The implementation of the Supreme Court’s judgment granting financial autonomy to Nigeria’s 774 local governments has encountered significant resistance from state governors, creating a major obstacle to the intended direct payment of federal allocations. Despite the establishment of a federal panel and directives from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) for local governments to open accounts for this purpose, progress has been slow and fraught with challenges. Governors in several states have reportedly resorted to intimidation and coercion, explicitly warning local government chairmen against complying with the CBN directive. This resistance stems from fears that direct allocation will curtail governors’ long-standing control over local government funds, a practice that has fueled concerns about mismanagement and lack of development at the grassroots level.
Local government chairmen, speaking anonymously for fear of reprisal, have confirmed the pressure from their governors. Some have even offered to remit a significant portion of their allocations back to the state governments in exchange for permission to open the CBN accounts, but these offers have been rejected. The situation highlights the deep-seated power dynamics between state governors and local governments, with the former reluctant to relinquish their financial grip. This resistance undermines the Supreme Court’s ruling and perpetuates a system where local governments struggle to operate independently and effectively address the needs of their communities. The lack of financial independence hinders local development initiatives and perpetuates a cycle of underdevelopment in many areas.
While some governors reportedly support the autonomy initiative, a significant number remain opposed, preferring that local governments open accounts with commercial banks, which they perceive as offering greater control. This preference has been communicated to President Bola Tinubu, but his stance on the matter remains unclear. The ongoing debate underscores the conflicting interests at play and the need for a clear and decisive resolution to ensure the effective implementation of the Supreme Court judgment. The lack of a unified approach between the federal and state governments creates confusion and further delays the process of empowering local governments.
Beyond the political maneuvering, technical and administrative challenges further complicate the implementation process. The CBN has reportedly imposed stringent conditions for account opening, including the submission of two-month bank statements, which many local governments are unable to provide. This requirement, viewed as difficult to meet due to existing financial practices within states, inadvertently reinforces governors’ control over local government funds. Some chairmen argue that these requirements are being used as a pretext to justify the delay and maintain the status quo. The lack of transparency and open communication between the involved parties exacerbates the situation, fueling suspicion and mistrust.
Differing narratives emerge from various states regarding their level of compliance with the CBN directive. While Nasarawa State claims full compliance and readiness to receive direct allocations, local government chairmen there contend that the delay stems from the federal government’s continued channeling of funds through joint accounts controlled by the state. This discrepancy highlights the lack of coordination and communication among stakeholders, creating confusion and hindering the seamless implementation of the Supreme Court’s ruling. The contrasting accounts also raise questions about the accuracy of information being provided and the need for independent verification of the progress made.
Further investigation reveals a patchwork of responses across the country, with some states, like Jigawa, claiming to be actively engaging with the CBN, while others, like Kwara and Kano, express a lack of awareness or progress in opening the required accounts. In states like Zamfara, local government chairmen are awaiting further instructions, while in Yobe, salaries continue to be paid through the state Ministry for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, contradicting the spirit of local government autonomy. This fragmented approach underlines the need for a more centralized and coordinated effort to ensure consistent implementation across all states. The lack of a clear timeline and measurable benchmarks further complicates efforts to track progress and hold stakeholders accountable. The varied experiences across different states demonstrate the complexity of the issue and the challenges in achieving uniform implementation of the Supreme Court’s judgment.
