By Ehichioya Ezomon
The contentious issue of autonomy for local government councils in Nigeria resonated in the past weeks in the Houses of Assembly in Rivers and Kwara states. On the burner was the power of state governors to dissolve democratically-elected councils, and sanction “recalcitrant” chairmen.
While the Rivers Assembly seems to hold the governor as cpable of doing anything with elected council chairpersons, its counterpart in Kwara seeks a complete break for the councils, in tandem with the provisions of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Lately, Rivers Governor Nyesom Wike suspended 12 council chairmen for “failing” to attend a state-organised function, an action that “contravenes” the Local Government Laws of the state.
The governor later sent an executive request to the Rivers House of Assembly, craving for a seal to the “fait accompli.” And pronto, the lawmakers endorsed the prayer retroactively.
The affected local government areas are: Okrika, Abua/Odual, Emohua, Degema, Khana, Gokana, Ahoada East, Ikwerre, Eleme, Andoni, Omuma and Ogu/Bolo.
Meanwhile, in Kwara, the House of Assembly has passed a Bill to amend the Kwara State Local Government (Amendment) Law No. 3 of 2006, which literally gave powers to the governor to dissolve, at will, elected local government councils.
In the new amendment, the House makes it “unconstitutional for the state governor to unilaterally dissolve democratically-elected local government councils in the state.”
Worthy of note is the differing reason(s) the respective legislature in Rivers and Kwara gave for its support of the matter before it. Debating the issue, the Rivers lawmakers argued that the governor’s action was in line with the Local Government Laws of 2018.
Besides, they held that the suspension of the council chairmen “will serve as a deterrence to those who may feel that they are above the law.”
Contrarily, the Kwara Assembly said the principal law, empowering the governor to dissolve democratically-elected councils, was out of sync with the amended 1999 Constitution, and a Supreme Court judgment regarding elections into and dissolution of councils.
During consideration of the general principles of the amendment bill, the legislators said section 18 of the 2006 Law contradicted Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantees that the local government councils shall be democratically-elected, and governed appropriately.
Section 7(1) states that: “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils.”
As it remains the mandate of a state to ensure the existence of local government councils, so long will the governor or House of Assembly deny autonomy to the so-called third tier of government.
The stranglehold on the councils flows from the maxim: “He who pays the piper dictates the tune.” It’s a contradiction in term for the constitution to allow the states to provide for the “establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of councils,” and yet strip the states of the power of control over the councils.
The solution lies in the constitution giving the states total control of councils, or make them “absolutely” autonomous in creation and financing, as the “Third Tier of Government” of the Federation. That means effecting an amendment to the revised 1999 Constitution.
But carrying out an alteration requires two-thirds concurrence by the 36 State Houses of Assembly – always an unachievable target, as shown in the 2014 and 2017/2018 exercises.
While both Chambers of the National Assembly ratified autonomy for councils, as capable of deepening the nation’s democracy, only 10 of the state assemblies voted for it. Twenty-four states, excluding Lagos and Rivers, stepped it down “for future consideration.”
Ironically, the assemblies couldn’t muster the two-thirds approval for their financial autonomy until in the 2017/2018 amendment, captioned, “Constitution Fourth Alteration Bill.” Part of it grants financial autonomy to the States’ Assemblies and Judiciary, which President Muhammadu Buhari has assented to.
Henceforth, the Assemblies and Judiciary will operate like the National Assembly and the Federal Judiciary, which are financially independent of the Executive. Their budgetary allocations will be transferred directly to their accounts, respectively.
Let’s hope the assemblies will leverage on their financial independence, to assist in untying the local government councils from the apron string of state governors.
Until then, we can only hazard why the Kwara Assembly suddenly woke up to the reality of the 2006 Law that conferred undue powers on the governor to dissolve democratically-elected councils.
Was it done to advance the “freedom” the House has gained; as a forewarning to the incoming government of the All Progressives Congress (APC), or just to flex muscles over its newfound financial autonomy? Only time will tell!
Turning to Rivers State, there maybe more to the clampdown on the 12 council chairmen by Governor Wike, and the Rivers House of Assembly’s quick endorsement of his action.
It’s surprising, and indeed unthinkable, that not one or two, but 12 council chairmen were absent at a state function without proper and tenable reasons given, and accepted in advance of the event!
What’s their aim? What’s their leaning in the Rivers political hotbed? Are they of the opposition APC or sympathetic to its cause against the ruling PDP in the state, and wanted to test the governor’s resolve?
Whatever their motives, the fate that befell the council chairmen shows that without absolute autonomy for local governments, state governors, in cahoots with the Houses of Assembly, will continue to hold and treat the councils as vassals.
The governors have argued that globally, it’s only in Nigeria that power is shared among three tiers: Federal Government, State Government and Local Government Councils. That’s why they find a common ground to oppose autonomy for councils.
The division in the Nigerian Governors’ Forum pre-2015 elections, and the fierce partisanship post-the polls didn’t, and hasn’t affected the governors’ opposition to council autonomy.
The resolution, though, is with the State Houses of Assembly, which should use their numerical strength to do the needful in the next opportune moment of constitutional amendment.
* Mr. Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.