Making LGAs more impactful

n n

The debate over local government autonomy in Nigeria continues to rage, raising an important question: will financial independence for local governments truly translate into development at the grass-roots? For decades, advocates have argued that granting local governments direct control over their funds will accelerate grass-roots development.

n

Yet, while financial autonomy is an important step, it is not a guaranteed solution to the deep-rooted governance challenges that have long hindered local administration. Local governments are constitutionally designed to be the closest level of government to the people. In theory, according to Schedule IV of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), they should be responsible for matters like primary healthcare, rural roads, sanitation, markets and other basic services that directly affect daily life. However, the reality has often been different, especially since 1999.

n

Because of several constitutional provisions that give the state governments the power to “guarantee” the operations of the LGAs, and the existence of the State Joint Local Government Account, SJLGA, system, local governments have operated largely under the control of state governments. Critics argue that this arrangement has weakened local councils, leaving them financially dependent and administratively constrained.

n

The calls for LG autonomy compelled the Muhammadu Buhari and Bola Tinubu regimes to take steps to activate local government autonomy. In July 2024, the Supreme Court ordered direct allocation of LG funds to them.

n

Direct allocation of funds to local governments was expected to enable them to plan and implement projects tailored to the specific needs of their communities. Rural infrastructure, primary schools, and healthcare centres could receive greater attention if councils have the authority to manage their own resources without interference.

n

However, the continued constitutionally-guaranteed mechanism of the state governments’ political control, the SJLGA system and the state governors’ power to constitute and supervise local government elections through the Independent State Electoral Commission, SIECs, have continued to hamper implementation of local government autonomy. Unless a comprehensive Constitution amendment is done, LG autonomy will continue to exist in chaos and failure.

n

The question of accountability will still need to be answered because LG autonomy could heighten corruption and impunity at the grass-roots without effective supervision by the state governments.

n

Over the years, allegations of mismanagement, corruption and poor planning have plagued many councils. Without strong transparency mechanisms and effective oversight, the risk remains that financial autonomy could simply decentralise inefficiency rather than eliminate it. It could also politically destabilise many states, as independent local government chairmen could have loyalties or agendas that could be inimical to the stability and security of states.

n

There is no doubt as to whether the state governments have thoroughly abused their control of the local governments. The challenge is in fostering an autonomous LG system that ensures that the elected officials are result-oriented and accountable to the people.

n

Anything less is simply replacing one problematic system with another.

n n