THAT SUPREME COURT RULING ON THE AUTONOMY OF NIGERIAN LOCAL GOVERNMENTS 

By James Pam, jamespam2004@gmail.com 16 July 2024

In May 2024, the Federal Government of Nigeria, through its Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, filed a suit at the Supreme Court of Nigeria against the 36 States of the Federation in which they prayed for several reliefs bordering on administrative and financial autonomy for Nigeria’s 768 Local governments. In its ruling of 11 July 2024 on the matter, the Supreme Court dealt several severe blows to Nigeria’s fragile federalism. Whatever is left of Nigeria’s brand of federalism, falls far short of the dictionary definition of that English noun. This article will review some of the Court’s consequential orders in the light of several constitutional provisions and the doctrine of the separation of powers. 

In the originating summons, the plaintiff’s attached affidavit averred that “the Constitution of Nigeria recognizes the Federal, States and Local Governments as three tiers of government.” In their ruling, the Supreme Court Justices agreed with the AGF & Minister of Justice that “the Constitution of Nigeria recognizes the federal, states and local Governments as the three tiers of government.” The Nigerian constitution may have created three levels of governance, but it clearly states that the federation is made up of 36 States and the FCT as the federating units  Chapter 1, Part 1, Section 2(2) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), which says,  

Nigeria shall be a federation of States and a Federal Capital Territory. 

Though Section 3(6) says, 

There shall be seven hundred and sixty-eight Local Government Areas in Nigeria,

Nowhere does the Constitution say these 768 LGAs are also part of the federating units or that they constitute the third tier of government in Nigeria. The LGAs were never envisaged by the drafters of the 1999 Constitution to be part(s) of the federating units.    

It’s a weighty decision for anyone, let alone someone like me who is not a lawyer, to question the decision of the apex court of the land with its trained, tried, tested and selected Justices in the country. But as a bona fide citizen of the country, I am at liberty to ask for further explanation where they leave me confused on a matter that appears clear and simple like a short 12-word sentence in the Constitution – Nigeria shall be a federation of States and a Federal Capital Territory. {S.2(2)} The drafters of the 1999 Constitution were aware of the standard definition of federalism as, 

a system of government in which the same territory is controlled by two levels of government (Cornel Law School), or 

the distribution of power in an organization (such as a government) between a central authority and the constituent units (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). 

The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria does not recognize the Nigerian federation to be a confused 3-tier  model.   

Further in its ruling, the Supreme Court issued a consequential order that the “LG allocations from the Federation Account should henceforth be paid directly to the LGAs.” How should we reconcile this to the clear provision of the 1999 Constitution in Section 162(6) which says, 

Each State shall maintain a special account to be called “State Joint Local Government Account” into which shall be paid all allocations to the Local Government Councils of the State from the Federation Account. 

Surely, without fresh constitutional amendments, this Supreme Court order should not be complied with by the Federal Government.      

The Supreme Court also said that “a State Government has no power to keep or control Local  Government money or funds” and ordered for, “an immediate compliance to this judgment.” Are these statements and orders not violations of the express provisions of the 1999 Constitution seeing that they did not suggest amendments to the Constitution first?        

According to the doctrine of Separation of powers, there are three main organs of the Government in a country, i.e. the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary, sometimes called the trias politica model. The Legislature performs the function of legislation; the Executive performs the function of execution and administration, while the Judiciary performs the function of adjudication. According to this doctrine, these three powers and functions of the Government must, in a free democracy, always be kept separate and exercised by separate organs of the Government. Thus, the Legislature cannot exercise executive or judicial power; the executive cannot exercise legislative or judicial; nor can the Judiciary exercise executive or legislative powers. To my understanding, the Nigerian Judiciary just violated this principle by attempting to perform strictly legislative functions. 

The Executive arm of government in Nigeria is already overloaded with too many powers and functions, which it has failed to execute satisfactorily. More powers and functions should be devolved to the States rather than the other way round. I, therefore, expect State Governors and the FAAC members not to comply with these Supreme Court orders unless and until the Legislative arm of government passes Bills into law that amend the extant Constitution in line with the orders.  

REV. JAMES G. PAM, 08037200640, jamespam2004@gmail.comBanker, Lecturer, Chaplain and Nation Builder. Author of several publications and books among which are: Middle Belt Ideology and Identity; North-ism versus the 2014 National Conference, Rethinking Nigeria’s Centralized Federalism and The Imperative of Restructuring Nigeria,A Review of the Secularity of the Nigerian 1999 Constitution (2014), Failures of the 2014 National Conference (2014), Proposals For The Amendment Of The Nigerian Constitution(2012), Fanning The Embers Of Religious Intolerance (2015), 100 Key Resolutions Of The 2014 National Conference (2015), Dissecting The Grazing Reserve Bill (2016) and Abolishing Regionalism Was A Mistake: Restructuring Is The Solution (2022).