IN his 1994 book, The Impossible Country: A Journey Through the Last Days of Yugoslavia, Brian Hall related his encounters with Serbs, Croats, and Muslims – real people, likeable people – who had been overcome with suspicion and anxiety about one another.

He painted the tragic picture of a country, its politics, its history, and its seemingly insoluble animosities. Reviewing the book, Atlantic Monthly, the iconic American magazine founded in 1857, said it was “a tragic portrait . . . presented with sympathy and frequently with humor . . . (of) a disparate people who were never united except by their resentment of a foreign conqueror.”

The question that concentrates my mind each time I read Hall’s book is whether Nigeria, like the ill-fated Yugoslavia, has become an impossible country. Why is it that nothing works in the real sense? Why are there statesmen who hanker after public good? Instead, there is a glut of wayward, errant political actors and there is a world of difference between the politician and statesman because as James Freeman Clarke, the 19th century American author poignantly noted: “A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of his country. The statesman wishes to steer, while the politician is satisfied to drift.”

Nigeria is drifting and every issue is viewed from the prism of politics, which is why the Supreme Court ruling on Thursday, July 11, 2024, granting financial autonomy to the 774 local governments in the country will also become a problem sooner than later.

Why? Because those who went to Court to procure the judgement have their eyes on the next election rather than the next generation.

In the unanimous judgement of its seven-member panel, the Supreme Court upheld the suit brought by the Federal Government to strengthen the independence of LGs in the country, by granting them financial autonomy.

Insisting on what it termed the demand of justice which requires a progressive interpretation of the law, Justice Emmanuel Agim, who read the judgement said: “It is the position of this court that the federation can pay local government allocations directly to the local governments or through the states. In this case, since paying them through the states has not worked, justice demands that local governments’ allocations from the federation account should henceforth be paid directly to the local governments. I hold that the states’ retention of local government funds is unconstitutional.”

By granting financial autonomy, the Supreme Court ordered the Federal Government to pay the 20.60 per cent monthly allocation of the 774 LGs directly to their exclusive accounts and not to accounts controlled by governors. The Court also ruled that state governors do not have the power to dissolve elected LG councils and replace them with caretaker committees as that violates Section 7(1) of the Constitution.

The judgement was well received by many. Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, former governor of Abia State, ululated thereafter: “The Supreme Court judgement on the autonomy of local governments is one that should be hailed and applauded, especially for the courage and independence shown by the judiciary. The Supreme Court being a policy court did what is right and beneficial to the society.”

Those in Kalu’s corner have a point. Since 1999, governors have made a mess of the local government system by not only fiddling with the allocations to the Joint LG Accounts, but also, contrary to the dictates of the Constitution which states unequivocally that local governments must be democratically elected, continue to run them with caretaker committees.

But some Nigerians like Chief James Ibori, former governor of Delta State, demur.

Ibori, who together with Kalu belong to the Class of 1999-2007 governors with President Bola Tinubu, said on the contrary, the judgement is a coup against true federalism.

“Supreme Court has dealt a severe setback on the principle of federalism as defined by section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended),” Ibori lamented, adding: “The court’s ruling on the matter is an assault on true federalism. The federal government has no right to interfere with the administration of local governments under any guise whatsoever. There are only two tiers of government in a federal system of government.”

Ibori believes that if the judgement subsist, it will erode the powers of the state governments and give more powers to the Federal Government, contrary to the principles of federalism. This, he contends, will be a dangerous precedent because “if the federal government can directly intervene in local government finances, it could potentially use this as a tool for political leverage.”

That is the crux of the matter – lack of political altruism. While it is true that governors have made a mess of the purpose for creating local governments, Tinubu, who created 37 local council development areas in Lagos, is not a great apostle of local government autonomy.

So, the judgement is more political than legal. Could it be that the executive railroaded the judiciary into handing Tinubu control of local governments for the purposes of 2027 elections?

But how far can the president go? He who pays the piper dictates the tune. Even if elections are conducted, as long as the state governors control the State Independent Electoral Commissions created by section 197 of the Constitution, there is not much anyone can do. They will decide who wins elections at that level and LG autonomy will continue to be a mirage.

In fact, in their brazenness, most governors routinely dissolve SIEC boards put in place by their predecessors and reconstitute them with their own loyalists as soon as they assume office.

The credibility and quality of elections into local governments have to be sorted out if LG autonomy is to be guaranteed. But how can that be when the Secretary of Local Government and other key administrative staff are appointees of the state government? Besides, the state Houses of Assembly which exercise oversight on local governments are still strongly tied to the apron strings of their respective governors and could be used to witch-hunt any LG chairman or councillor who fails to do the bidding of the state governors.  

Some have suggested that the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, should be saddled with the responsibility of conducting LG polls. But with what the Professor Mahmud Yakubu-led INEC has become, there is little or no difference between SIEC and INEC.

And that takes me back to Brian Hall’s book. Nigerians are right now overcome with suspicion and anxiety about one another, a disparate people never united, not even by their collective misery inflicted on them by the ruling class – their oppressors.

To make matters worse, there are no statesmen. All we have are desperate politicians adept at gaming the system, people will do everything to win the next election even if it means pulling down the roof on everyone and everything. So, it does not matter what the Supreme Court rules or what the Constitution actually says, Nigeria will remain an impossible country as long as the status quo remains.