₦airaland Forum

IfnobeGod20:
■ The local council have no financial autonomy because their allocation is sent into a state joint account manage and control by the state governor. The governor only give whatever he likes to each local council.

This is wrong! The account is called "State Joint Local Government account". That it is called that does not then mean it should be interpreted as an account that belongs both to the state and the Local Government. Rather, it is merely an account were the aggregate Federal allocations and State IGR meant for all the local governments are to be deposited. The National and State Houses of Assemblies decides how much each LG gets from that account.

This rabble rouser again! Either Fayose is so empty headed he cannot see that the judgment will deepen democracy and good governance in Nigeria or he does not mean well for Nigerians. He lives in the past. I trust God to put him to shame. A new Nigeria is emerging.

So,the state Houses of Assembly are only there to force L.G Chairmen to respect governors even when governors are oppressing and stealing their funds?

If any chairman thinks he can disrespect governor because he is now getting his allocation directly from the F.G,the state House of Assembly will ask him to go home and disrespect the governor from home bla bla bla.

So what about the governors that do disrespect the president,has the N/Assembly ever ask them to go home and disrespect the president from home?
Beneficiary of illegality that still wants illegality to continue.
It won't work like that again this time around, Mr former governor.

Meanwhile, have you gone to EFCC and pick your sleeping mat that you took to their cell?

Kobojunkie:
This is wrong! The account is called "State Joint Local Government account". That it is called that does not then mean it should be interpreted as an account that belongs both to the state and the Local Government. Rather, it is merely an account were the aggregate Federal allocations and State IGR meant for all the local governments are to be deposited. The National and State Houses of Assemblies decides how much each LG gets from that account.

You're very wrong here my brother. Each 774 local government areas in Nigeria have its stipulated allocation for each month. No local government that doesn't have an aggregate amount allocated to it by federal allocation but they are aggregately sent together with the state allocation to a joint account mainly manage by the state governor. The local government areas generate its own IGR and spend. Have you heard before about local government tax collectors. They are many all over the local council areas in Nigeria. You will see them with local government tickets that they use to collect tax about and on the road.
There was a time I have the spreadsheet of allocation to state and local government but I have lost them now.

Kobojunkie:
1. Oh, I know what is going on in the country. My concern was that your previous statement was not in fact accurate. It is the House of Assembly that has the power to remove an elected LG official, not the Governor at all since the Constitution is clear that the Governor has no power or control over the LGs, who are elected officials. The abuse of power by the Senators who are paid by the Governors is an entirely different issue.

2. There are no half-autonomies. The system defined in the Constitution almost mirrors what we have here in the United States where the three tiers of government function in pretty much the same way. Yes, there is rampant abuse of power and crime in the Nigerian situation and this is to be expected. Why? Because the drivers in a democracy, the Nigerian people, are nowhere to be found in the driver's seat. They seem to have taken a backseat to their democratic system and that cannot work at all since democracy is a system of Government for the people by the people.

I think you're misconstruing issue. The House Assembly have no power to singlehandedly remove a chairman but can recommend his removal, just the same way the national assembly cannot remove an elected official at the national level but can recommend to the executive or president for the removal or discipline of such person. Put in mind we are operating a federating unit. The third tier is directly under the control of the second tier of government.

No doubt there is no half autonomy but in principle that is what the local government areas are enjoying. You cannot say you give autonomy to a local government areas but the second tier of government will still be the one controlling it and even organize its election, then, where lies the autonomy?
The governor will always determine who and who will be the chairman by only handing over to the chairman of the state SIEC who he wished the chairman should announce as the winner while the state assembly regulate their activities by formulating laws to guide them and exercise oversight functions on them.

IfnobeGod20:
■ You're very wrong here my brother. Each 774 local government areas in Nigeria have its stipulated allocation for each month. No local government that doesn't have an aggregate amount allocated to it by federal allocation but they are aggregately sent together with the state allocation to a joint account mainly manage by the state governor.
■ The local government areas generate its own IGR and spend. Have you heard before about local government tax collectors. They are many all over the local council areas in Nigeria. You will see them with local government tickets that they use to collect tax about and on the road.
There was a time I have the spreadsheet of allocation to state and local government but I have lost them now.

1. Section 162 of the Constitution instead has it that the account is maintained, not managed, by the State Governor.

2. The LG-generated IGR generated is not a part of the topic of discussion here at all.

IfnobeGod20:
■ I think you're misconstruing issue. The House Assembly have no power to singlehandedly remove a chairman but can recommend his removal, just the same way the national assembly cannot remove an elected official at the national level but can recommend to the executive or president for the removal or discipline of such person.
■ Put in mind we are operating a federating unit. The third tier is directly under the control of the second tier of government.
■ No doubt there is no half autonomy but in principle that is what the local government areas are enjoying. You cannot say you give autonomy to a local government areas but the second tier of government will still be the one controlling it and even organize its election, then, where lies the autonomy?
■ The governor will always determine who and who will be the chairman by only handing over to the chairman of the state SIEC who he wished the chairman should announce as the winner while the state assembly regulate their activities by formulating laws to guide them and exercise oversight functions on them.

1. The State and the National House of Assembly are empowered by the Constitution with the right to remove elected leaders from office including the President himself.

2. If you pay close attention to section 162, you will, again, find that control over the LG(third-tier) is ceded, not to the State Governors but to the National House of Assembly and the State House of Assembly. The only interaction the State has with the LG is in maintaining the Joint account where funds are dropped for all LGS in the State — nothing else.

3. I don't know what exactly you mean by half autonomy at all. And again the Governors are by law granted no control over LG matters and funds.

4. Not according to the Constitution which instead has it that the LG Chairman's are elected by the people. Please visit section 7 of your Constitution for more on this.

Nwaikpe:
The idiot called Onanuga, speaking for the piggish government thought they could rope Peter Obi in. Peter Obi in his wisdom never replied the bastards because little did the Adviser know, politics does not play out that way.


Peter Obi has always been on the side of low cost governance. And with this supreme court ruling, lets expect every Local Government Government to have their ow 20 special advisers too, and ministers.

How can Obi be on the side of low cost of governance and gave out 400 cars to traditional rulers in anambra for his re election.

Kobojunkie:
1. The State and the National House of Assembly are empowered by the Constitution with the right to remove elected leaders from office including the President himself.

2. If you pay close attention to section 162, you will, again, find that control over the LG(third-tier) is ceded, not to the State Governors but to the National House of Assembly and the State House of Assembly. The only interaction the State has with the LG is in maintaining the Joint account where funds are dropped for all LGS in the State — nothing else.

3. I don't know what exactly you mean by half autonomy at all. And again the Governors are by law granted no control over LG matters and funds.

4. Not according to the Constitution which instead has it that the LG Chairman's are elected by the people. Please visit section 7 of your Constitution for more on this.

No doubt the national assembly and the state assembly can initiate impeachment proceeding against any elected official of the government within their purview. But the state assembly is the only one that have the purview to regulate the activities of the local government administration and not the national assembly.
The governor also see the conduct of the local government election through the SIEC and not only joint account between them.
Are you also aware that the supreme court said the state have the power to replicate or merge the LGA the way they want? A governor can wake up tomorrow with the help of the state assembly and replicate any LGA or merge two LGAs together. Thankfully it was the same Tinubu that won the case.
Why I use the word half autonomy. Autonomy means having total control but does local government council have total control of their administration? They are subject to the whims and caprices of the state assembly and governor in oversight. That's why I used the word half autonomy because they have no total control of themselves.

kedeojo:
How can Obi be on the side of low cost of governance and gave out 400 cars to traditional rulers in anambra for his re election.

Are you people saying the tradition rulers doesn't deserve the cars bought for them by Peter Obi?
You guys should know that tradition rulers are part of the government and their activities are controlled by the government and they draw their monthly salary from the government. What is the big deal of buying cars for your employees?
Again, he bought the cars for them when the economy was still booming because he was still able to save for the state afterwards.

IfnobeGod20:
■ No doubt the national assembly and the state assembly can initiate impeachment proceeding against any elected official of the government within their purview. But the state assembly is the only one that have the purview to regulate the activities of the local government administration and not the national assembly.
■ The governor also see the conduct of the local government election through the SIEC and not only joint account between them.
■ Are you also aware that the supreme court said the state have the power to replicate or merge the LGA the way they want?
■ A governor can wake up tomorrow with the help of the state assembly and replicate any LGA or merge two LGAs together. Thankfully it was the same Tinubu that won the case.
■ Why I use the word half autonomy. Autonomy means having total control but does local government council have total control of their administration? They are subject to the whims and caprices of the state assembly and governor in oversight. That's why I used the word half autonomy because they have no total control of themselves.

1. Again, this is not true! Visit section 162 of your Constitution for clarity!

2. The Governor's job is not to conduct the elections. That job belongs to SIEC which is set up by the Governor. It is the same way that INEC, not the FG, conducts elections. The people are responsible for electing their officials at the Local, State, and National levels.

3. Yes, States have the power to create LGs; sections 7 & 8 of the Constitution speak to this. However, the same does not give the right over LG to the State Governor who created them. It is kind of similar to how the States are created at the federal level but does not answer to the FG either. Please understand and be clear about this.

4. Sections 7 and 8 are clearly indicated and have been since 1999. However, what Tinubu created were not LGAs— according to Section 7 & 8 of the Constitution— but LCDAs which are not recognized at the Federal level— FG does not fund LCDAs. Even to this day, Lagos is said to have only 20 LGs even though on paper in Lagos State, there are an additional 37 LCDAS which are funded, only by the State government.

5. Yes, according to the Constitution, it should! As I have repeated several times now, LGs as defined in the Constitution answer only to the State House of Assembly and the National House of Assembly— Section 162 of the Constitution—, the same as the State and the FG do.

kedeojo:
How can Obi be on the side of low cost of governance and gave out 400 cars to traditional rulers in anambra for his re election.

I forgot that those were his special advisers.

Mumu osun caste

Which one is Abuja INEC again? Do you mean FEDERAL Government?

SmartPolician:
LG autonomy can only work if electoral laws are amended to allow Abuja INEC conduct LGA elections. If not, if governors put their stooges in LGAs in a sham election, they will still be remitting whatever they get from Abuja to the governors.

Kobojunkie:
1. Again, this is not true! Visit section 162 of your Constitution for clarity!

2. The Governor's job is not to conduct the elections. That job belongs to SIEC which is set up by the Governor. It is the same way that INEC, not the FG, conducts elections. The people are responsible for electing their officials at the Local, State, and National levels.

3. Yes, States have the power to create LGs; sections 7 & 8 of the Constitution speak to this. However, the same does not give the right over LG to the State Governor who created them. It is kind of similar to how the States are created at the federal level but does not answer to the FG either. Please understand and be clear about this.

4. Sections 7 and 8 are clearly indicated and have been since 1999. However, what Tinubu created were not LGAs— according to Section 7 & 8 of the Constitution— but LCDAs which are not recognized at the Federal level— FG does not fund LCDAs. Even to this day, Lagos is said to have only 20 LGs even though on paper in Lagos State, there are an additional 37 LCDAS which are funded, only by the State government.

5. Yes, according to the Constitution, it should! As I have repeated several times now, LGs as defined in the Constitution answer only to the State House of Assembly and the National House of Assembly— Section 162 of the Constitution—, the same as the State and the FG do.

My brother you're misconstruing the constitution. There's no portion of the constitution that says the National Assembly shall have control over the local government, it is solely within the powers of the state assembly to exercise legislative functions over the local government administration and this is explicitly captured in section 162 subsection 8 as attached. There's no subsection of the section 162 that gave any oversight function of the local government administration to the National Assembly, none. I have attached herein for your perusal. The National Assembly only make law for the distribution of the accruals to the FG to each tier of government and nothing more. Check keenly the clauses as attached.
The my point above have answered your number 1 and 5.

On your number 2, no one is disputing that governor doesn't conduct election but if you know what is going on during local government election, you will marvel. Governor just hand over names of those to announce as winners even before the conclusion of the election. I have witnessed such so many times.

3. The governors have overbearing influence on the local government administration as a result of the federalism status, so that cannot be compare to FG exerting on the state government.

IfnobeGod20:
■ My brother you're misconstruing the constitution. There's no portion of the constitution that says the National Assembly shall have control over the local government, it is solely within the powers of the state assembly to exercise legislative functions over the local government administration and this is explicitly captured in section 162( as attached. There's no subsection of the section 162 that gave any oversight function of the local government administration to the National Assembly, none. I have attached herein for your perusal. The National Assembly only make law for the distribution of the accruals to the FG to each tier of government and nothing more. Check keenly the clauses as attached.
The my point above have answered your number 1 and 5.

Are you certain about any of the claim you made above in bold?

(3) Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the Federal and State Governments and the Local Government Councils in each State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(4) Any amount standing to the credit of the States in the Federation Account shall be distributed among the States on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(5) The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account shall also be allocated to the State for the benefit of their Local Government Councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(7) Each State shall pay to Local Government Councils in its area of jurisdiction such proportion of its total revenue on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
( The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils of a State shall be distributed among the Local Government Councils of that State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the State.
More: https://jurist.ng/constitution/sec-162

Kobojunkie:
Are you certain about any of the claim you made above in bold?

Please go back to my above comment, I forgot to attach the poster but is now there. Please read keenly sub section 8

IfnobeGod20:
■ Please go back to my above comment, I forgot to attach the poster but is now there. Please read keenly sub section 8

I did include subsection 8 in my previous post. What aspect of subsection 8 overrules the previous subsections which equally indicate that the National House of Assembly has some form of control over the funding of the LGs?

(3) Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the Federal and State Governments and the Local Government Councils in each State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(4) Any amount standing to the credit of the States in the Federation Account shall be distributed among the States on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(5) The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account shall also be allocated to the State for the benefit of their Local Government Councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(7) Each State shall pay to Local Government Councils in its area of jurisdiction such proportion of its total revenue on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
( 8 ) The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils of a State shall be distributed among the Local Government Councils of that State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the State.
More: https://jurist.ng/constitution/sec-162

If the amount of funding that eventually makes it down to each LG is dependent on decisions made by the National Assembly as well as the State Assembly, isn't it then reasonable to suggest that power over the LG resides with both houses?

Kobojunkie:
I did include subsection 8 in my previous post. What aspect of subsection 8 overrules the previous subsections which equally indicate that the National House of Assembly has some form of control over the funding of the LGs?
If the amount of funding that eventually makes it down to each LG is dependent on decisions made by the National Assembly as well as the State Assembly, isn't it then reasonable to suggest that power over the LG resides with both houses?

Please go back and read it very well, don't have any control over their finding but only empowered by law to make laws on how the money accrual to the FG will be distributed among the three tiers of government, i.e the ration of distribution for each tier. Subsection 8 gave vivid function of who to control the redistribution of the finance of the local government. It would be abnormal for two organs of government to have control over just one entity of government. It will surely cause overlapping function. So national assembly cannot be having control over the local government administration and the state assembly will also have same control. That's misnomer.
Take time and digest from subsection 5 to 8 and you will see the difference and who has control.

No no, see subsection 5, even the allocation meant for the local government shall be credited to the state and subsection 6 tells us where the allocation will be credited to, that is state joint account. The national assembly is just a o make law for the distribution of the accruals to the Federation account to all the three tiers of government. They have no direct administration with the local government areas.

IfnobeGod20:
...Subsection 8 gave vivid function of who to control the redistribution of the finance of the local government. It would be abnormal for two organs of government to have control over just one entity of government. It will surely cause overlapping function. So national assembly cannot be having control over the local government administration and the state assembly will also have same control. That's misnomer. Take time and digest from subsection 5 to 8 and you will see the difference and who has control.

I asked you a simple question but I am getting some sort of runaround from you instead. What part of the content of the law as revealed in subsections 4, 5, 6,7, and 8, leads you to believe that the National Assembly being able to control allocations that eventually reach the LG cannot be said to directly influence events at the LG level?

Kobojunkie:
I asked you a simple question but I am getting some sort of runaround from you instead. What part of the content of the law as revealed in subsections 4, 5, 6,7, and 8, leads you to believe that the National Assembly being able to control allocations that eventually reach the LG cannot be said to directly influence events at the LG level?

Go up my last comment I have included that in the last paragraph.

IfnobeGod20:
■ Go up my last comment I have included that in the last paragraph.

Please read through and digest all of what is written. Section 5 states that amounts shall be distributed to the States for the benefit of their Local Government Councils, not the State Governors themselves. In Section 6 it is explained to you that the amount credited to the state on behalf of the LGs in said are to be deposited in that joint account maintained(kept alive) by the State.

(3) Any amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account shall be distributed among the Federal and State Governments and the Local Government Councils in each State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(4) Any amount standing to the credit of the States in the Federation Account shall be distributed among the States on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(5) The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account shall also be allocated to the State for the benefit of their Local Government Councils on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
(7) Each State shall pay to Local Government Councils in its area of jurisdiction such proportion of its total revenue on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.
( 8 ) The amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils of a State shall be distributed among the Local Government Councils of that State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the State.
More: https://jurist.ng/constitution/sec-162

According to you....

The national assembly is just a o make law for the distribution of the accruals to the Federation account to all the three tiers of government. They have no direct administration with the local government areas.

Let's assume for a second that this is true. Isn't that law in itself a form of control over the LGs? Does that Law not directly impact the functioning of the LGs at the lower level?
So, my questions remain. What part of the content of the law as revealed in subsections 4, 5, 6,7, and 8 leads you to believe that the National Assembly being able to control allocations that eventually reach the LG cannot be said to directly influence events at the LG level?

Kobojunkie:
Please read through and digest all of what is written. Section 5 states that amounts shall be distributed to the States for the benefit of their Local Government Councils, not the State Governors themselves. In Section 6 it is explained to you that the amount credited to the state on behalf of the LGs in said are to be deposited in that joint account maintained(kept alive) by the State.
According to you.... Let's assume for a second that this is true. Isn't that law in itself a form of control over the LGs? Does that Law not directly impact the functioning of the LGs at the lower level?
So, my questions remain. What part of the content of the law as revealed in subsections 4, 5, 6,7, and 8 leads you to believe that the National Assembly being able to control allocations that eventually reach the LG cannot be said to directly influence events at the LG level?

It seems my brother you don't even understand the content of this section. The national assembly duty is to work out how the money generated by the FG will be shared among the three tiers of government. I think by law it is 52% for FG and 48% for the state and local government. The national assembly doesn't have any other duty than this on the finance of the state and local government. And this 48% is to be paid to the state joint local government account, before the state redistribute to the local government councils in the state. After that it is the responsibility of the state house assembly to also determine how the local government will appropriate to different council. That's just what that section 162 subsection 3 to 8 is saying.
In a lay man language, National Assembly determines what 1 son , 2 son and 3 son will get (subsection 3, 4, 5) while the state assembly determines how the 3 son will spend the money (subsection8).

IfnobeGod20:
■ It seems my brother you don't even understand the content of this section. The national assembly duty is to work out how the money generated by the FG will be shared among the three tiers of government. I think by law it is 52% for FG and 48% for the state and local government. The national assembly doesn't have any other duty than this on the finance of the state and local government. And this 48% is to be paid to the state joint local government account, before the state redistribute to the local government councils in the state. After that it is the responsibility of the state house assembly to also determine how the local government will appropriate to different council. That's just what that section 162 subsection 5 to 8 is saying.
In a lay man language, National Assembly determines what 1 son , 2 son and 3 son will get (subsection 3, 4, 5) while the state assembly determines how the 3 son will spend the money (subsection .

1. Stop all this unnecessary storytelling abeg! Answer the question abeg!

If the National Assembly is responsible for, according to the Constitution, prescribing the final amount to be shared by the LGs in each state and the State Assembly equally has the responsibility for prescribing and eventually distributing amounts to individual LGs in a particular state, does it not then follow, as stated in the Constitution, that the final fate of the LGs lies in the hands of both the National and State Houses of Assembly in this case?

Kobojunkie:
1. Stop all this unnecessary storytelling abeg! Answer the question abeg!

If the National Assembly is responsible for, according to the Constitution, prescribing the final amount to be shared by the LGs in each state and the State Assembly equally has the responsibility for prescribing and eventually distributing amounts to individual LGs in a particular state, does it not then follow, as stated in the Constitution, that the final fate of the LGs lies in the hands of both the National and State Houses of Assembly in this case?

My brother, the way you're moving back and forth and doesn't want to listen to common sense is what is causing their long argument.
I have said it and I will repeat it, the National Assembly doesn't have anything to do with the local government areas and I am reiterating to you again and again.
The angle you're looking at it doesn't make any sense at all. The national assembly also determined the amount a state should also receive, do they have any other thing to do with the state assembly other than taking over the assembly in case there is friction in the assembly. They have no other legislative function at all.
Please I am tired of this your argument because I have tried to let you understand common system of governance but you're bent of making me to accept what is totally wrong. My brother, national assembly have nothing to do with the local government administration and I repeat again and again, that they make law to determine what FG, state and local government should share out of the Federation account doesn't mean they have any influence on the local government administration. Note this and be at peace. The section is very much explicit and straight forward.
My concern is that people just left us arguing here while those that know much kept mum.

Kobojunkie:
1. Stop all this unnecessary storytelling abeg! Answer the question abeg!

If the National Assembly is responsible for, according to the Constitution, prescribing the final amount to be shared by the LGs in each state and the State Assembly equally has the responsibility for prescribing and eventually distributing amounts to individual LGs in a particular state, does it not then follow, as stated in the Constitution, that the final fate of the LGs lies in the hands of both the National and State Houses of Assembly in this case?

My brother, the way you're moving back and forth and doesn't want to listen to common sense is what is causing this long argument.
I have said it and I will repeat it, the National Assembly doesn't have anything to do with the local government areas and I am reiterating to you again and again.
The angle you're looking at it doesn't make any sense at all. The national assembly also determined the amount a state should also receive, do they have any other thing to do with the state assembly other than taking over the assembly in case there is friction in the assembly. They have no other legislative function at all.
Please I am tired of this your argument because I have tried to let you understand common system of governance but you're bent of making me to accept what is totally wrong. My brother, national assembly have nothing to do with the local government administration and I repeat again and again, that they make law to determine what FG, state and local government should share out of the Federation account doesn't mean they have any influence on the local government administration. Note this and be at peace. The section is very much explicit and straight forward.
My concern is that people just left us arguing here while those that know much kept mum.