No to Local Government autonomy

At a time when there is widespread clamour for restoration of proper federal structure in Nigeria came a rude shock that President Muhammadu Buhari is encouraging the trade union at the grasrrots – the chairmen of Local Governments to form and present a bill to further destroy the last vestiges of our federalism.

The president while receiving the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON) in the Aso Rock Villa last week encouraged them to initiate a bill to seek autonomy from their states. He said: “The relationship between the three tiers of government is not a very nice one, especially that between the local governments and the states.

“The states feel like they own the local government, if they are of the same party. It is worse if they are not.

“This is a very serious constitutional problem and unless there is absolute clarity and transparency, the relationship will continue to be exploited against the interest of the ordinary people of the country.”

I recall that ALGON and the National Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) stormed the 2014 National Conference to press for the so-called autonomy. I sat on the committee that had to deal with that matter and we resolved on the side of federalism.

In federalism, there are two tiers of government -the Federal and the federating units. We therefore resolved that Local Governments should rightly be an an issue for the states who should determine their number, operations and funding. And to address the fears of the stranglehold on them by the states, we recommended that there should be a revenue allocation body to manage the sharing of resources between the states and the LGs within them and they must be democratically elected. We equally asked that the present anomaly of LGs being listed in the 1999 constitution should be rectified. The recommendations were accepted by the conference which I quote:

4. Local Government Administration

“Conference recognised Local Governments as a layer of governance closest to the people and, in effect, a platform for sustainable socio-economic development and popular participation in governance at the grass-root.

It however noted the alleged abuse of the Local Government system by State administrations.

“In tandem with its recommendation under Federalism, Conference introduced some necessary safeguards to guarantee the independence of local government councils.

Conference therefore decided that:

(a) Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), that a system of Local Governments by democratically elected Local Government Council be guaranteed;

(b) States wishing to create Local Governments, may create them under the jurisdiction of the States;

(c) The number, structure, form and administration of Local Governments shall be determined by the States; (d) Without prejudice to the existing Local Governments, States that wish to, may create or reduce the number of existing Local Governments Areas, which shall be under the jurisdiction of the State;

(e) The List of the Local Governments Areas contained in the First Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) be removed, and transferred to the States to be covered by a law of the State Houses of Assembly;

(f) The functions of the Local Governments as contained in Schedule 4 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) shall be transferred to the States subject to the power of the State Houses of Assembly to add or reduce the said functions of the Local Government;

(g) Chairmen and Councillors of Local Governments, not democratically elected, shall not be recognised by all authorities and persons and shall not be entitled to any revenue allocation;

(h) In addition to the functions conferred upon Local Government Councils as specified in the Fourth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), a House of Assembly of a State may by law confer other functions on the Local Government;”

What we did is consistent with the practice in all federal states. Harvey Lazar and Aron Seal in their paper on the place of local government in Canadian constitution pointed out:

“Within the constitutional framework, the roles of local governments are defined in detail by provincial statutes. Each province has its own legislation defining the place, powers and responsibilities of municipal governments within its territory. As such, the nature of municipal government in Canada varies greatly across provinces. For example, in some provinces such as New Brunswick, municipal government does not cover the entire territory of the province, with service provision to scarcely populated areas assumed entirely by the provincial government. Elsewhere, in provinces like Quebec, the entire territory is governed by at least one level of local government, with many areas falling under the authority of multiple municipal levels. Moreover, while municipalities in Ontario play a significant role in the provision of social services, municipal governments in most other provinces do not”.

To make LGs autonomous is to create another 774 “states” to be reporting directly to Abuja and further weaken the states as federating units. It would also make irreversible their lopsided creation. The Federal Government that is sitting on the destiny of the federating units cannot in any way pose as the liberator of the LGAs without showing itself to be pursuing some sinister agenda against federalism in Nigeria. Why is it asking for LGAs what it would not grant the federating units in the country?

All lovers of federalism in our country must reject this quest!