LG AUTONOMY: BETWEEN GOVERNORS’ RESISTANCE & A PRESIDENT’S CHARGE
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s renewed call for the financial autonomy of local governments is not just timely; it is urgent. Speaking at the 14th meeting of the APC National Caucus, the President did what many Nigerians have long expected of a leader who understands the roots of Nigeria’s governance crisis: he confronted, once again, the entrenched resistance of state governors to genuine grassroots governance.
In July 2024, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, in a unanimous judgment by a seven-member panel, affirmed the financial autonomy of the country’s 774 local government councils. The apex court did not equivocate. It upheld the suit brought by the Federal Government and made it clear that local governments are a constitutionally recognized tier of government, not administrative appendages of state governors.
Yet, months after the historic ruling, implementation remains stalled.
President Bola Tinubu’s words cut to the heart of the matter: “There is no autonomy without funded mandate… we’ll give them their money directly. That’s the truth. That’s compliance of the Supreme Court.” In one stroke, the President exposed the hypocrisy that has defined Nigeria’s federalism for decades.
In the face of the unprecedented increase in monthly allocations to states as a result of fuel subsidy removal, the resistance of state governors to local government autonomy is not ideological; it is self-serving. Despite the Supreme Court landmark judgment, state governors are still treating local government funds as personal war chests, funneled through the opaque State-Local Government Joint Accounts.
These funds, meant for primary healthcare, rural roads, basic education, markets, and sanitation, are never accounted for. A meagre amount is often released for the payment of salaries to local government employees, at the whim of governors.
The result is visible across Nigeria: comatose local councils, abandoned rural infrastructure, and chairmen who answer more to governors than to the people who “elected” them.
How can governors, who claim to be champions of federalism, justify their stranglehold on the tier of government closest to the people? How can they preach accountability while presiding over a system that institutionalizes théft and suffocates development at the grassroots?
President Tinubu deserves commendation for standing firmly on the side of constitutionalism and local government autonomy. His insistence that councils must receive their funds directly is a bold affirmation of the rule of law. It signals a departure from decades of political cowardìce.
However, moral clarity must now translate into administrative urgency. A Supreme Court judgment does not implement itself. While presidential speeches matter, what Nigeria needs now is decisive executive action. The Federal Government must move swiftly to operationalize direct disbursement of local government funds, issue clear guidelines, and close every loophole that the governors have been exploiting.
If governors are allowed to continue frustrating implementation, the authority of the Supreme Court itself will be weakened, and the message sent to Nigerians will be dangerous: that powerful political actors can ignore court judgments without consequence.
What is at stake is more than local government funding; it is the future of democratic governance in Nigeria. Local governments are meant to be schools of democracy, nurseries for leadership, and engines of local development. When they are crippled, democracy is hollowed out from the bottom.
State governors must be told, unequivocally, that local government autonomy is not a favour to be granted at their convenience. It is a constitutional obligation. Their continued resistance is an indictment of their commitment to democracy and development.
