Politics
S’Court Verdict On LG Autonomy, Sheer Judicial Conspiracy – Afenifere
The Pan Yoruba Socio-Political Group, Afenifere, has faulted the Supreme Court verdict that granted fiscal autonomy to local government areas.
It lamented that the apex court’s verdict has “done incalculable injury” to the Nigerian state.
This was contained in a statement signed by the leader of the group, Pa Ayo Adebanjo and its National Publicity Secretary, Prince Justice Faloye, and made available to newsmen in Akure, the Ondo State capital.
Entitled “Tinubu and the Grand Conspiracy Against Democracy and True Federalism in Nigeria”, the statement declared that “Afenifere views the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case filed by the Federal Government on the so-called Local Government autonomy as sheer judicial conspiracy in cahoots with the Tinubu administration against the Nigerian state and its foundational principles of federalism.
“Rather than interpret the constitution to uphold its elementary but overriding federal principle which recognises only a two-tier federal structure of the central government and federating states, the Supreme Court played to the gallery and wittingly allowed itself a most retrogressive declaration that the power of the government is portioned into three arms of government, the federal, the state and the local government.
“For the avoidance of any doubt, Afenifere makes bold to say that in line with its negotiated basis of existence, Nigeria is a ‘Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory’ as affirmed by Section 2 (2) of the 1999 constitution.
“While Afenifere frowns at corruption and misuse of public funds at levels of government, it condemns in most unmistaken terms the subjugation of the states and its constitutional roles including the Local Government system to the whims and caprices of the federal government by any means including obvious manipulation of the federation account as in the present case.
“The 1999 constitution, which in spite of its flaws, gives life and power to the Supreme Court provides in Section 162 and particularly subsection (6) that “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 and from the Government of the state”.
“Against this unambiguous provision the Supreme Court held that “demands of justice requires a progressive interpretation of the law.
“ It is the position of this court that the federation can pay Local Government allocations to the Local Government directly or pay them through the states.
“ In this case, since paying them through states has not worked, justice of this case demands that Local Government allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the Local Governments .
“Contrary to this invented alternative routes, Section 162 of the Constitution is not ambivalent about the process and route through which “all allocations to the local government councils of the state from the Federation Account and from the Government of the state” shall become payable to the Councils.
“In other words, the interpretation does not require a voyage into jurisprudential sophistry leading to the absurdity of deliberate judicial amendment of the grundnorm.
“By wittingly or inadvertently equating the Nigerian Federation with the Federal Government in the erroneous belief that both expressions are used interchangeably, such that the President may withhold funds to the credit of the Local Governments from the Federation Account, under the guise of having no democratically elected officials, which is obviously subject to the interpretation by the Federal Government.
“ The apex court has not only done incalculable injury to the Nigerian state, it has lent itself to setting aside its precedent in the hallowed judgment against the President Obasanjo administration withholding funds to the credit of Local Governments in Lagos State even when the Supreme Court agreed that the Local Council Development Authorities (LCDA) created by then Governor Tinubu were inchoate and fell short of constitutional requirements.
“ It is becoming stridently eloquent that with just over a year of its inauguration, the Tinubu government, more than even the military administrations, is uncannily determined to unitarise the Nigerian Federation.
‘Part of the unitary package is the creation of the Ministry of Livestock Development which is the audacious euphemism for the re-introduction of Cattle Colony, RUGA and those other policies by which the Buhari administration sought to appropriate lands in the states contrary to the provisions of the Land Use Act and the Constitution which vest land in the state in the Governor in trust for the people.
“Afenifere insists that the way forward for Nigeria is not the confusing rudderless tinkering but holistic restructuring of the polity to re-enact the fundamental principles of true federalism as agreed by the founding fathers.
‘ This includes the fact that the Local Government system is an exclusive preserve of the states, either by direct constitutional provisions or residual powers in a federation.”
On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed, through a second reading, a bill seeking to retain immunity for the Office of the President and remove immunity from the Vice President, the Governors and the Deputy Governors.
The bill was one of the 42 considered and passed through the second reading stage during plenary presided over by the Deputy Speaker, Mr Benjamin Kalu, in Abuja.
Sponsored by Hon. Solomon Bob (Rivers PDP), the bill is seeking the amendment of Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution to guard against abuse of office and to ensure transparency in governance.
The long title of the proposed legislation read: “A Bill for an Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to qualify the immunity conferred on the President, remove the immunity conferred on the Vice President, the Governors and their deputies, in order to curb corruption, eradicate impunity and enhance accountability in public office and for related matters.”
Key amendments include changes to Section 308 of the Constitution, which currently grants immunity to the president, vice president, governors, and deputy governors while in office.
The proposed bill will amend subsection 3 to ensure that immunity only applies to the President and the vice president when acting as President under Section 145 of the Constitution.
Additionally, a new subsection 4 will be introduced to make the immunity clause inapplicable if the office holder is acting in an unofficial capacity, engaging in actions beyond the powers of the office, or involved in criminal conduct.
“The bill seeks to foster transparency and strengthen the fight against corruption by making public officials more accountable for their actions, both in and out of office.”
“Section 308 of the principal Act is amended by:(a) substituting a new subsection (3) as follows: “(3) This section applies to a person holding the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Vice President only when acting as President, in line with Section 145 of this Constitution.
Creating sub section (4) thereto as follows:”(4) The foregoing provisions of this section shall be inapplicable where the person to whom this section applies is acting in an unofficial capacity or where the conduct of the person is beyond the powers of his office or the conduct is criminal in nature.
“This Bill may be cited as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Alteration) Act 2024.
The bill is currently awaiting further debate and consideration by the National Assembly.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has written to notify Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the senator representing Kogi Central, about the petition by constituents seeking her recall from the national assembly.
INEC said it has also received the contact details of the petitioners.
“Pursuant to section 69 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended, I write to notify you of the receipt of a petition from representatives of registered voters in your constituency seeking your recall from the senate.
“The notification is in line with the provisions of clause 2 (a) of the Commission’s Regulations and Guidelines for Recall 2024.
“This letter is also copied to the presiding officer of the senate and simultaneously published on the commission’s website. Thank you”, the letter read.
The letter was signed by Ruth Oriaran Anthony, secretary to the commission.
Meanwhile, in a statement issued on Wednesday, INEC said it has now received the updated contact details from representatives of petitioners seeking to recall the senator.
In the statement, Sam Olumekun, INEC’s National Commissioner and Chairman of Information and Voter Education, said a letter notifying the senator of the petition has been delivered to her official address, copied to the senate presiding officer, and published on the commission’s website.
“The next step is to scrutinise the list of signatories submitted by the petitioners to ascertain that the petition is signed by more than one half (over 50%) of the registered voters in the constituency. This will be done in the coming days.
“The outcome, which will be made public, shall determine the next step to be taken by the Commission. We once again reassure Nigerians that the process will be open and transparent”, Mr Olumekun said.
Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan had recently accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexually harassing her.
The allegation came in the wake of seating arrangement related altercation between Senator. Akpabio and the Kogi Central senator at the red chamber
She was subsequently suspended from the senate for six months for “gross misconduct” over the incident.
The constituents behind the recall move also accused her of “gross misconduct, abuse of office, and deceitful behaviour”.
The senator has denied wrongdoing and called the recall effort a “coordinated suppression” of her voice.
The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed the second reading of a bill to upgrade the Lagos State 37 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) to full-fledged Local Government Areas (LGAs ).
The bill, was sponsored by James Faleke, Babajimi Benson, Enitan Badru, and 19 other lawmakers.
The bill is titled “A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) to Accommodate the Thirty-Seven (37) Development Area Councils of Lagos State as Full-Fledged Local Government Areas, Increasing the Total Number of Local Government Areas in the Federation to Eight Hundred and Eleven (811), and for Related Matters (HB. 1498),”
Once fully enacted, Nigeria’s total number of LGAs will rise from 774 to 811, with Lagos overtaking Kano and Katsina, which currently have 44 and 34 LGAs, respectively.
Proponents of the bill argue that granting full LGA status to the LCDAs would bring governance closer to the people. The 37 LCDAs were created by President Bola Tinubu in 2003 when he was governor of Lagos State.
However, it’s worth noting that the Lagos State House of Assembly has been working on a bill to replace the 37 LCDAs with newly designated administrative areas.