Why Rejection of Local Government Autonomy is a Setback

This comment is to put on record my opinion that the rejection of local government autonomy in the ongoing 4th amendment of the 1999 Constitution is not the collective will of the masses, especially those located in the rural communities whose lives would have been impacted positively if local governments were autonomous. It is also my deduction that it was done inadvertently because the amendment procedure was carried out by an electoral college where the representatives rather than the people concerned voted. The concerned residents did not acquire sufficient knowledge about the implications of the rejection of the autonomy of local governments associated with fiscal problems canvassed by governors.

I further submit that the rejection is unconstitutional because the 1999 Constitution created a three-tier government that is mutually independent, except that the constitution recommends a joint account for the purposes of local government operations and projects. If the constitution created them it must have foreseen the viability of such structures including sources of revenue. The thrust of my argument and submissions are mainly on local government areas located in non-urban areas. The reason is that you can hardly differentiate between developments going on in the 20 local governments in Lagos and those carried out as state government’s projects since all the 20 local governments are part and parcel of metropolitan Lagos.

Compare Lagos with Bayelsa with 8 local government areas. Apart from Yenogoa all the other 7 local government areas may not have developed as much as each of the local government areas in Lagos state. The point I tried to elicit from the comparison is that the impact of local government autonomy would be different in Bayelsa. Before Bayelsa State was created there were virtually 8 local government areas on their own, being part of the state government they lost their ‘autonomy’ even though they never had it from the former state from where they were created.

This comment is not against creation of states or local government areas which are practical ways of devolution of powers from the center. If the center devolves powers why is it reluctant to grant autonomy? In that case it is delegation of authority. That is the reason why I argued earlier on that rejection was inadvertent. It was not the federal government that rejected the move. In line with the delegation of authority the direction of modern governments is towards underdeveloped, rural and conurbations. The communication, technological/electronic, agricultural, transportation companies etc. have local areas as a strategic policy, not only for profitability but also for sustainability as a business concern. And this is an appropriate time for the governors to stop delegation and grant autonomy to local government areas.

Today government’s agricultural policies are driving people from urban to local communities; another way of redistributing the population. Therefore, objection to local government autonomy is tantamount to regulating it while its autonomy would have signalled support for deregulation. A trend that would no doubt promote inclusiveness.

Democratisation has become innovative as it emphasises on increased local autonomy even in unitary governments. Without local government autonomy how do you mobilise communities to complement government policies and administration voluntarily?

The UK parliamentary system is based on a two-tier government: central and local councils with their functions spelt out, without one’s function impeding the other, especially when it comes to fiscal relationship. Instead of rejecting autonomy. One of the ways to resolve fiscal problems arising from the autonomy could be for us to use the census figure for revenue allocation. States as well as local government areas vary in land and population sizes. As accurate demographic data: collection, storage and retrieval may be the beginning of a lasting solution.

The autonomy of local governments will encourage its traditional function of food and raw material production which will provide employment for a large population of people at the local level. The Local government structure enhances socio-political awareness of the people as well as strengthens the economic inter-face with other structures.

Notwithstanding that, the political objection to local governments is universal. Its advantages are: being close to the masses it enhances proper social security; it strengthens integrated rural programmes by providing basic infrastructure which includes rural and urban access road; housing; water supply, health care and primary education to local communities. This facilitates the creation of hundreds if not thousands of jobs; as well as consolidates the existing agricultural and rural infrastructure. Autonomy of local governments has a way of stemming rural/urban migration, it creates entrepreneurial skills and wealth in local communities.

If allocations are paid directly to the local government areas a lot of them would yield encouraging results. Then those local government areas that cannot deliver should be annexed to the state government until improvements are made.

The Ibrahim Dasuki Repot on the desirability of local government creation as a third tier of government found that operational problems can be surmounted. One of the ways to deal with it is decentralisation. It recommended the appropriateness of the third tier of government for gross participation in the socio-political and economic development of the country.

We do know that the autonomy of the judiciary is guaranteed by the constitution but the executive interferes with it. And so the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) went on strike to enforce the judgment of the Federal High Court delivered on 13th January 2014 directing that s. 162(6) of the 1999 Constitution which provides for the financial autonomy of the judiciary should be implemented.

In the same manner ss. 7 and 8 gives the state government power to create and administer local governments including their finances, it has been interpreted by governors to mean that local governments would be run according to their whims and caprices: development areas without autonomy, no elections, nor independent source of revenue except subventions from federal and state governments. I doubt if that is the intent of those sections. Just as Andrew Obaseki JSC as he then was warned that statutes should not be interpreted to defeat its purpose.

The question we need to find answer to is whether local government areas are created as a third tier of government in a federation or as an appendage of the state government simply because of the joint account?

It is rather absurd to say that because state governments get monthly allocations from the Federation Account they no longer enjoy the status of an autonomous second tier government of the federation. It takes courage to admit that local government especially those in rural communities are the people’s assembly that address the unique day to day environmental, socio-political and economic lives of the inhabitants. There is no way a statute would create structure without considering the sources of revenue available even if the state government has a role to play in that regard. My point is that loss of autonomy, lack of elections are too high a price to pay.

Ozemena is with Ikechukwu O.Odoemelam & Co