that in the United States, there is no such thing as a national election body. Even presidential and national assembly elections are conducted at level levels by state election commissions.
YOU SHOULD NOT MISS THESE HEADLINES FROM RULERS’ WORLD
“We had some really good, quality time there,” Jeff Bezos said of traveling outside of Earth with his brother Mark. Rather than autonomy, scrap Local Government Areas Rather than autonomy, scrap Local Government Areas Rather than autonomy, scrap Local Government Areas Rather than autonomy, scrap Local Government Areas.
%20appears%20confused%20as%20to%20the%20status%20of%20the%20774%20Local%20Government%20Areas%20(LGAs)%20spread%20across%20country){kind=link}