The Supreme Court has barred the 36 governors of the federation from further retaining or utilising funds that are allocated for the 774 Local Government Areas of the country.
According to the court, it is illegal and unconstitutional for governors to continue to receive and seize funds allocated to LGAs.
It maintained that the “dubious practice”, which has gone on for over two decades, was a clear violation of Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The apex court, in its lead judgement that was delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, held that no House of Assembly of any state has the power to make laws that could, in any manner, interfere with funds allocated for the LGAs.
Stressing that the law mandated that LGAs must be governed by democratically elected officials, the Supreme Court ordered that forthwith, funds allocated for the LGAs must be directly paid to them from the federation account.
Also Read:
- We won’t down tools to demand for N100b bridging claims – PETROAN
- Hajj Savings Scheme: More Banks join initiative
- Shell wins Best Upstream Company 2024 award at Energy Summit in Abuja
- Governor dedicates church to mark 50th birthday
- Ex-FIFA Executive Committee member Adamu accused of land grabbing
The Supreme Court held: “Demands of justice require a progressive interpretation of the law. It is the position of this court that the federation can pay LGA allocations to the LGAs directly or pay them through the states.
“In this case, since paying them through states has not worked, justice of this case demands that LGA allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the LGAs.”
It further declared unconstitutional the appointment of caretaker committees by governors to run the affairs of the LGAs.
The Supreme court held that the 36 states are under obligation to ensure democratic governance at the third tier of government.
The judgement followed a suit the Federal Government filed to secure financial autonomy for the LGAs.
The court earlier dismissed preliminary objections the state governors filed to challenge the competence of the suit.