Seven months after the Supreme Court delivered its landmark ruling granting full financial autonomy to local governments, implementation remains stalled amid political maneuvering and bureaucratic bottlenecks, ISMAEEL UTHMAN and OLUFEMI ADEDIRAN report

The implementation of local government autonomy has faced numerous hurdles seven months after the Supreme Court judgment.

Legal practitioners have expressed concerns that the delayed implementation of the Supreme Court ruling was disrespectful to the apex court and showed how the Nigerian government often seeks to circumvent judicial decisions.

On July 11, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered that local government allocations must be paid directly to them, as requested by the Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, in a suit filed at the court.

Fagbemi had instituted the lawsuit on behalf of the Federal Government, seeking to grant full autonomy and direct funding to all 774 local government councils in the country.

He urged the apex court to issue an order prohibiting state governors from unilaterally, arbitrarily, and unlawfully dissolving democratically elected local government leaders.

However, the 36 state governments, through their attorneys general, filed a counterclaim, arguing that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case.

They further contended that the AGF lacked the locus standi to institute the suit on behalf of the local governments.

Despite this, the Supreme Court affirmed its jurisdiction. In a judgment read by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the court ruled that states’ retention of local government funds is unconstitutional.

“The demands of justice require a progressive interpretation of the law. It is the position of this court that the federation can pay local government allocations directly to the LGs or through the states.

“In this case, since payment through states has not worked, the justice of this matter demands that LG allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the LGs,” the court ruled.

The Supreme Court further granted an order of injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, or privies from spending local government allocations. It also declared that no state government should receive funds meant for local governments.

Additionally, the court ruled that state governments have no power to appoint caretaker committees and that only democratically elected local government councils are legally recognised.

“A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable,” the court affirmed


https://punchng.com/scourts-judgment-fails-to-seal-lg-autonomy-seven-months-after-verdict/