The political landscape of Edo State, Nigeria, has been embroiled in a contentious power struggle between the state government and its 18 local government chairmen, culminating in the latter’s suspension by the Edo State House of Assembly. This action has ignited a fierce debate on the boundaries of executive and legislative authority, the interpretation of constitutional provisions regarding local government autonomy, and the sanctity of court judgments. The suspended chairmen, vehemently denouncing their suspension as unlawful and a blatant disregard for established legal precedents, are challenging the state government’s authority to interfere with their democratically elected tenure. This clash underscores the persistent tension between centralized state power and decentralized local governance in Nigeria.
At the heart of the dispute lies the interpretation and application of Section 10(1) of the Edo State Local Government Law (2000), which the governor invoked as the basis for the suspension. Governor Godwin Obaseki, in a petition to the House of Assembly, accused the local government chairmen of “gross misconduct and insubordination,” allegations that the chairmen categorically deny. The chairmen argue that Section 10(1), which empowers the state government to intervene in local government affairs, is fundamentally inconsistent with Section 7(1) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantees the autonomy of local governments. This constitutional conflict forms the cornerstone of the chairmen’s legal challenge, asserting that the state government’s actions are ultra vires, exceeding its legal authority.
Bolstering their legal position, the chairmen cite a judgment by the Edo State Chief Judge, which declared Section 10(1) of the state’s Local Government Law unconstitutional, null, and void. This judgment, they argue, effectively strips the state government of the legal basis for their suspension. Furthermore, the chairmen point to a recently issued interim court order, specifically restraining the state government from interfering in the administration of the local governments. These legal instruments, they contend, provide an unambiguous legal shield against the state government’s actions, emphasizing the importance of adhering to judicial pronouncements to uphold the rule of law. The chairmen maintain that they are duly elected officials with a mandate to serve until September 2026, and any attempt to curtail their tenure prematurely is a violation of the democratic process.
Led by Newman Ugiagbe, the chairman of the Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON) in Edo State and the chairman of Orhionmwon Local Government Area, the suspended chairmen have launched a public campaign to defend their position and rally support for their cause. They have addressed the media, emphasizing their commitment to upholding the law and their determination to resist what they perceive as an unlawful power grab by the state government. Ugiagbe, in a forceful statement, declared, “Politics is different from governance. What is happening is politics, but we are products of the law, elected by the people, not appointees. Our tenure is backed by the Constitution.” This statement encapsulates the core of their argument, differentiating between political maneuvering and the legal framework governing local government administration.
The chairmen, asserting their commitment to the rule of law, have called upon various security agencies, including the Nigeria Police, the Department of State Services (DSS), and the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), to protect local government assets and ensure compliance with the court rulings. This appeal to security agencies underscores the potential for escalating tensions and the need for a peaceful resolution to the ongoing dispute. The chairmen’s call for security intervention highlights the seriousness of the situation and the potential for further conflict if the state government continues to disregard the court orders.
In response to the growing controversy, Samson Osagie, the Edo State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, has defended the House of Assembly’s decision to suspend the chairmen. He argues that a panel of inquiry will investigate the allegations of misconduct against the chairmen, and the outcome of this inquiry will determine their fate. This response, however, fails to address the core legal arguments raised by the chairmen, particularly the alleged unconstitutionality of the state’s Local Government Law and the existing court orders. The state government’s stance highlights the complexities of navigating the overlapping jurisdictions and interpreting conflicting legal provisions in the Nigerian legal system. The ongoing dispute in Edo State serves as a microcosm of the broader challenges facing local governance in Nigeria, underscoring the need for clear legal frameworks and respect for judicial pronouncements to ensure a stable and effective system of local administration.
