Local Government Autonomy: How Much Should Governors Be Blamed? The Underlying Challenges in the Wake of LG Independence | #NwokeukwuMascot

 Opinion 

LG Autonomy: How Much Blame Should The Governors Accept? By John Okiyi Kalu | #NwokeukwuMascot

Photo: Abia Workers Jubilating Over LG Autonomy 

Let me start this intervention by disclosing that I have never operated within the local government structure and system, directly or indirectly. Most of what I know come from reading and/hearing from operators and non operators alike.  Furthermore, it should be noted that I fully support Local Government Autonomy to the full extent the law permits and as recently affirmed by the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

After the ruling of the Supreme Court was made public, I saw multiple videos of workers in at least 4 LGAs of Abia State celebrating the judgement jubilantly. What that suggests to me is that they must have been unhappy with the former state of affairs in their LGAs and believed that the recent judgement would engender relief. It also points to what they must have been made to believe by the managers of the concerned LGAs: that the Governor of the state or his government was possibly tampering with local government funds.

That mindset, right or wrong, could only have come from what they were told by the administrators of the LGAs who incidentally were appointed by the same Governor. Yet, we must examine the unfolding situation in our LGAs and ask ourselves if the Governors were wholly to blame.

Our experience in Abia State suggests that the first attempt to have fully autonomous and democratically elected local government executives, under Governor Orji Kalu administration, led to gross abuse of the independence with some of the elected Chairmen reportedly throwing their LGAs into huge debts by borrowing from banks to squander on invisible and unfeasible projects while others failed to pay workers for as much as 9 months even while receiving direct monthly allocations.

The consequence was that that administration introduced transition council executives and indeed made the existing Abia state law on LGA administration possibly with a view to asserting more positive control over the management of local government funds.

Suffice it to state that after those elected local government executives left office, it took two subsequent administrations to wipe off the huge debts they accumulated from unpaid wages and bank loans. Even LGA pensions and wages of primary school teachers were impacted negatively until sorted out over time by succeeding administrations. 

Interestingly, with all the financial mess, it was the Governors that were blamed, rightly or wrongly, for the mal-administration of the elected local government executives and not even one of the LGA executives was brought to book, to the best of my knowledge, up to this day.  I am also yet to see anyone who pointed to the “good works” done by any of those pioneer elected local government executives.

Since then the laws in different states have substantially changed with the objective of curtailing the excesses of the LGA operators but not necessarily attempts to steal the funds, by Governors, even though I cannot vouch that the they did not steal the funds or will not steal it in future,  because I simply don’t know.  

There are also states like Anambra where Transition Council executives have perpetually been in office for nearly two unbroken decades while in other states like Abia, all 3 previous administrations conducted elections at least once  within their respective 8-year life span except for the Ikpeazu administration that conducted LGA elections twice and was on course for a 3rd before some vested political interests sponsored a court injunction to truncate it in 2023. The current Otti administration is operating with appointed local government executives even though Dr Alex Otti swore not to do that while campaigning for office. 

Yet, there is a blurry line between elected and appointed local government executives in our states because in both cases it is still the government in power at the state level that handpick those who will emerge, with or without election. We should therefore equally hold elected and appointed LGA executives to account regardless of how they emerged. They are akin to children of same mother who gave birth to one through C-Section and the other through vaginal delivery.

Most current and former operators of our local government system have one excuse in common. They privately accuse the state governors of giving them only a small portion of what was due to their LGAs while pocketing the rest.

Is that really the case?

What I heard is that before giving them whatever they receive as security vote and operational imprest, the state governors will normally pay workers' wages on their behalf, as a first line charge, and in so doing, also attempt to stop them from padding LGA workers' wage bill to write away substantial part of their funds. 

Also, they are permitted to use whatever they get as IGR to augment in running their offices without interference from the states. What that mean is that LGAs that are able to generate high IGR will still have reasonable amount of money after the state must have paid the workers' wages and pensioners as well as paid statutory security management funds including that of the Chairman and his principal officials. I am yet to read any past or present LGA Chairman specifically account for collected and shared IGR.

While it is very human to pass buck and blame others, we must also note that elected and appointed LGA executives subscribed to whatever the state government did with their funds. They signed up to whatever existed as their financial relationship with the ministry of local government and indeed appended their signatures to it. It is therefore disingenuous for those who signed into an  arrangement to turn round and complain when in the eyes of the law they are, at best, willing collaborators.

I have never read or heard of any LGA elected or appointed executive that resigned in Abia State because he or she didn’t like the arrangement they had with the state government on the management of the funds of the local government. By simple deductions, they were happy and comfortable with the arrangement and should, in my personal view, be seen as complicit in whatever they allege. You really can’t accept a situation from the beginning, benefit from it and later raise up your hands to cry wolf.

There is also another issue that will most likely crop up with the full implementation of local government financial autonomy. The earning powers of the respective LGAs is not the same as allocations from the federation account to beneficiaries and each of them is based on factors like population, IGR, land mass etc. Some LGAs might not be able to cover their current wage bills with what they will get as monthly allocation. In the current JAAC system, the state governments mitigate that problem by taking from the richer LGAs to support and meet the wage bill obligations of the not so rich LGAs.

At the national level, Revenue is shared in accordance with the vertical formula, as determined by RMAFC and approved by the National Assembly. The formula allocates 52.68%, 26.72% and 20.60% to the Federal, State and Local Governments, respectively. That has not changed. 

With the new autonomy, it is envisaged that some LGAs will necessarily reduce workforce to meet wage payment obligations and also embark on development projects. There are also expectations that the LGAs will fully fund their internal security obligations, pay allowances to traditional rulers and of course  meet other statutory obligations. Nobody should expect the state government to make interventions within the statutory areas of financial responsibilities of the LGAs after relinquishing whatever supervisory and predatory control they previously maintained over LGA funds.

Naturally, those states that currently have appointed transition council executives will experience challenges with payment of workers if the federal government, as expected by law, withholds remittance of LGA funds pending the conduct of elections. This will likely lead to more suffering for already deprived workers and my personal suggestion is that the federal government take up the direct payment of wages on interim basis till the states do the needful.

It should also be noted that Governors hitherto execute joint projects with local government executives by forcing them to contribute to some development projects located in their LGAs. For instance, the state government can construct a Trunk C road which ordinarily should be done by the local government, and compel the concerned LGA to contribute to the funding. While many may see this as statutorily wrong, we should consider a situation where state governors now hands-off such roads and ask LGAs to carry their cross.

It is very populist to think that state governors merely dip hands into LGA accounts and steal money but when examined closely that might not be the case in all instances. Yes, there are possibly many instances of graft within the LGA system but then so also it is with the federal and state systems. The relationship between states and their LGAs is more complex than the media reports and we should be aware of all the issues so as to mitigate against many challenges that will surely come after this euphoria of financial autonomy. Unless financial autonomy means replacing state approved thrives with elected local robbers. Anti-graft agencies that are seemingly overwhelmed by the prosecution of federal and state thieves might find it even tougher to deal with the new challenge of monitoring the 774 LGAs in Nigeria.  

Based on existing laws in most states, they cannot conduct immediate LGA elections because of statutory requirements such as proper constitution of state independent electoral commissions, issuance of statutory election notifications, allowance for campaign periods etc. It should be envisaged that at the minimum, it will take between 4-6 months for states without elected LGA executives to comply with the Supreme Court ruling. Allowing workers to suffer hunger and deprivation from non payment of wages for that long will amount to multiplying poverty in an already impoverished economic environment. That will surely lead to possible social upheavals with associated upsurge in crime and other ills.

There is nothing legally wrong with the federal government taking up the direct payment of workers wages to the affected LGA workers to the best of my knowledge. They can simply use the last payroll for affected LGAs and transfer to workers' accounts while holding the remaining funds till elections are conducted.

While we collectively celebrate the financial autonomy granted LGAs, we must also prepare for upheavals and associated challenges. First, Governors must know that they can no longer expect benefits from foisting their cronies on the LGAs through phantom elections. If you impose your cronies also be prepared to take the blame for whatever infractions they will commit tomorrow. Like it or not, many of them will turn against you even if you rig them in using the state electoral commissions and whatever sin they commit will be on your head.

If Goveenors allow visibly free, fair and transparent elections without minding who wins or loses, they will be doing themselves a lot of favor in this new dispensation. In fact, Governors should join those advocating for INEC to conduct LGA elections because it will serve them better than electoral impositions using state commissions. Imposition of executives is corruption and when you institute or enhance corruption within a system you lose much more than you will ever gain.

Finally, the federal government should also impose restrictions on LGAs borrowing from commercial banks including using amorphous instruments like contractor finance facilities. This will prevent LGA operators from embarking on bogus projects that will be used to fleece their respective LGAs while overwhelming the LGAs with debts.

Autonomy is good and progressive, hence, everyone should encourage it. But there will be major associated challenges that will require pragmatic interventions even if in the short run.

Similarly, the natural progression for us now should be state and LGA (county) police establishment to support the new autonomous LGAs. Having control of their own resources naturally means that states will hands off security expenditure related to the LGAs to a large extent. Conversely, if they agree to joint funding we will simply return to the vilified era of joint accounts by other means.

I suggest that the National and State Assemblies quickly approve constitutional amendments that will usher in state police and INEC empowered to conduct LGA polls as quickly as possible. That will effectively RENEW HOPE and give life to the electoral promises of Mr President and the APC to deliver true federalism in Nigeria. Telling us that State Police will be abused by Governors is similar to saying LGA autonomy should be jettisoned to avoid abuse. In any case, the federal government is already abusing federal police and we can reform state and federal police together, whenever ready. 

Change comes with challenges and we should be ready to meet the challenges of LGA autonomy and State Police at the same time.

-John Okiyi Kalu writes from Aba North LGA of Abia State where the Speaker of Abia State House of Assembly is willfully desecrating the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by refusing to inaugurate our elected house of assembly member