Damn !!!! Ameachi ain't playing around. I know he has never rated GEJ but this is throwing down the gauntlet !!!!

http://www.thisdayonline.com/

Governors Assemble Legal Team to Challenge SWF

04 Sep 2011



From Chuks Okocha in Abuja and Olawale Olaleye in Lagos


Governors are not relenting in their efforts to challenge the establishment of the Sovereign Wealth Fund, a special statutory account into which the three tiers of government are meant to save excess accruals from oil sales above the budget benchmark and other excess revenues.

THISDAY gathered at the weekend that the governors, under the auspices of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, had reached out to some lawyers to challenge the legality of the wealth fund at the Supreme Court for them.

Former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), heads the legal team, whose membership for now includes Rickey Tarfa (SAN).

It was also gathered that the governors are also considering engaging the services of the incumbent NBA President, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN), to join the team, though THISDAY could not confirm yesterday whether the deal with him had been sealed.

The governors, at a meeting of the NGF in Abuja on August 21, presided over by their chairman, Governor Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers State, had urged the federal government to stop the operation of the SWF.

At a meeting of the National Economic Council the next day, President Goodluck Jonathan, apparently trying to dissuade the governors from their opposition to the SWF, urged them not to play politics with the economy.

One of the governors confided in THISDAY yesterday that although they were amenable to dialogue, they would not drop the legal bid except the federal government addressed their concerns over certain grey areas they have with the fund.

THISDAY had exclusively reported plans by the governors to go to court over the implementation of the SWF that came into being following the president’s assent to the National Sovereign Investment Authority Bill.



Opposition to the fund stemmed from the governors’ drive to get more funds to meet rising financial obligations, especially in implementing the Minimum Wage Act that pegs the lowest salary for workers at N18,000 per month.

Besides, the governors had argued that the operation of the SWF is in conflict with Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution which establishes the Federation Account and stipulates that all monies accruing to the federation should be paid into the account and distributed to the three tiers of government in conformity with the revenue allocation formula.

A governor said they were ready to take on the federal government over the SWF because it does not have the legal power to force them to save money as the operation of the special fund connotes.

Another governor confirmed that they would be heading to the Supreme Court soon for a final resolution on the operation of the fund, adding: “The constitution of Nigeria gives majority of the expenditure responsibilities to states as residual powers and the revenue formula as presently constituted is inadequate to cater to such constitutional provisions such as health care, education, housing, agriculture and infrastructure development.”


According to him, the operation of the fund reduces the revenue coming to the states from the Federation Account, “yet our responsibilities have not gone down. If for anything, the duties of the states keep increasing. Today, the federal government collects the lion’s share of the federal revenue.”

He said this was why the governors are agitating for an amendment to the revenue allocation formula as “the existing formula has become obsolete having been enacted in 1982 as the Revenue Allocation (Federation Accounts) Act of 1982.

“The inability of the federal government to efficiently discharge some of its constitutional responsibility results in states having to spend huge sums of money to fill the vacuum created by these lapses.


“Examples are the construction and rehabilitation of federal roads, infrastructure maintenance, power generation, etc.”

The governors also said the federal government has continued to deny states of revenue centrally collected from companies paying stamp duties and the income of members of the armed forces and police which are supposed to be fully remitted to the states of residence on the basis of derivation as provided under Section 163 (b) of the 1999 Constitution.

“The increasing responsibilities of states and local governments in such areas as education, health care, roads, construction and maintenance, drainage  and water supply, sanitation, inland water ways, town planning, justice, etc, justify an upward review of revenue allocation to the states and local governments and  is one of the reasons why we are against the fund,” the governor said.

where is beaf to disown this traitor

oyb:



where is beaf to disown this traitor

Amaechi never rated GEJ as a leader and he made this clear by openly refusing to support GEJ until Mr. President used the EFCC to bully him into joining the 'endorsement' bandwagon after which the EFCC miraculously decided that Rivers State has no case to answer.


I can understand where Amaechi is coming from. It must be frustrating , as a competent administrator, to see mediocrities promoted above you into positions they can actually use to frustrate your own proative efforts towards progress for the electorate. I see the hands of Fashola and Amaechi in this issue of challenging the FG. They have similar ideologies . Even at the last NGF meeting, Amaechi still reiterated that the Governors continue to 'insist' on the full deregulation and privatisation of the power sector. I am sure this is in reaction to how the GEJ Government, despite its previous promise, is deepening Government involvement in the sector and thereby perpetuating the Misery of States ready to implement quick power solutions.

Bloody rogues. What have they done with all the money they have been receiving all these years. The Federal government should ask them to account for every penny otherwise their monthly allocations will be stopped. Vagabonds in power, that's what they are.

kulutempa:

Bloody rogues.  What have they done with all the money they have been receiving all these years.  The Federal government should ask them to account for every penny otherwise their monthly allocations will be stopped.   Vagabonds in power, that's what they are.

The point is that more money should be going to the States. It does not really matter what the Governors have done or not done with previous allocations because we are in a representative democracy not a dictatorship where the FG can act autocratically towards a State (as OBJ used to do) rather than view States as partners in development. You should not be asking the Federal Government to withold State allocation or take on the role of school teacher punishing pupil.

You cannot ask one thief to punish another. Let the FG, if itself not full of thieve who like things as they are, push , as experts have advised, for complete transparency and a greater system of auditory checks and balances to ensure that allocations are judiciously utilised. You cannot suggest illegal behaviour as punishment for what you deem wrong. We are back to square one with that thinking. The States should get more money and GEJ, if he is willing and a solutions provider, should put in place measures that can effectively curb and discourage corruption.

I think Jonathan has a beautiful idea with this.Rotimi et al are have very selfish agenda.The local government should be empowered because they are more in touch with the grassroots.Ameachi should shut the hell up.What has he done in rivers ,apart from increase prostitution

Petty theives. He wants more money to buy more jets. Serious countries establish SWF to help fund strategic investments locally and internationally. Singarpore, China. UAE, Qatar, Libya , all high earning developing countries or oil exporting countries try to mop up funds with this body in order to diversify investments and fund big time capital infastructural developments. Nigeria is going no where without such projects. But you have empty governors going to war for more funds when their states are still cesspits of corruption. I hope they are forced to explain what they do with all these monies they fight for someday. If there is no law backing that, GEJ should get the national assembly to make a law to that effect so the greedy governors can go home and rest.

hollandis:

I think Jonathan has a beautiful idea with this.Rotimi et al are have very selfish agenda.The local government should be empowered because they are more in touch with the grassroots.Ameachi should shut the hell up.What has he done in rivers ,apart from increase prostitution

very dumb comment, very dumb

@ topic
i feel its a right step in the right direction

Now I see a bright future with such lovely thing as the SWF. What is the governors thinking? SWF is for major developmental project

Gbawe:

The point is that more money should be going to the States.

Nothing in our constitution promises that. Before we can entrust the state governors with more money they need to account for what they have already gotten. If they cannot do that, they do not deserve any more money. Period.

It does not really matter what the Governors have done or not done with previous allocations because we are in a representative democracy not a dictatorship where the FG can act autocratically towards a State (as OBJ used to do) rather than view States as partners in development.

I am shocked to hear this from a self-labeled progressive a la intellectual from Oxford. In a democracy, accountability is paramount. The whole reason why there is check and balances is just so our representatives would be accountable to us. It matters what they've done with our money. We need to know before we can give them more.
To whom much is given, much they say  should be expected and should be accounted for. It is obvious to us all that our state governors are also our biggest treasury looters; most become richer after their tenure, much more richer beyond what they could account for ( e.g Tinubu, a mere accountant , albeit a fraudulent one c-/u/-m druggie, who is now one of Nigeria's richest men).

You should not be asking the Federal Government to withold State allocation or take on the role of school teacher punishing pupil.

That is exactly the job of the federal government in a democracy. The feds are meant to oversea the states. After all, the buck stops at GEJ's table. When flood ravaged Lagos, who did Fashola run to? The feds. When Bokoharam started terrorizing Jos, the governor ran to the feds. The point is that they have to account for every kobo they get from the federal government. That is just how it is. Even in the US, the feds take on the role of the school teacher punishing the school pupil, at least when it comes to federal money. Federal money is federal money, not state money, and the federal govt decides how it is spent or if it is spent at all. If the state wants to be the masters of their destiny, let them generate more income for themselves and spend it how ever they see fit.

You cannot ask one thief to punish another.

You are right, Fashola, Amosun, Tinubu, and your brother are all thives. Just because you know they are thieves doesnt mean you have the right to call others names. You should know more than that, Mr. I-went-to-Oxford-on-tax-payers-money-gotten-illegally-from-Tinubu

Let the FG, if itself not full of thieve who like things as they are push , as experts have advised, for complete transparency and a greater system of auditory checks and balances to ensure that allocations are judiciously utilised.

I agree with this point. Now you are making use of your Oxford brain, at least for the first time since I started reading your posts

You cannot suggest illegal behaviour as punishment for what you deem wrong.

There is nothing illegal about the directives from the feds to the state governors. The excess crude oil money belongs to the federal government, not to the state governors.

We are back to square one with that thinking. The States should get more money and GEJ, if he is willing and a solutions provider, should put in place measures that can effectively curb and discourage corruption.

The States should account for what they have gotten first, then maybe we can talk about giving them more. As far as I am concerned, the SWF is the best use of our excess crude money. The state of Alska has the highest SWF in the world and it is in care of the US government. We cannot allow such amount of money in the hands of people like Aregbesola, Amosun, Tinubu, Ikuforiji, your brother, Ajimobi et al. There is too much at stake here. Once bitten by drug dealers with  multiple date of births, twice shy. Fool me once by certificate forgers, shame on you; fool me twice by ex-convicts in Asiwaju Criminals of Nigeria, shame on me

@Gbawe

The point is that more money should be going to the States. It does not really matter what the Governors have done or not done with previous allocations because we are in a representative democracy not a dictatorship where the FG can act autocratically towards a State (as OBJ used to do) rather than view States as partners in development. You should not be asking the Federal Government to withold State allocation or take on the role of school teacher punishing pupil.

I beg to disagree with you on certain statements from the above!

First, l agree with you in totality that
*the Fed Govt should not be a dictator
*We are in a representative democracy with three "independent arms" who are partners to each other.
*One tier of govt should not super-impose itself on others, unnecessarily.

Having said the above, let me also add "Governance" either at Federal, State or Local Govt level SHOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE CITIZENS.
If that is the case, the Federal Govt, being the custodian of the "federal Purse" called federation Account, has the responsibility to ensure that our national resources are not just "given-out and stolen at will", at any level of Govt.

In most cases, if something fails (Security, Roads, Schools, Power, Water, e.t.c), l do recall that the buck STOPS AT THE PRESIDENT's TABLE!
He is held "collectively responsible" for these failures even when it is glaring that some of the responsibilities for such failures, RESTS with another tier of government!

In the light of the above, l  am of the humble opinion that, like in a "family setting", the Father (Fed Govt) owes a "duty of care" to the Wife (states) even when she is working and earns income, and to the children (Local Govt) of that family.
If that family fails, it is not the kids or wife that failed, it is the Father, if you get my simplistic analogy!

My "wonderment" again is that "what is wrong with having a SWF (savings) if the intention is noble?
*If the intention is to create a fund from which capital projects like Power stations and refineries, can be built?
*If these projects are executed by the Federal govt, is it not for the benefit of the citizens?

Is it not the same Govt that these Governors run to, when they run into financial trouble or when confronted with projects that incur heavy amounts? For example, LASG is running to the President during the recent ecological and natural disasters it experienced!
Ws it not the Federal Govt that "solved" the Ocean encroachment problem at Bar-Beach, after many years when the state seems helpless?

LASG is expecting the Federal govt to partner with it to build the 4th Mainland bridge, something it can not and will never be able to do on its own!
Look at the 2nd Niger Bridge, why is the state Govt not building it on its own?


In essence, l am saying we cannot completely "financially dissect and disconnect" the three tiers of Govt, from each  other.
They should have a common sense of purpose; The Caveat being that the federal govt is not just trying to create a huge "pool of money" for itself so that it can steal larger sums, at its own whim and caprice!

Would you rather we have this "share-share mentality" where resources are just "tabled and shared", only to  be looted and siphoned-off by the various heads of the three tiers of government?

Look at our "local street roads" in Lagos for example.
Fashola has tried on the state roads but all you still hear, when people complain about the roads that lead to their houses (which are in extremely in terrible states) is: What is Fashola doing sef!
But in truth, these roads are the responsibility of the Local Government!

With all the increased allocations to the Local govts, why have they not been up and doing on these 'street roads'?
All they do is siphon the little left of their "tier allocations", into foreign accounts and buy houses overseas (That is after the Mafioso-General, Bola Tinubu, has removed his "sizeable cut"! )

Under such scenario, when and how do you think this country will develop?

Except there is a mechanism for monitoring how these huge sums are spent and spent judiciously, we should have observed that a "centralized system of accounting" (as obtainable in military rule, of which l am in no way advocating), seems to provide a faster rate of infrastructural development!)

In terms of "structural development,", as bad as the "military years" are, it is very unfortunate and ironic that most of the structures we enjoy today were put in place under them! Almost all the bridges in Lagos, Abuja FCT, Airports, Power stations, just name it!
No wonder IBB can still raise his head and thump his chest! Ditto OBJ too!

What then are the gains of this democracy sef?
Bombings? Riots? Kidnappings?

Cheers,

Lastpage!
Our political leaders must get real and be very objective.
Sentiments or playing politics with such issues dont help us as a nation.

sagaponle:


Nothing in our constitution promises that. Before we can entrust the state governors with more money they need to account for what they have already gotten. If they cannot do that, they do not deserve any more money. Period.

I am shocked to hear this from a self-labeled progressive a la intellectual from Oxford. In a democracy, accountability is paramount. The whole reason why there is check and balances is just so our representatives would be accountable to us. It matters what they've done with our money. We need to know before we can give them more.
To whom much is given, much they say  should be expected and should be accounted for. It is obvious to us all that our state governors are also our biggest treasury looters; most become richer after their tenure, much more richer beyond what they could account for ( e.g Tinubu, a mere accountant , albeit a fraudulent one c-/u/-m druggie, who is now one of Nigeria's richest man).


That is exactly the job of the federal government in a democracy. The feds are meant to oversea the states. After all, the buck stops at GEJ's table. When flood ravaged Lagos, who did Fashola run to? The feds. When Bokoharam started terrorizing Jos, the governor ran to the feds. The point is that they have to account for every kobo they get from the federal government. That is just how it is. Even in the US, the feds take on the role of the school teacher punishing the school pupil, at least when it comes to federal money. Federal money is federal money, not state money, and the federal govt decides how it is spent or if it is spent at all. If the state wants to be the masters of their destiny, let them generate more income for themselves and spend it how ever they see fit.



You are right, Fashola, Amosun, Tinubu, and your brother are all thives. Just because you know they are thieves doesnt mean you have the right to call others names. You should know more than that, Mr. I-went-to-Oxford-on-tax-payers-money-gotten-illegally-from-Tinubu


I agree with this point. Now you are making use of your Oxford brain, at least for the first time since I started reading your posts


There is nothing illegal about the directives from the feds to the state governors. The excess crude oil money belongs to the federal government, not to the state governors.

The States should account for what they have gotten first, then maybe we can talk about giving them more. As far as I am concerned, the SWF is the best use of our excess crude money. The state of Alska has the highest SWF in the world and it is in care of the US government. We cannot allow such amount of money in the hands of people like Aregbesola, Amosun, Tinubu, Ikuforiji, your brother, Ajimobi et al. There is too much at stake here. Once bitten by drug dealers with  multiple date of births, twice shy. Fool me once by certificate forgers, shame on you; fool me twice by ex-convicts in Asiwaju Criminals of Nigeria, shame on me

Fstranger, zstranger, wizardofoz and now sagaponle ?  Do you have a life at all?

From  a purely legal perspective, I think the governors are on a wild goose chase and would simply end up enriching the lawyers.  All that the Sovereign Wealth Fund legislation has done is to put on a legal basis, the previous excess crude account into which  excess earnings above a particular oil price benchmark were previously paid.  However there was no legal foundation for that account and as a result  it was used for all sorts of undocumented purposes.  The Sovereign Wealth Fund has now provided a legal basis for the excess crude oil receipts and the problem for the state governors it that the fund does not form part of  the Federation Account.  A similar challenge was made in the case of Attorney General of Ogun State vs Attorney General of the Federation in 2002, in respect of proceeds of the government privatisation exercise, but that case was thrown out of court because it was decided that the such proceeds are not payable into the Federation account.   Since the Sovereign Wealth Funds is similarly ring fenced, I fail to see how the governors would be able to get their hands at it.  However, it should be quite an interesting case for our hot shot lawyers, who should have a profitable day in court, whichever way the case goes.

kulutempa:

From  a purely legal perspective, I think the governors are on a wild goose chase and would simply end up enriching the lawyers.  All that the Sovereign Wealth Fund legislation has done is to put on a legal basis, the previous excess crude account into which  excess earnings above a particular oil price benchmark were previously paid.  However there was no legal foundation for that account and as a result  it was used for all sorts of undocumented purposes.  The Sovereign Wealth Fund has now provided a legal basis for the excess crude oil receipts and the problem for the state governors it that the fund does not form part of  the Federation Account.  A similar challenge was made in the case of Attorney General of Ogun State vs Attorney General of the Federation in 2002, in respect of proceeds of the government privatisation exercise, but that case was thrown out of court because it was decided that the such proceeds are not payable into the Federation account.   Since the Sovereign Wealth Funds is similarly ring fenced, I fail to see how the governors would be able to get their hands at it.  However, it should be quite an interesting case our hot shot lawyers, who should have a profitable day in court, whichever way the case goes.

And also, if they are really serious, why pick Olisa Agbakoba to head the team? This is nothing but paddy-paddy crap going on here. Olisa Agbkoba made his name as a Human rights lawyer and he hasnt practiced actively for some years now. Nothing in his CV tells us he has any substantial experience taking on cases like this, and yet he is heading a team that is supposed to be challenging the federal government on what belongs to the federal government.

This Amaechi guy is just a clown! I refuse to take him seriously.

Next story please!

lastpage:

@Gbawe
I beg to disagree with you on certain statements from the above!

let me clarify that with this statement

It does not really matter what the Governors have done or not done with previous allocations

I am saying that there are provisions , in a modern democracy, for dealing with corruption and misrule. Autocratically withholding funds is not part of those provisions and indeed we all saw the Supreme court rule against OBJ over this (see below).

When there is no deliberate and systematic effort to use , in tandem and effectively, the EFCC, ICPC, office of the Auditor General, office of the Accountant General et al to provide an effective checks and balance against misuse of disbursed funds why are we talking like a Banana republic, run by a dictator, with how we are advocation the dictatorial withholding of funds to States as a way to force States to judiciously utilise recieved allocations?

The supreme Court has outlawed that sort of action and this is why I said what I did above. The FG cannot play judge, jury and jailer . Instead it must become modern and borrow lessons from other Nations as per how effective democracies are run with checks and balances and total sincerity that prohibits corruption and profligacy. What we should realise in Nigeria is that the FG is often a beneficiary of corruption and profligacy. This is why we don't see robust and sincere efforts geared at the development of a more transparent and well audited system that will drastically improve judicious usage of disbursed funds.

We demonstrate that we dont see the big picture if we join the noise for the FG to autocratically withhold funds to any States without first asking the FG to commit to reforms that will transform how disbursements are utilised. That is putting the Cart before the Horse and no different to supporting GEJ's tenure extension , as a way to curb 'monetised' politics when we have not , first and foremost, asked GEJ to so the simple things that are most effective such as pushing for the life ban of any politician guilty of fraudulent electoral conduct. Withholding allocations State are legally entitled to unconditionally is not the way forward at all.

http://www.ialsnet.org/meetings/constit/papers/AmupitanJoash(Nigeria).pdf

The Supreme Court also held as null and void the decision of the Federal Government to withhold statutory allocation due and payable to the Lagos State Government in respect of the 20 Local Governments. Before the decision of the Supreme Court on this matter, very serious tension was already generated between the Lagos State Government led, as at that time, by Chief Bola Tinubu and the Federal Government led by President Olusegun Obasanjo.

^^^

Example of the US govt withholding federal dollars from states:

http://drkatesview./2011/03/11/is-obama-bribing-the-states-on-eligibility/

http://liveaction.org/blog/obama-threatens-to-cut-off-indiana-healthcare-funds/

http://www.laborunionreport.com/portal/2011/05/us-dept-of-labor-withholds-grant-money-to-texas-bus-service-due-to-union-dispute/

http://broken-government.com/?p=1852

Again, I reiterate, the FG is doing nothing absurd here, Mr. Gbawe.


PS: there is nothing autocratic about the FG holding on to federal money. The money belongs to the feds and they can spend it how ever they deem fit or not even spend it at all.

Mr. Gbawe go back to Oxford for a post-grad. You are out of your depth here.

Gbawe:

let me clarify that with this statement  I am saying that there are provisions , in a modern democracy, for dealing with corruption and misrule. Autocratically withholding funds is not part of those provisions and indeed we all saw the Supreme court rule against OBJ over this (see below).

When there is no deliberate and systematic effort to use , in tandem and effectively, the EFCC, ICPC, office of the Auditor General, office of the Accountant General et al to provide an effective checks and balance against misuse of disbursed funds why are we talking like a Banana republic, run by a dictator, with how we are advocation the dictatorial withholding of funds to States as a way to force States to judiciously utilise recieved allocations?

The supreme Court has outlawed that sort of action and this is why I said what I did above. The FG cannot play judge, jury and jailer . Instead it must become modern and borrow lessons from other Nations as per how effective democracies are run with checks and balances and total sincerity that prohibits corruption and profligacy. What we should realise in Nigeria is that the FG is often a beneficiary of corruption and profligacy. This is why we don't see robust and sincere efforts geared at the development of a more transparent and well audited system that will drastically improve judicious usage of disbursed funds.

We demonstrate that we dont see the big picture if we join the noise for the FG to autocratically withhold funds to any States without first asking the FG to commit to reforms that will transform how disbursements are utilised. That is putting the Cart before the Horse and no different to supporting GEJ's tenure extension , as a way to curb 'monetised' politics when we have not , first and foremost, asked GEJ to so the simple things that are most effective such as pushing for the life ban of any politician guilty of fraudulent electoral conduct. Withholding allocations State are legally entitled to unconditionally is not the way forward at all.

http://www.ialsnet.org/meetings/constit/papers/AmupitanJoash(Nigeria).pdf

@Gbawe, with all due respect, the issue is not the witholding of the allocation from the Federation Account, but whether the Sovereign Wealth Fund forms part of the Federation Account.  That, and that only, is the question the court would have to answer.

kulutempa:

From  a purely legal perspective, I think the governors are on a wild goose chase and would simply end up enriching the lawyers.  All that the Sovereign Wealth Fund legislation has done is to put on a legal basis, the previous excess crude account into which  excess earnings above a particular oil price benchmark were previously paid.  However there was no legal foundation for that account and as a result  it was used for all sorts of undocumented purposes.  The Sovereign Wealth Fund has now provided a legal basis for the excess crude oil receipts and the problem for the state governors it that the fund does not form part of  the Federation Account.  A similar challenge was made in the case of Attorney General of Ogun State vs Attorney General of the Federation in 2002, in respect of proceeds of the government privatisation exercise, but that case was thrown out of court because it was decided that the such proceeds are not payable into the Federation account.   Since the Sovereign Wealth Funds is similarly ring fenced, I fail to see how the governors would be able to get their hands at it.  However, it should be quite an interesting case for our hot shot lawyers, who should have a profitable day in court, whichever way the case goes.

I disagree. In fact , I think they have a good case given that a good argument can be made for how some States can genuinely prove that they are fiscally unable to pay the minimum wage yet the Government , rather than increase allocations to such States, want to save excess funds in an SWF. Minimally , the court will find merit in directing amendments that will prevent insensitive savings of funds in the SWF.

The Governors might succeed in gaining what they really want , i.e an amendment to the revenue allocation formula, even if the Government gets it SWF. I suspect they don't really want the SWF rescinded . Rather they want more money for States and I back them in that respect. There are even many grey areas in the Constitution that may be interpreted in favour of the argument proffered by the Governors.

Whether we like it or not, this is the way forward . I.e various tiers of Governance challenging each other legally. Change and progress is often the by-product. What we had up to now, with Governors and the FG always colluding to defraud Nigerians, should end. Let states get more Money because that is where we all live and not at Aso Rock or the NASS. Thereafter we should all do our bit and demand ,through the powers of the FOI, to inspect how funds are utilised.

Besides, the governors had argued that the operation of the SWF is in conflict with Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution which establishes the Federation Account and stipulates that all monies accruing to the federation should be paid into the account and distributed to the three tiers of government in conformity with the revenue allocation formula.

A governor said they were ready to take on the federal government over the SWF because it does not have the legal power to force them to save money as the operation of the special fund connotes.

The governors also said the federal government has continued to deny states of revenue centrally collected from companies paying stamp duties and the income of members of the armed forces and police which are supposed to be fully remitted to the states of residence on the basis of derivation as provided under Section 163 (b) of the 1999 Constitution.

Opposition to the fund stemmed from the governors’ drive to get more funds to meet rising financial obligations, especially in implementing the Minimum Wage Act that pegs the lowest salary for workers at N18,000 per month.

SWF is a good idea in theory, but the implementation is suspect. If you want to fund it, use federal funds to do so. Don't use state funds. You cannot confiscate money due to State X in order to fund national program Y. . . no matter how cool, cute, important, etc national program Y is.

kulutempa:

@Gbawe, with all due respect, the issue is not the witholding of the allocation from the Federation Account, but whether the Sovereign Wealth Fund forms part of the Federation Account.  That, and that only, is the question the court would have to answer.

I was responding to what you and others have written. You seem to suggest the FG should arbitrarily hold back allocations due to States without understanding that the FG should , first and foremost, proactively put in place a system that can enable it to show conclusive proof of the misuse of State allocation. We don't want Nigeria regressing with practices best suited to Junta republic. You cannot just give States money and then crudely withhold allocation when you don't see what you want to see. Let the FG provide , with total integrity, a robust auditory system and it will be easy to prove corruption and misuse of funds against States. This can then guide and provide legality for any action the Government embarks on from then on. Nothing else should be acceptable if we want progress and if , as Obama suggested, we believe stronger Institutions are required as a way forward.  

The Federal government should ask them to account for every penny otherwise their monthly allocations will be stopped.

It is a bit sad here that many don't understand the principle of federalism.

what increasing demand are the governors talking aboit here? their main motive to object this is to keep more monies for themselves period[color=#990000][/color][b][/b]

ekt_bear:

SWF is a good idea in theory, but the implementation is suspect. If you want to fund it, use federal funds to do so. Don't use state funds. You cannot confiscate money due to State X in order to fund national program Y. . . no matter how cool, cute, important, etc national program Y is.

Precisely !! This is why I wrote  

Minimally , the court will find merit in directing amendments that will prevent insensitive savings of funds in the SWF.

You cannot "insensitively" save the funds accruing to the federation account in a SWF , effectively an investment vehicle, when States cannot pay the minimum wage !!!! No Court will sanction that action. At the very least , the FG will be directed to look at altering the allocation formula to specifically accomodate what is allowed for the SWF. The arbitrariness and lack of transparency of the past cannot be allowed continue . This move from the Governors is correct as , minimally, it may force a long overdue review of the allocation formula.

ekt_bear:

It is a bit sad here that many don't understand the principle of federalism.

My brother, thank you OOOOO !!!!

ekt_bear:

It is a bit sad here that many don't understand the principle of federalism.

you are right but some of us understand federalism but are worried that these lot who call themselves governors are not in it for the love of federalism.
they just want more to loot.
the problem is that leaving the loot in the center fuels the lust of the thieves in Abuja.
whichever way,a thief prospers.
the crux of the matter is finding a way to ensure that our collective resource is used for the benefit of the masses not a few,either in Abuja or the state capitals.

mbulela:

you are right but some of us understand federalism but are worried that these lot who call themselves governors are not in it for the love of federalism.
they just want more to loot.
the problem is that leaving the loot in the center fuels the lust of the thieves in Abuja.
whichever way,a thief prospers.
the crux of the matter is finding a way to ensure that our collective resource is used for the benefit of the masses not a few,either in Abuja or the state capitals.

Thank you jare.

When you do not agree with some ediots, they assume you are not as educated as them.  Buncha retarrdds, I call them.

mbulela:

you are right but some of us understand federalism but are worried that these lot who call themselves governors are not in it for the love of federalism.
they just want more to loot.
the problem is that leaving the loot in the center fuels the lust of the thieves in Abuja.
whichever way,a thief prospers.
the crux of the matter is finding a way to ensure that our collective resource is used for the benefit of the masses not a few,either in Abuja or the state capitals.

I am sure that some of them are in it to loot (or stated more accurately, so that the money available to them to loot doesn't decrease.)

However, that is not really the point.

If we practice federalism, then there are certain powers that belong to the FG and others that belong to a state. If you decide that shiny national project Y or looting governor Z is the reason you want to let the FG encroach on a state's territory, thus weakening your federalism and make a more centralized state. . . well, I think it is very bad idea and a bad precedent.

If you support this, then don't complain if later down the line the FG decides to take on more powers for itself.

Gbawe:

I was responding to what you and others have written. You seem to suggest the FG should arbitrarily hold back allocations due to States without understanding that the FG should , first and foremost, proactively put in place a system that can enable it to show conclusive proof of the misuse of State allocation. We don't want Nigeria regressing with practices best suited to Junta republic. You cannot just give States money and then crudely withhold allocation when you don't see what you want to see. Let the FG provide , with total integrity, a robust auditory system and it will be easy to prove corruption and misuse of funds against States. This can then guide and provide legality for any action the Government embarks on from then on. Nothing else should be acceptable if we want progress and if , as Obama suggested, we believe stronger Institutions are required as a way forward.  

Well, I had already moved on from there and I was responding to your latest post about the withholding of the state's allocation.  Of course, the Federal government cannot link the disbursement of allocations with an audit of how the funds were spent without enabling legislation and all it needs to do is to present a bill to parliament to this effect.  In fact if we are serious in Nigeria, this is something that should have been included in our 1999 constitution for both the Federal and State governments or raised in parliament by our lazy legislators.  However I agree that that is something for the future, and not quite as relevant or immediate as the proposed court action by the governors.  As to the insensitivity of the allocation to the SWF,  I would be surprised if a court of law concerns itself with such emotional issues, as opposed to the legal question, of whether or not  the allocation is part of the Federated account.

I also agree that some of these state governors don't give a crap about federalism.

But if their selfish interest leads to a weaker FG and thus a better country, so be it.

mbulela:

you are right but some of us understand federalism but are worried that these lot who call themselves governors are not in it for the love of federalism.
they just want more to loot.
the problem is that leaving the loot in the center fuels the lust of the thieves in Abuja.
whichever way,a thief prospers.
the crux of the matter is finding a way to ensure that our collective resource is used for the benefit of the masses not a few,either in Abuja or the state capitals.

My brother, this is my consistent point. judicious usage of State/Government funds is a foregone conclusion in the best Nations on Earth because effective checks and balances exist to ensure this. We don't have this because the current slack arrangement suits everyone - including the FG.

The FG can therefore never be seen as the Saint in this while we lambast the Governors. The governors have a right to ask for more money because States are , in real terms, the most important federating units in our federal system !!! Governors can object against insensitive saving of funds in so far as their is no specific clarification as per what the FG is legally allowed to invest in the SWF.

What Governors have done with previous allovation has no bearing on them asking for more money from an allocation formula that is unfair IMO. We should be asking for more checks and balances to ensure allocations are judiciously utilised not automatically supporting the FG and touting that it crudely act as judge, jury and executioner .

ekt_bear:

I also agree that some of these state governors don't give a crap about federalism.

But if their selfish interest leads to a weaker FG and thus a better country, so be it.

Selfish interest leading ultimately to a better country? I doubt it.

sagaponle:

Thank you jare.

When you do not agree with some ediots, they assume you are not as educated as them.  Buncha retarrdds, I call them.

Fstranger, there is general decorum on this thread . Why do you want to ruin that with your schizophrenia !!! Can't you ever talk like a normal person ?