Supreme court

BY BOLANLE OLABIMTAN

JULY 20, 2024 3:48 PM

Habeeb Abiru, a justice of the supreme court, refused to grant the relief sought by the federal government on LG autonomy.

The relief sought direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs, while bypassing the state governments.

The federal government, through the attorney-general of the federation, had sued all 36 states of the federation over the contentious subject of financial autonomy for the 774 LGAs.

In the majority judgment delivered on July 11, the court criticised the practice of states creating and controlling caretaker committees, reiterating that local government chairpersons and councillors should be democratically elected as stipulated in the constitution.

ADVERTISEMENT

​​Six of the seven-member panel of the apex court also ordered the federal government to withhold allocations of LGAs governed by unelected officials.

Although Abiru agreed that the local government should be run by democratically elected councils, he said there is no constitutional provision for the direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs.

Citing the case of the ‘Attorney General of Abia state Vs Attorney General of the Federation supra’, the judge also held that the federal government ought not to meddle in the business of how states share the allocated money with the LG councils, adding that the LGs are not independent of states.

Advertisement

“Honestly, this is not, and should not be, the business of the plaintiff neither is it, and it should not be, the business of the court,” the judge held.

“It is and should be, a matter strictly between the states and the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils.

“The Local Government Areas superintended over by the Local Government Councils are component parts of the States.

“There is no provision in the Constitution stipulating or regulating how the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils should spend the funds allocated to them from the Federation Account.

Advertisement


Advertisement


“If they choose to cede part of the funds to the states to spend on their behalf on common services that are for their benefit, how is that the concern of the plaintiff or of the courts?

“The Constitution did not grant the Federal Government of Nigeria any oversight functions over how the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils spend the funds allocated to them.”

He added that the plaintiff failed to adduce evidence to prove the allegations of “arm-twisting tactics, and allocation of ridiculously low amounts to Local Government Councils”.

“It is elementary that address of counsel, no matter how brilliant, cannot take the place of evidence,” Abiru held.

“A counsel cannot tacitly give evidence on an issue of fact under the guise of making submissions in his brief of argument.

“It is my candid view that the Plaintiff failed woefully to give this Court any exceptional or cogent and/or credible reason to depart from its finding in Attorney General of Abia State Vs Attorney General of the Federation supra.

Advertisement

“Section 162(5) and (6) of the 1999 Constitution stipulates the mode of payment of the funds due to the Local Government Areas of States from the Federation Account.

“These provisions are explicit and self explanatory. They do not admit, accommodate or concede the direct payment of the funds due to the Local Government Council from the Federation Account to the Local Government Councils.

“It is my understanding, on reading the provisions of Section 7 of the Constitution along with those of Section 162 of the Constitution together, that the essence of the mode of payment of the funds due to the Local Governments Areas of a State through the State provided for in the Constitution is in recognition of the fact that the Local Government Areas are constituent parts of and are subordinate to the State and to protect the concept of federalism contained in the Constitution.

“The prayer of the Plaintiff that this Court should order direct payments of the funds due to the Local Government Areas from the Federation Account to the Local Government Councils by the Federal Government, and thus bypassing the States, is in, my view, an invitation to this Court to engage in judicial legislation and to interpret the provisions of the Constitution in a manner that will undermine the very foundation of the nature of the federalism upon which the provisions of the Constitution were constructed.

“I have not seen any cogent and credible facts presented by the plaintiff to support the notion that the stipulated procedure for payment of the funds due to Local Government Areas from the Federation Account was not meeting the purpose for which the funds were allocated by the Constitution.

“There is thus no basis given for this court deviating from the constitutionally laid down mode of payment of the funds and directing another mode of payment.

“The answer to Questions 12 and 15 on the originating summons must be in favour of the Defendants
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.thecable.ng/full-text-dissenting-scourt-verdict-that-rejected-financial-autonomy-for-lgs/&ved=2ahUKEwiD_s37oLiHAxUpVEEAHVIYD3gQ0PADKAB6BAgPEAE&usg=AOvVaw0Vq98_Wjd8VaLzkY0kMqu8


Mynd44
Nplfmod
Fergie001
Seun

Ok

Victory for democracy

Lol.
Now the Supreme Court is unbiased.
But when they deliver a judgement people don't like they'll say they're compromised.

there is no constitutional provision for the direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs.

thesicilian:

Lol.
Now the Supreme Court is unbiased.
But when they deliver a judgement people don't like they'll say they're compromised.

Orrr

slivertongue:
there is no constitutional provision for the direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs.

Neither is there a provision for states to use LG funds

Where is the constitutional provisions for direct disbursement of LG fund with state fund ?!

slivertongue:
there is no constitutional provision for the direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs.

senatordave1:


Neither is there a provision for states to use LG funds

JAAC

slivertongue:


JAAC

Lgas don't want jaac sir.let everyone receive their money direct from FAAC

EcoNews:
Where is the constitutional provisions for direct disbursement of LG fund with state fund ?!

The Constitution did not grant the Federal Government of Nigeria any oversight functions over how the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils spend the funds allocated to them.”

senatordave1:


Lgas don't want jaac sir.let everyone receive their money direct from FAAC

Section 162(5) and (6) of the 1999 Constitution stipulates the mode of payment of the funds due to the Local Government Areas of States from the Federation Account.

“These provisions are explicit and self explanatory. They do not admit, accommodate or concede the direct payment of the funds due to the Local Government Council from the Federation Account to the Local Government Councils.

senatordave1:


Lgas don't want jaac sir.let everyone receive their money direct from FAAC

“It is and should be, a matter strictly between the states and the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils.

“The Local Government Areas superintended over by the Local Government Councils are component parts of the States.

The prayer of the Plaintiff that this Court should order direct payments of the funds due to the Local Government Areas from the Federation Account to the Local Government Councils by the Federal Government, and thus bypassing the States, is in, my view, an invitation to this Court to engage in judicial legislation and to interpret the provisions of the Constitution in a manner that will undermine the very foundation of the nature of the federalism upon which the provisions of the Constitution were constructed.

slivertongue:
there is no constitutional provision for the direct disbursement of funds from the federation account to the LGAs.

The governors abused the privilege they had. They were underfunding the LGA. In majority of the states in Nigeria, government is almost not existing at the local level.

In Abia state, the governor is owing local government workers 11 month arrears

That is to say the governors are still the alpha and omega of everything in the state.
LG autonomy is still far from being achieved.

Paraman:
The governors abused the privilege they had. They were underfunding the LGA. In majority of the states in Nigeria, government is almost not existing at the local level.

In Abia state, the governor is owing local government workers 11 month arrears

“It is my understanding, on reading the provisions of Section 7 of the Constitution along with those of Section 162 of the Constitution together, that the essence of the mode of payment of the funds due to the Local Governments Areas of a State through the State provided for in the Constitution is in recognition of the fact that the Local Government Areas are constituent parts of and are subordinate to the State and to protect the concept of federalism contained in the Constitution.

Paraman:
The governors abused the privilege they had. They were underfunding the LGA. In majority of the states in Nigeria, government is almost not existing at the local level.

In Abia state, the governor is owing local government workers 11 month arrears

Citing the case of the ‘Attorney General of Abia state Vs Attorney General of the Federation supra’, the judge also held that the federal government ought not to meddle in the business of how states share the allocated money with the LG councils, adding that the LGs are not independent of states.

So what did we celebrate last week or earlier this week? Am confused right now.

slivertongue:



“It is and should be, a matter strictly between the states and the democratically elected members of the Local Government Councils.

“The Local Government Areas superintended over by the Local Government Councils are component parts of the States.

The local government is an independent arm and level of govt and not under any state or fg.the dissenting judgment is foolish.imagine how stupid it is for one to support them

slivertongue:


Section 162(5) and (6) of the 1999 Constitution stipulates the mode of payment of the funds due to the Local Government Areas of States from the Federation Account.

“These provisions are explicit and self explanatory. They do not admit, accommodate or concede the direct payment of the funds due to the Local Government Council from the Federation Account to the Local Government Councils.

Those sections have now been repealed

senatordave1:


Lgas don't want jaac sir.let everyone receive their money direct from FAAC

Very trite Judgement but unfortunately majority carries the day.

aderadio1:
So what did we celebrate last week or earlier this week? Am confused right now.

Likely this is minority, dissent opinion. Majority won

fergie001:

Very trite Judgement but unfortunately majority carries the day.

Yes just like in plateau.i knew there was a dissenter.

aderadio1:
So what did we celebrate last week or earlier this week? Am confused right now.

It's a minority judgement, it's just his take, it's 6vs1, so such won't stand, the 6 have it.

aderadio1:
So what did we celebrate last week or earlier this week? Am confused right now.

My confusion dwarfed your own. I am still reading comments to see if I can understand

senatordave1:


The local government is an independent arm and level of govt and not under any state or fg.the dissenting judgment is foolish.imagine how stupid it is for one to support them

Kai! Federalism don suffer in the hands of neophytes and pretenders.

senatordave1:


Those sections have now been repealed

Agreed that the Supreme Court is a public policy institution but it can't bypass a valid constitutional provision built on the tenets of Federalism while the constitution is not reviewed to keep with the new resolve. Of course after this administration which is using shortcut to make mockery of constitutional laid
down direction for addressing issues, the status quo will return. The lone judgment is sound, the case died when the judge posited that FG is not the LG, a meddlesome interloper.

slivertongue:


Agreed that the Supreme Court is a public policy institution but it can't bypass a valid constitutional provision built on the tenets of Federalism while the constitution is not reviewed to keep with the new resolve. Of course after this administration which is using shortcut to make mockery of constitutional laid
down direction for addressing issues, the status quo will return. The lone judgment is sound, the case died when the judge posited that FG is not the LG, a meddlesome interloper.

The case is dead sir

slivertongue:



Kai! Federalism don suffer in the hands neophytes and pretenders.

Federalism means sharing of powers among all the levels and arms equally sir

senatordave1:


The case is dead sir

Time will tell

You posted the oral argument of the defendant and labelled it a judgement of the Supreme Court. What's your problem self. Imagine making me read through this rubbish without reading the counter motion from the plaintiffs lawyers.

Mind yourself. What we have now as it stands is no LGA elections, no disbursement.