Adedeji Adeleke, the father of the award-winning superstar, David, popularly called Davido, has revealed what he went through securing the environmental permit for his power plant worth over $2 billion.

The billionaire industrialist disclosed this while speaking as a Layperson from the West-Central Africa Division during the Seventh Day Adventist General Conference Annual Council on Tuesday, which was held in Maryland, United States of America.

While sharing his experience as a Baptist member, Adeleke recounted how he ran into bottlenecks with ‘difficult government officials’, with a particular official saying to him that the project would never ‘see the light of day’.

He said he went on his knees and prayed to God because he did not want to accept the government official’s statement as the final say for his company, Pacific Energy which was closely working with Chinese engineering companies for the construction and design of the power projects.

“I am a businessman in Nigeria. I’m into the electricity business. I own a power plant, I generate about 15 per cent of the electricity needs for Nigeria. I have Chinese engineering companies that work for me. I’m building the biggest power plant in Nigeria that will be completed in January 2025. It is a 1,250-megawatt power plant.

“During the course of the design and getting the permit, we ran into difficult government officials. For environmental reasons, our permit was denied, and the particular government officials that I held a meeting with told me to my face that my project would never see the light of the day. But while he was saying that, I was saying in my mind that this guy is talking as if he is God. I was saying in my mind that God should listen to him; Because he is not God, whatever he is saying is null and void.”

“So I left, disappointed and I told my Chinese friends that unfortunately we have difficulty and this project is going to stall. Meanwhile, the project is worth about $2 billion. In the process, a lot of money had already gone into the design and preliminaries. Before we get to the stage where we would need a permit and then break ground. So my Chinese friend was worried because the Afrexim Bank of China was involved so that meant bankruptcy for him. I told him not to worry,” he said.

Adeleke further stressed that his Chinese friend had to travel down to Nigeria to discuss a way out because he never believed that prayer was enough to get the project done, noting that it did as the then Minister of Power granted the approval because he saw that the project was a brilliant one.

Recall that Adeleke had earlier spoken about this power project while delivering a lecture note at the 9th graduation ceremony of Adeleke University, Ede, Osun State in July 2023.

[Punch]

A SERVING minister was quoted as saying that the crisis in the country is being sponsored by those who wish to share power with the President. To me, there is nothing wrong with power sharing. It is only in a country like our own that it is a sin to lose an election.

Much as it is wrong for the opposition to want to destroy the country because they are not in government, there is nothing bad in accommodating them in the government.

A coalition government is in no position an inferior government or illegitimate. Power sharing is good for democracy. It helps reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Power sharing makes people dependent and responsible. It is essential to avoid violent conflicts, tyranny of the majority and ensure political stability.

Democratic rule and power sharing have close links. Power sharing is an integral component of the spirit of democratic rule. It is highly applicable in a diverse society as ours. Let’s face it: a united Nigeria is still a dream. Ethnicity is still the rule here, and if power sharing will help bring about progress and unity, let’s adopt it.

Monopoly of power by group, a tribe, a political party, will lead to envy, hatred, disunity and jealousy, no matter how that party got to power, even if they bought their way to power.

In some countries, it is called coalition. In the First Republic we called it alliance; in the Second Republic we called it accord.

In his inaugural address on May 29 last year, President Bola Tinubu declared: “Today, fate and destiny join together to place the torch of human progress in our very hands. We dare not let it slip.

“We lift high this torch so that it might shine on every household and in every heart that calls itself Nigerian. We hold this beam aloft because it lights our path with compassion, brotherhood, and peace. May this great light never EXTINGUISH.

“Our administration shall govern on your behalf but never rule over you. We shall consult and dialogue but never dictate. We shall reach out to all but never put down a single person for holding views contrary to our own.

“We are here to further mend and heal this nation, not tear and injure it.

“In this vein, may I offer a few comments regarding the election that brought us to this juncture. It was a hard-fought contest. And it was also fairly won. Since the advent of the Fourth Republic, Nigeria has not held an election of better quality.

“The outcome reflected the will of the people. However, my victory does not render me any more Nigerian than my opponents.

Nor does it render them any less patriotic. “They shall forever be my fellow compatriots. And I will treat them as such. They represent important constituencies and concerns that wisdom dare not ignore”. 

I remember in the First Republic that there was an alliance between the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons, NCNC, and the Action Group. There was also an alliance between the Northern People’s Congress, NPC, and Chief Ladoke Akintola’s Nigerian National Democratic Party, NNDP.

While at Olofin Anglican Grammar School in Idanre in Ondo State in 1964, I remember the first time I saw Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s wife, Chief Hannah Dideolu Awolowo (November 25, 1915 – September 19, 2015) was when she came to Idanre, my home town, in company of Chief Michael Okpara (NCNC), then Premier of the Eastern Region, for a political rally. Their alliance then was called the United Progressive Grand Alliance, UPGA.

The alliance between NPC and NNDP transformed into what was known then as the NNA. That alliance produced the following as Ministers on March 31, 1965: Mr. M.T. Mbu(Minister of State in the Ministry of Defence, Navy); Alhaji Nuhu Bamali (Minister of State in the Ministry of External Affairs); Mr. Jaja Nwachukwu (Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance; Alhaji Usman Maitambari(Minister of State, Transport); Alhaji Ibrahim Tanko (Minister of State, Defence, Army); Alhaji Hashim Adaji(Minister of State, Works); Mr. T.E. Orodi (Minister of State, Lagos Affairs); Chief H.O. Davies (Minister of State, Industries); Chief A. Akerele( Minister of State, Information); Alhaji Abdul Rasaq(Minister of State, Transport); and Mr. D. Ibekwe(Minister of State, External Affairs).

To be concluded

The death of messianic or saviour politics

THE current state of ennui is to a large extent the result of the death of messianic or saviour politics. This is politics that revolves around a charismatic leader who is ascribed redemptive or saviour qualities. Until he became President in 2015, Buhari’s supporters passionately promoted him as an ascetic and incorruptible man who had the magic wand, or whose ‘body language’ alone could solve all, or most of the country’s problems.

However, by the time he exhausted his eight years in office, almost all indicators of human development in the country, including some progress made in nation-building, had nosedived. People who fervently argued that the country would have been transformed if his time as a military ruler in the 1980s had not been aborted by the Babangida coup in August 1985, were left shame-faced.

When Tinubu was campaigning for office, in contrast to Buhari, no one marketed him as ‘Mr Integrity’. Here his promoters, while not conceding the scandals and allegations linked to him, argued that since we have tried a man deified as a saint (Buhari) and it did not work, it might be time to try a man who had an opposite image. He was promoted as a talent spotter, creator of modern Lagos, and ocean tamer, who, when he was the governor of Lagos State, demonstrated his cosmopolitanism by having Nigerians from different ethnicities and religions in his cabinet.

As a very wealthy man, his promoters argued that at this point in his life, he needed nothing more than an opportunity to show gratitude to God. He was said to know the crooked and their ways and how to tame them. While Buhari’s saviour marketing revolved around his assumed integrity and incorruptibility,  that of Tinubu centred on his promotion as  a competent man who is both politically intelligent and street smart, who knows the ways of the crooked and how to tame them  to move the country forward, and who is willing to commit class suicide to achieve this goal.   Less than two years in office, many who promoted this brand of messianic politics have also become shame-faced.

There is also another thing about the Tinubu presidency. For a long time, politicians from the Southern part of the country, particularly opposition politicians from the South-West, appropriated to themselves the moniker of ‘progressives’.  The subtext is that the problem of the country is bad leadership and that if the ‘progressives’ were allowed to take over power, the challenges of the country would be fixed. Tinubu was one of the prominent faces of the ‘progressives’. However, with the Tinubu government making the incompetent and clannish Buhari government look good on all fronts, the ‘progressives’ have also been demystified. 

With the failure of messianic politics and the de-mystification of the ‘progressives’, a season of ennui seems to have taken over the land. Combined with unprecedented hardship in the land, people are simply being bored and tired of everything. They do not trust that the opposition angling to replace those in power, including the separatist leaders, would be any different, if given the chance. At the same them they can hardly withstand the names of those ruling over them. There is hardly any institution or individual that is able to command legitimacy across the fault lines. For many people, there is simply existential crisis.

What is to be done?

There is no magic bullet for the country’s numerous problems but I believe that three effective bullets, could in combination, help. These are:   hope to Nigerians; a leader who will be willing to commit class, ethnic and religious suicide; and the re-imaging of our politics:

Restoring hope to Nigerians

The key challenge the country faces is how to restore hope to Nigerians. Hope is that ingredient that makes life worth living. Obviously those who promised to renew hope have ended up pushing people into greater despair. There is less trust in people and key institutions of the state, including religious leaders. 

Class suicide

It was Amilcar Cabral, the revolutionary socialist leader of the national liberation movement in Guinea-Bissau, who formulated the theory of class suicide. He explained it as the act of dying to the privileged class of one’s birth or circumstance by sacrificing one’s own advantages in favour of full identification with the oppressed.

Given my argument that our current system of leadership recruitment can only throw up   people with deep pockets and certain rough edges, the hope seems to be for people to pray for the emergence of a leader who would be willing to commit class, ethnic and religious suicide. Unfortunately, since politicians promise heaven and earth when seeking for power, it is difficult to know beforehand a leader who will become radicalised by office.  While some leaders get radicalised by office, some previously radical individuals could also be de-radicalised by the system. 

Re-imagining our politics

It will not be enough to have leaders who will be willing to commit class, ethnic and religious suicide. There is also a need for the re-imagining of our politics. I feel that the nature of our politics (in which elections are conducted every four years) exacerbates the crisis in our nation-building process. Not only is politics seen as a veritable vehicle of wealth accumulation, there is also a pervasive fear that whoever captures state power will use it to privilege his or her in-group and disadvantage others.

For this, politics tends to be anarchic and almost a warfare, in which all forms of primordial identities, including ethnicity and religion, are mobilised in a simplistic binary of ‘we versus them’. Elections, therefore, deepen the chasms in our fault lines and the wounds from one election cycle are not given enough time to heal before another election cycle beckons. For this, I strongly feel that the Western brand of liberal democracy is unlikely to work in our environment and that we need a novel solution. I do not agree with those who argue that our problem is fundamentally the economy, because economic policies themselves are decided through the political process.

Since the fear of being excluded and marginalised is at the heart of the contentious nature of our politics, I will recommend a collegial presidency in which one candidate is elected from each of the six geopolitical zones, with each of the six persons elected into the college taking turns to serve as president of the college for two non-renewable years, while others become vice presidents responsible for constitutionally specified duties. 

In this collegial system, if just one of the six leaders of the college chooses to commit class suicide, it will have a domino-effect on others. For instance, if one of the collegial presidents is known to come to work in a bus, it will mount implicit pressure on the others who use long convoys.

A collegial system of presidency, with a single tenure of 12 years, will also give us a long break from presidential elections (which, besides the cost, have lost their value as credible vehicles for leadership recruitment). Remarkably nearly all the leaders deified by Nigeria’s public intellectuals – Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore), Mahathir Mohamad (Malaysia) and Paul Kagame (Rwanda) share one thing in common – longevity in office. 

I have no idea how we can give Nigerians hope in the midst of the current hopelessness and distrust of everyone and every institution; I have no idea how a leader who can commit class, ethnic and religious suicide will emerge, and I have no idea on who will champion the re-imagining of our politics. But I believe that the three, working in tandem, may give us succour and the necessary breathing space because Nigerians are indeed being squeezed and need space to breathe.

Leaders of Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC, and their Trade Union Congress of Nigeria, TUC, counterpart are currently meeting with the Federal Government.

Vanguard gathered that meeting is centered on the state of the nation, especially the petrol pricing and its consequences.

According to sources, the meeting is taking place at the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, SGF, George Akume.

Details coming.

Vanguard News

Yemi Cardoso, Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria was guest of the Harvard Club of Nigeria in Lagos on Friday October 4th, 2024.

In speaking to the topic – “Leadership in Challenging Times: Restoring Credibility, Building Trust, and Containing Inflation”, he referenced the raising of the MPR from 18.45% in February 2024 a few months after he assumed office to the current level of 27.25% on September 24th, 2024.

According to a report, he told his audience that “Our decision to raise the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR) to 27.25% was a bold move. Higher interest rates, while painful for borrowers, are necessary to curb excess money in circulation and control inflation. Leadership is about making hard choices to secure long-term stability over short-term comfort in moments like these.”

Reading that portion of the report from his interaction with the Harvard Club of Nigeria Yemi Cardoso’s comments about the MPR, interest rates and inflation took me many years back to when I was a Deputy Manager in the Research and Economic Intelligence Department of Zenith Bank.

In that role, the bulk of my work was routine; stock and money market monitoring and analysis as well as analysis of foreign exchange transactions and trends.

But aside from data collection and trend analysis I did some writing; producing the Zenith Economic Quarterly and analyzing feasibility studies for new businesses. It was from analyzing feasibility studies that I gained some unique insights about setting up a business and the disposition of Nigerian entrepreneurs to banks and the loans they obtain from banks. It was there I learnt about interest rates and Nigerian businesses. But I will come to that shortly.

Back then at Zenith, I recall that when I started compiling money market reports, the reference for interest rates was something called the Minimum Rediscount Rate (MRR). It was replaced on December 4, 2006 with the now popular Monetary Policy Rate (MPR).

The CBN noted at that time that “The MPR would be the main instrument of the new monetary policy framework and will determine the lower and upper band of the CBN standing facility and is expected to have the capability of acting as the nominal anchor for other rates.” That lower and upper band is what we now know as the asymmetric corridors.

The MPR is therefore a benchmark that determines the interest rate at which banks lend to their customers. Raising or lowering the MPR also has an effect on inflation by controlling the amount of money in circulation. This is why Yemi Cardoso has made it a key aspect of his inflation control agenda.

Since taking office, the incumbent CBN governor has raised the MPR 5 times.

These increases have been anchored on what he described at the 294th Monetary Policy Committee Press Briefing as underscoring “the CBN’s commitment to the price stability mandate and the need to urgently bring inflation under control to ensure that the purchasing power of ordinary Nigerians is restored in the short to medium term.”

With each raise, financial analysts and commentators have expressed their opinions. While varied, the common denominator has been the fact that a high interest rate which is correlated with a high MPR will impact the borrowing costs for businesses and individuals.

The point has also been made that the negative impact on borrowing for investment and consumption purposes could slow down economic activity but what they do not say as loudly is that a high MPR rate means that those who put their money in savings deposits or TBs will get more bang for their buck and even foreign investors would be attracted by higher rates of return.

Basic economics tells us that inflation occurs when a few things happen, top of which is rising prices and too much money chasing too few goods. Others include, a rise in the cost of producing goods and services, demand exceeding supply, wages rising leading to increased purchasing power, natural disasters impacting farming or production, conflicts disruptingsupply lines or when tax cuts lead to higher purchasing power.

Almost all of these have happened since 2023 and led to an increase in headline inflation something Cardoso also noted at that MPC briefing. In his words “members note the continued rise in headline inflation driven largely by food prices because of supply shortages and high cost of logistics and distribution.”

The last bit was, of course, a euphemism for high transport costs exacerbated by the increase in the fuel price.

So, curbing borrowing which leads to more money in circulation is clearly a step in the right direction.

While it is true that a high interest rate will discourage borrowing and potentially impact productive activities, the point should also be stressed that all over the world, the interest rate and inflation rate are connected because central bankers realize that the interest rate should usually be higher than the rate of inflation if prices are to stay stable which is what Yemi Cardoso is trying to do – keep prices stable and low and restore the purchasing power of ordinary Nigerians who are the most impacted.

A quick look at statistics from Statista will show us a trend for inflation vs interest rates for a few countries as at July 2024:

Australia, inflation rate of 3.5% and interest rate of 4.35%

Brazil: inflation rate of 4.5% and interest rate of 9.5%

Canada: inflation rate of 2.5% and interest rate of 4.5%

Russia: inflation rate of 9.1% and interest rate of 16%

UK: inflation rate of 2.2% and interest rate of 5.25%

US: inflation rate of 2.9% and interest rate of 5.38%

Now, if central banks the world over have realised that interest rates must be higher than the inflation rate why do we scream blue murder each time the MPC raises the MPR?

The answer I believe is because we are looking at high double digits. Back in the mid noughties when I worked at Zenith bank interest rates were around 12 and 13% and I remember that fixed deposits used to attract less than 10% returns. So, if the MPR had been moved by 200 basis points from 12.75 to 14.75% there would be not so much hoopla.

To underline this point, let us go back to 2006. Resolutions from the MPC Meeting of February 14, 2006 included: “Resolved to work towards maintaining single digit (core) inflation… MRR will be maintained at 13% in line with the anti-inflation stance of the MPC.” This shows that the resort to MRR or MPR as an inflation monitoring tool is historic and pre-dated Cardoso and his team who have set an inflation target of 21.4% in the short term.

Another point that needs to be made is that if interest rates remain lower than the rate of inflation in an inflationary environment such as we have presently, it could be an invitation to financial rascality where loans are obtained and used for what they were not intended for.

And that point leads me back to my days as a researcher at Zenith bank. Back then, in analyzing and providing opinions on feasibility studies, I was often mystified when I read the financials presented by start-ups seeking loans. A service oriented business would,for instance, apply for N60m take off loan and present line items for its sunk costs showing – business registration, legal, rent, office equipment, salaries and wages etc. But then you would often discover that N25m had been allotted to be used for “buying cars for marketing.”

My boss back then always told me that such depreciating assets must never be allotted more than 20%!

The issue was that in those days, with interest rate at about 10%, the temptation to be imprudent was high. This is what Yemi Cardoso is fighting to stop in an era of high inflation. Whatever is borrowed now must be applied judiciously to productive activity.

So, do we expect the MPR to go higher? My view is that it should. The MPR must correlate in some particular with the rate of inflation and as the CBN governor noted at that Harvard Club event “in the face of economic challenges, it is imperative to focus on core objectives—restoring the credibility of the institution, building trust in the financial system, and, most critically, containing inflation. These are not just strategic goals; they are foundational to any meaningful recovery.”

In concluding, I must return to a submission I made in a previous intervention; for the economy to grow and the gains become apparent in the medium to long term, there must be a convergence of both monetary and fiscal policies? Monetary policy is not a silver bullet even though it seems to be working with headline inflation dropping and the gap between the official and parallel markets contracting. Interesting days lie ahead.

Kan is a PR expert and financial analyst.

Senate President Godswill Akpabio says reports suggesting that the Department of State Services (DSS) has taken over the national assembly premises to stop an alleged impeachment plot against him is false.

The reports said the secret police had taken over all the entrances of the assembly’s complex on Tuesday.

Speaking on the floor of the senate, Akpabio dismissed the reports as “fake news”

The senate president jocularly said those behind the reports may be seeking revenue as a result of the traffic they could get on their websites.

“[They said DSS] has surrounded the national assembly to possibly stop the impeachment of principal officers,” he said.

“There is no limit to social media… we are sitting down here doing our work peacefully oblivious of the mischief.

“Which committee do we refer this to? (laughter)

“I understand that they are being paid if they have a lot of traffic, but I hope the public is aware that this is total fake news.”

Akpabio referred the matter to the special duties committee to report back “as soon as possible”.

[TheCable]

Everyone knows what is good; why they cannot imitate it is what baffles me! Or are they just pretending? In the event that you think I am directing my question only at those in power, permit me to announce to you that you are mistaken! Gani Fawehinmi, remember him? He put himself forward for election as president of this country but failed woefully! In parliamentary parlance, he not only lost the election but also lost his deposit! Femi Falana, who takes after Gani, contested election to be governor of his home state of Ekiti but also lost woefully! I can go on and on!

We know the right people but always choose the wrong person. Like the Jews of biblical times, we crucify Jesus Christ and demand freedom for Barrabas (Luke 23: 18 - 25). It happened then; it still happens now! So, if we suffer for the choices that we make, it is our fault. Said Cassius to Brutus in William Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar”: “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves, that we are underlings!”

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is reputed for head-hunting talents and good, quality hands. There are a few of them in his administration at the moment - but Nigerians, like Oliver Twist, want more! Ishaq Oloyede, Registrar of the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) is one of them. Tinubu inherited him from his predecessor, former President Muhammadu Buhari. Retired General Mohamed Buba Marwa, Executive Chairman of the Nigeria Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) is another.

 I once recommended that rather than waste time and resources conducting elections into the office of president, with all the bad blood it spins, we should just toss the coin for both Oloyede and Marwa; head or tail, whoever wins becomes the president and the other one the vice-president. The ink had not dried on the paper on which I wrote when people reminded me that both were Muslims! You see our problem!

Very well! I then made another proposition: that we toss the same coin for two Christians: the recently-retired judge of the Kogi State High Court, Justice Alaba Omolaye-Ajileye: cerebral, incorruptible and an authority on electronic evidence, and the husband and wife that own and manage BOVAS Petroleum (where, despite all the monkey games played by filling station operators, you still get value for money). For gender sensitivity, let us pick the madam, Dr. Victoria Adunola Samson. Between these four, let us settle for the leadership of this country.

 I can mention other names like Professor Eyitope Ogunbodede, immediate past vice-chancellor of my alma mater, Obafemi Awolowo University (Great Ife), Ile-Ife, and businessman Segun Olugboyegun (former Fagboyegun) as persons I know to be conscientious, passionate, and effective managers of men and resources with an uncommon love for our national well-being. You, too, can help hunt for more capable and trustworthy leaders. 

Again, the ink had not dried on the paper on which I wrote when someone said: “Bolawole, why is your own name not there?” I replied that it would be immodest for me to nominate myself; others can if they think I am worthy!

When Oloyede celebrated his 70th birthday recently, his landmark achievements at JAMB, which were there for even the blind to see and the deaf to perceive, were on everyone’s lips. I am not aware he got gifts of Lamborghini or Rolls Royce cars! So, see how perverse our values are in this country! Mercifully, he got something far worthier than those: The accolades of ordinary Nigerians who appreciate the good work he has been doing in the very important education sector of our national life. 

The icing on the cake was the tribute penned by President Tinubu. Titled “UNCOMMON SCHOLAR, EXCEPTIONAL ADMINISTRATOR: MY TRIBUTE TO PROF. OLOYEDE AT 70”, the president said: “As Professor Ishaq Oloyede turns 70… I pay a special tribute to this astute administrator, educator, author, and scholar, currently the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) Registrar. As the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Ilorin, Prof. Oloyede's invaluable contributions to the nation through academia and public-sector administration have significantly impacted the academic community. His impactful tenure at the University of Ilorin, during which he introduced landmark ideas and innovations that helped the institution attain enviable heights, is on record.

“Through patriotic dedication and commitment to his craft, Prof. Oloyede imparted knowledge and character to thousands of students who underwent his teaching during his glorious and impactful academic career. Indeed, the bedrock of development lies in education. Developing nations, including Nigeria, are in dire need of more scholars like Prof. Oloyede. His selfless sacrifices and innovative approaches to learning and leadership give hope for a brighter future.

“Perhaps more remarkable is Prof. Oloyede's transformative leadership at JAMB. He pioneered and sustained a series of reforms and technological innovations that have made the admission process in Nigeria transparent and credible. In his eight years of stewardship at the board, thus far, Prof. Oloyede has demonstrated an uncommon commitment to financial integrity and accountability in public service. He has also raised the bar in administration and management.

“I am proud of Prof. Oloyede's accomplishments. The nation owes the professor of Islamic Jurisprudence a debt of gratitude for transforming JAMB, traditionally a non-revenue-generating government agency, into a consistent contributor to the national treasury through efficient financial management. His contributions to JAMB are invaluable and (are) greatly appreciated.

“On this occasion of his 70th birthday, I join members of the academic community, students, JAMB staff, and well-wishers in celebrating this scholar who, in words and deeds, has also done a lot to propagate the Islamic religion. I pray that Almighty Allah will continue to honour the distinguished professor with health, wisdom and strength to serve the nation for many more years”

Oloyede deserves this and every tribute marking his landmark birthday! But more than celebrate him, we should all emulate and imitate him - all of us from head to toe without an exception. Happy birthday!

Gov. Oyebanji’s second year in office

Ekiti State’s Gov. Abiodun Abayomi Oyebanji aka BAO marks his second year anniversary in office today! He is unlikely to roll out the drums and waste millions of Naira of Ekiti’s hard-earned money that the state can ill afford. Others will do but this governor is not cut out for that. Publicly shy and silent achiever, he is humility personified. If you are searching for the archetype Yoruba Omoluabi, BAO is one. He has been caught on camera prostrating full length for Ekiti Obas and elders like Aare Afe Babalola, legal luminary and founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD).

Although Ekiti is not one of the country’s richest states in terms of allocation from the Federation Account and Internally Generated Revenue, reports from the state indicate that BAO has managed the state’s meagre resources with the fear of God. Ekiti needs the even keel with which BAO has steered its ship. The location of this state of "The Land of Honour" at the northernmost tip of the South-west has meant security challenges from rampaging Fulani herdsmen, which reached its apogee during the presidency of Muhammadu Buhari. Successive Ekiti governors have battled this scourge with varying degrees of success.

Only last January 29, 2024, two Ekiti Obas were accosted and gunned down in broad daylight. I was a member of the AFENIFERE delegation that went to commiserate with the governor. I asked and he told me that the state and, indeed, the entire South-west governors, were making arrangements to use Forest Rangers (what our people used to call “So’gbo-So’gbo” or forest guards) to checkmate the marauders. I can still recall that my father wanted me to enlist as a forest guard when I left secondary school in 1974 because, according to him, they make money there! Corruption did not just begin today!

Ekiti’s tourism potential is another sector that interests me. During the tenure of Gov. Fayemi, my family enjoyed the holiday of a life-time at the Ikogosi Warm Spring Resorts. My wife and children still ask: when are we going back there! BAO’s administration has given pride of place to showcasing Ekiti’s tourism potentials and I think the good initiative should continue. It will pay off over time if he faints not.

Ekiti was noted for education. Every household is said to boast at least a professor! The story is told of how SL Akintola, foremost orator and one-time premier of the Western Region, squared up to another orator but of an opposing party, K. O. Mbadiwe (corrupted in Yoruba as M - BA - D’IWE: If I turn into a book); Akintola dared K. O. to turn into a thousand books and see whether Ekiti will waste any time in reading him! TI O BA D’IWE, EKITI O KA O! It is of the same Ekiti that Akintola boasted had all manner of professors: Professor Igun, Professor Aluko, Professor Akala, Professor Atioro! BAO’s investment in education, to return the state to its place of glory is, therefore, not misplaced.

But this is just half-way through the first term; BAO needs all the support and encouragement to continue the good work. It is not yet “Uhuru” as the finishing line is still far ahead. A lot of work remains to be done. Tell BAO there is no resting on his oars until he leaves Ekiti far better than he met it!  

 Former Editor of PUNCH newspapers, Chairman of its Editorial Board and Deputy Editor-in-chief, BOLAWOLE was also the Managing Director/ Editor-in-chief of The WESTERNER newsmagazine. He writes the ON THE LORD'S DAY column in the Sunday TRIBUNE and TREASURES column in NEW TELEGRAPH newspaper on Wednesdays. He is also a public affairs analyst on radio and television.

In a 2010 assessment report, the US-based group, Human Rights Watch (HRW), posited that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was envisaged to tackle corrupt politicians and public sector fraud effectively, but has contrary to expectations, continued to “reward rather than punish corruption”.

Coming just seven years after the establishment of the anti-corruption agency, HRW’s early verdict seemed a clairvoyant perception that has deepened over the years. Although a product of a United Nations Convention, the enthusiasm at the time to nip corruption persuaded the state governors to overlook what was supposed to be an established path to building a strong and enduring institution.

As a strategic agency with a national jurisdiction, the decision to overlook the error may have been inspired by hope that the EFCC may evolve into an independent organization led and run by persons that shared a common desire to chart a firm path where public office holders will be held accountable without fear or favour.

It may have started fairly well under its pioneer chairman, Nuhu Ribadu. But sooner rather than later, it became clear that politicians with views out of sync with those of Aso Rock chief occupant became the prime targets of its operatives. The still-born attempt to engineer a third term for then President Olusegun Obasanjo through a constitutional amendment turned the EFCC into an enforcer against politicians, especially members of the National Assembly where the constitutional immunity for then Vice President Atiku Abubakar and state governors shielded them from the arm-twisting that was generously applied to beat dissenting politicians into line.

At the end of Obasanjo’s second term and the ouster of Ribadu under controversial circumstances, EFCC shed whatever remained of its toga of independence and became a full-fledged tool at the disposal of the tenant of Aso Rock. It became a theatre of hysteria and a potent tool of vendetta without pretence. What with the comical manner Chairman of Globacom, Mike Adenuga, was chased out of Nigeria to Ghana and later Europe; the gestapo-style bid to arrest former governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, not forgetting the invasion of the offices of Dangote Group in search of non-existent documents just to spite its President Aliko Dangote.

Yet, in the midst of all this and many more, nobody bothered to inquire into how the anti-graft agency was birthed. Was the infraction-burdened commission itself a child of Constitutional infraction? This is the matter before a seven-man panel of Supreme Court justices, led by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji. They are to adjudicate on a case first brought before the apex court by Kogi state through its Attorney-General. A good 15 other states have joined in the consolidated suit which seeks to determine whether the EFCC Bill followed due process of the law, in this case the Constitution, before it became an Act of Parliament. Hearing on the matter has been fixed for October 22.

The states that joined in the suit marked: SC/CV/178/2023, are Katsina, Sokoto, Jigawa, Ondo, Edo, Oyo, Ogun, Nasarawa, Kebbi, Enugu, Benue, Anambra, Plateau, Cross River and Niger. Their argument is that the enactment of the EFCC Act grossly undermined the powers and rights of the states as federating units within a Federation. The states have functional Houses of Assembly but the input of these State Assemblies was not sought in the course of the enactment of the EFCC Act as required by the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

This is a strong ground because it borders on Constitutional abuse.

The state governments are relying on the case of Dr. Joseph Nwobike Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, wherein the Supreme Court held that it was a UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) that the National Assembly converted into the EFCC Establishment Act and that in enacting this law in 2004, the provisions of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, were not followed.

The state governments argued that in transforming a convention into Nigerian law, the provision of Section 12 must be complied with. The 16 state governments assert that the provision of the Constitution demands that a majority of the states’ Houses of Assembly shall agree to bring the UN Convention into Nigeria before passing the EFCC Act or any other such law. They maintain that this critical requirement that underscores the sovereignty of Nigeria as a self-governing entity was never met neither was the constitutional procedure followed.

For the avoidance of doubt, section 12, subsection (2) of the Constitution states that “the National Assembly may make laws for the Federation or any part thereof with respect to matters not included in the Exclusive Legislative List for the purpose of implementing a treaty,” which in this case is the UNCAC, a treaty Nigeria ratified since 14 December 2004 from which the EFCC Act was enacted at the whim of the Executive and the National Assembly without the concordance and ratification from the state Assembles.

Subsection three(3) of section 12 states that “a bill of the National Assembly passed pursuant to the provisions of subsection (2) of the section shall not be presented to the President for assent, and shall not be enacted, unless it is ratified by a majority of all the Houses of Assembly in the Federation.”

The fact that 15 states have joined Kogi in challenging the legality of the process that birthed the EFCC across party and regional lines illustrates the common challenges states face when they hold contrary views with the occupant of Aso Rock. In the prayers brought before the Supreme Court, their major desire is not to be shielded from prosecution but for the process not to be activated at the whim and caprice of the party at the centre or the President at any point in time. The reality of imperial presidency is one of the major impediments to a functional federal structure. Despite being heads of sub-national governments, state governors still face the prospect of arbitrary persecution if they are not in the president’s good book.

The suit before the Supreme Court, if successful and should be, may open the door to the resolution of some contentious issues and proposed legislations that are emasculating the states and the citizens. One of such is the proposal for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to take over the conduct of local government elections as well as the criteria for choosing its chairman and national commissioners. With every electoral cycle, the overbearing power and influence of the presidency in conducting credible elections become more apparent. The recent gubernatorial election in Edo State is sticking out like a sore thumb.

Above all, what the suit seeks to achieve is to establish that Nigeria is a true Federation hence its statutes including Acts of Parliament must respect the constitutional roles and relevance of the federating units, the states.

Dr (Mrs) Ochioma, political strategy consultant, writes from Benin City

Since 1999, as insecurity in Nigeria has surged dramatically, federal and state governments have been divided over whether to maintain the current central policing system or shift to a state/local policing model.

In February 2024, President Bola Tinubu and the governors of all 36 states agreed that implementing a state/local policing system could provide a more effective response to the severe insecurity that threatens lives and property across the nation.

It is distressing that news of Nigerians being killed by bandits and terrorists floods the media daily. These unnecessary and preventable deaths highlight the deep-rooted insecurity and the consequences of inadequate policing. Given that ensuring the safety of lives and property is a fundamental duty of the government, the ongoing loss of Nigerian lives at an exponential rate is both alarming and unacceptable. This is particularly true since our leaders have the ability to curb, if not halt, this tragic loss of life by restructuring the nation’s security system—an area where their leadership has thus far fallen short.

The sheer number of Nigerians who have lost their lives since the return to multiparty democracy in 1999 is not just shocking but overwhelming.

Here’s a snapshot:

As of September 30, 2024, Statista.com reports that 38,000 deaths in Nigeria have been caused by domestic terrorists, including the religious extremist group Boko Haram and bandits. For perspective, the death toll in Nigeria due to insecurity is about 3,000 less than the number of lives lost in the ongoing one-year-old Israeli-Palestinian war, which has resulted in approximately 41,000 deaths in Palestine and Gaza—the focal point of the Middle East conflict with religious dimensions.

While Israel and Palestine are engaged in an active war, leading to the tragic and high number of casualties, Nigeria is not technically in a conventional war. However, the country has been locked in an asymmetric conflict with non-state actors for nearly two and a half decades.

As a result, a significant number of Nigerians have lost their lives in this prolonged state of turmoil, especially in remote areas, notably in the northeastern, northwestern, and parts of the north-central regions, where conditions have been harsh and life precarious.

Given this situation, the need for effective policing in Nigeria cannot be overstated. The lack of such policing, among other issues, has created an environment where insecurity can thrive, leading to the widespread suffering of our people.

There is no doubt that policing is crucial for ensuring the safety and security of lives and properties. It is clear that the current police force is overwhelmed, possibly because the existing system is not well equipped to handle the increasingly complex criminal challenges facing the country.

Currently, Nigeria operates a centralized policing system. Under this system, while the state governor is designated as the chief security officer of their state, the actual control lies with the Inspector General of Police (IGP), who is based in Abuja,the Federal Capital Territory, FCT. As a result, the state police commissioner takes directives only from the IGP, not the state governor. This structure aligns with Section 214(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which mandates: “There shall be a police force for Nigeria, which shall be known as the Nigeria Police Force, and subject to provisions of this section no other police force shall be established for the Federation or part thereof.”

To alter this framework embedded in the nation’s laws, a constitutional amendment is required—a challenging endeavor due to the complex legislative process that involves federal lawmakers and requires the approval of a majority of state-level legislators. Nevertheless, despite the challenges, a deliberate change in Nigeria’s security structure is essential to effectively combat the insecurity plaguing the nation.

Effective policing is known to lower crime rates, build trust and confidence within communities, enhance public safety, and promote economic growth and development. Therefore, establishing a solid policing framework is essential for Nigeria. However, the limited funds available for training police personnel, resulting in a lack of capacity, pose a significant challenge to the Nigerian police force. These issues mirror those affecting nearly all sectors within the country’s public administration.

Some of the critical challenges that need to be addressed include insufficient resources, corruption and misconduct, strained relations between communities and the police, and emerging threats like terrorism and cybercrime—areas where the police, as currently structured, lack the institutional expertise to handle effectively, as these are relatively new challenges.

To tackle these issues, Nigeria has initiated several reforms, such as:

(a) Police reform programs

(b) Community policing initiatives

(c) Counter-terrorism strategies

(d) International partnerships and training

Despite these efforts, Nigerian citizens, particularly those in rural areas, continue to suffer under relentless attacks from religious and criminal elements since the return to multiparty democracy in 1999. This ongoing insecurity remains a significant challenge, despite the best efforts of the current government.

Given this context, many have argued that a state or local policing model might be more effective than the current centralized policing system in addressing the new wave of criminal activities that threaten defenseless Nigerians.

There has been resistance to the idea of state police, dating back to its initial proposal in 1999 under the administration of then-President Olusegun Obasanjo (OBJ, 1999-2007). According to historical records, OBJ faced impeachment threats from federal lawmakers who were influenced by those opposed to state police. Their concerns included the lack of funding to support such a system and the risk of misuse if governors had full control over the police in their states.

A recent incident illustrates the complexities of the current system. Following a court ruling ,IGP Kayode Egbetokun reportedly ordered the police to withdraw from local government elections in Rivers State. However, the elections proceeded under the direction of the state governor, Siminari Fubara, who relied on another court ruling authorizing the election, used vigilante groups to ensure the process was completed successfully. This event highlights the urgent need to reassess Nigeria’s current policing structure and judicial interference in our electoral system.

The conflict between the Rivers State governor and the IGP on election matters brings into focus broader questions about the role of the police in Nigeria’s electoral processes and the ongoing debate between adopting a local policing model versus maintaining the central policing system.

As a nation striving for optimal security for both lives and property, it is crucial that we urgently and impartially evaluate which approach is best suited to address the current insecurity challenges facing our country.

This is why the bill advocating for the establishment of state police, which is currently under legislative review in the House of Representatives, is a positive development. It should be pushed forward with renewed urgency to ensure its inclusion in the ongoing process to amend the 1999 Constitution.

While local/state policing has its advantages, such as fostering community engagement, quick response times, deeper understanding of local issues, adaptability, and cost-effectiveness, it also has drawbacks. These include limited resources and expertise, high susceptibility to political influence, inconsistent training standards, and challenges with coordination across different jurisdictions.

Conversely, central policing offers benefits like standardized training, access to specialized skills and resources, better coordination and communication, economies of scale, and the ability to conduct national-level intelligence gathering—critical for combating complex criminal activities. However, its disadvantages include a lack of close connection to local communities, bureaucratic hurdles, risks of centralized control and abuse, and limited awareness of local needs.

The strengths of central policing often align with the weaknesses of local/state policing, and vice versa, meaning the two approaches tend to balance each other out. The real challenge lies in choosing the approach that will serve the country’s needs most effectively. This is where a hybrid model—combining elements of both systems—could offer a more balanced and pragmatic solution, potentially transforming our approach to security if our lawmakers are willing to adopt it.

The recent Supreme Court decision mandating that funds designated for Local Government Areas (LGAs) be directly transferred to their accounts and managed by the elected grassroots representatives strengthens the argument for implementing state police.

This ruling overturns the previous arrangement in which state governments controlled LGA funds. Under the new system, LGAs would allocate resources for security, enabling them to hire and maintain local police forces as they see fit.

At the state level, funds previously directed toward supporting central police operations could instead be used to coordinate local police within LGAs. This would address concerns about funding shortages, one of the main reasons governors were initially hesitant to embrace local/state policing.

Currently, aside from the central police headquartered in Abuja, states operate informal policing mechanisms, such as vigilante groups under various names. With the adoption of decentralized policing through constitutional amendments, these systems could be formalized into an official police force with proper recognition, akin to the native police of earlier times. Alternatively, a hybrid model could be adopted, blending aspects of both central and local/state policing.

Many nations already use such hybrid models, combining local and central forces. Examples include decentralized policing with national standards, regional police forces with local branches, or community policing supported by centralized oversight. Countries like the United States (local police with federal backing), the United Kingdom (local forces with national coordination), Australia (state police forces supported by federal agencies), and Japan (community policing with national supervision) have all implemented these hybrid approaches.

In my view, these countries provide strong examples for Nigeria to consider, offering valuable lessons in effective policing.

To conclude, it is worth noting that Nigeria previously practiced local policing in the pre-independence era through native and district constabularies. This approach persisted until the 1914 amalgamation, which consolidated the local police structures of the two protectorates into a unified national framework.

Having experienced both local and central policing models, a balanced hybrid approach—blending elements of both—could enhance the effectiveness of policing in Nigeria. It is hoped that our lawmakers will seriously consider this hybrid option as a viable alternative to the current system.

A similar approach could be applied to deciding the most suitable system of governance for our country. This decision is currently in the final stages of refinement by our legislators, who recently conducted a retreat in Kano, Kano State, focused on constitutional review.

In my view, when it comes to the debate over whether to maintain or replace the current system of governance, it’s clear that instead of continuing with the imported parliamentary and presidential models that Nigeria has experimented with over the past 64 years of independence, we should adapt our democracy to align with the unique dynamics and cultural characteristics of our environment. This customization could lead to a more effective and well-functioning society. Our neiboring country Ghana operates a hybrid. Perhaps that is why religion orientation of president candidates and their running mates do not matter in the country of Ghana as it is a major issue in Nigeria. 

A crucial starting point to end insecurity in our country would be to transition our policing system from a centralized structure to a state/local model, which could help curb the widespread loss of lives caused by violent actors who have been terrorizing our communities with impunity.

Given this, any further delay in implementing the state/local policing system—an initiative that has been under consideration for 25 years since the return of multiparty democracy in 1999, and for which there is broad support across Nigeria as both the presidency and all the 36 governors reaching a concensus in February this year —would suggest that our political leaders, particularly the legislators, are neglecting their responsibility to protect lives and properties implying that they may be recklessly putting the lives of a critical mass of Nigerians at risk.

This is a path we hope they will avoid.

Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

The Anambra State House of Assembly passed two progressive legislations pursuant to its powers under the Constitution (Anambra State Economic Planning and Development Law, 2024; and Anambra State Local Government Administration Law, 2024), and I have signed them into law. This has generated commentaries and debates especially in relation to their consistency or inconsistency with the recent Supreme Court judgement and the mantra of “local government autonomy.” My media team, other members of my government as well as well meaning Nigerians have vigorously defended these progressive laws and that should suffice. At this moment in Nigeria, being a state governor is not a fanciful job, especially given the gamut of allegations and innuendoes levelled against governors vis-a-vis local government funds. In the circumstance, any comment by me would be construed as self defence. However, I have a citizen duty to clarify and contribute to the discourse—especially as one who has been extensively involved in the debate and search for a more perfect union.

At the outset, let me make an important disclosure. I am a federalist and a proponent of competitive federalism for a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, vast country as Nigeria. From my limited knowledge, I do not know any federation (except perhaps some variants in Brazil) where a uniform local government system is provided for in a federal constitution or where the local government is treated as a de-facto federating unit. I understand that the issue of appropriate local government system was vigorously debated by the framers of the 1999 Constitution and a compromise was to insert Sections 7 Constitution which, among others, empowers each State through its House of Assembly to make laws which provide “for the establishment, structure, composition, finance, and functions...” of the local governments. Pioneered by Lagos State about 2004 several states have various laws pursuant to these Constitutional powers. The composition or structure of local governments in Lagos or Ebonyi state is certainly different from Anambra.

Also, the debate as to whether local governments should be part of the federal constitution or left to each federating unit (state) to determine its own appropriate local government system is still an unsettled matter. The APC committee on restructuring Nigeria proposed scrapping the local government from the Constitution of Nigeria. As the former chairman of planning and strategy committee of Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide, I know that the published position of Ndigbo in 2018 was that local governments be scrapped from the Constitution and let each state/region determine the type of local administration that suits it. Similar positions have been argued by Afenifere, PANDEF, Middle Belt Forum, etc. This is an issue for another day.

In the context of our evolving federalism, I see the recent Supreme Court judgment regarding the direct transfer of funds belonging to the local governments as an important contribution to our search for effective and transparent administration of resources at the local level. I see the judgment as an opportunity for public good. Given the Constitutional mandate for joint planning between the State and local government, I see the judgment as an opportunity for greater transparency and predictability regarding the sources and uses of funds, as well as greater coordination and collaboration between the State and local government. If there was any state where the State-Local Government Joint Accounts Committee did not manage the LG funds transparently, the Supreme court judgment is an opportunity and mandate to do it differently by further empowering the LG administration.

But there is more work to be done. We all need to think through how the funds transferred to the LGs should be appropriated, spent, or accounted for. Monies meant for the federal or state governments are not spent by the president or governors. The National Assembly and State Assemblies make appropriation laws on how and by whom the monies should be spent and provide oversight functions. What happens to the monies directly sent to the LGs? Who spends the monies, on what and how will they be accounted for?

This is where Section 7 of the Constitution comes handy, and the Anambra State House of Assembly has risen to the occasion. Happily, the Supreme Court did not nullify Section 7 of the Constitution. The new laws by Anambra House of Assembly are therefore consequential to give operational life to the Supreme Court judgment and not to undermine it. If the State House of Assembly abdicates this constitutional duty, the Local Government will then have no law on the use and management of its finance which the Constitution has given the State House of Assembly (and only the House of Assembly) the mandate to legislate on. Indeed, in many states the House of Assemblies retain the power to suspend or remove chairpersons of local governments.

By the way, isn’t the legislative authority exercised by the State Assemblies under Section 7 of the Constitution similar to the powers granted by the Constitution to the National Assembly over the Federal Capital Territory and its Area Councils? I understand that the Senate President had recently at one of the Plenary Sessions rhetorically asked if it was indeed possible to grant the kind of “autonomy” some people talk about without major amendments to the Constitution. Many Nigerians ask the same question. I also understand that the Senate recently resolved to begin the process of Constitutional amendment in this regard. This is a welcome development. But until that is done, our laws pursuant to the Constitution and designed to give operational effect to the Supreme Court judgment remain subsisting and valid.

A critical instrument for muddling through our evolving federation and delivering higher efficiency and effectiveness in development is through structured collaboration among the tiers of government. No tier of government enjoys absolute autonomy. For example, the FGN has exclusive right over solid minerals, but the States have exclusive right over the land. Only a collaborative framework will maximize benefits from natural resources. Currently, there is a collaborative funding for the security agencies. The States and LGs contribute tens of billions monthly and deducted directly from FAAC every month towards the funding of the armed forces which are exclusively under the FGN. At the state levels, each state is spending a fortune of its own revenues on logistics and operational costs for the federal security agencies. The FGN, States and LGs are jointly paying for the FGN initiative on metering, etc. The states understand the above “emergency measures” as part of the collaborative arrangements to make Nigeria work better. A federal agency, the Debt Management Office (DMO) must clear any state government seeking to borrow from domestic financial system, while the National Assembly must approve States’ external borrowing. The federal UBEC insists on counterpart funding by states before it can release federal funds for basic education and also supervises the utilization of the contributions by states. There is a dozen or more areas of oversight of federal agencies over State finances. The above illustrations are simply to make the point that no tier of government can function in absolute autarky without collaboration with others. Given the functions assigned to the LGs by the Constitution, it is impossible to see how they can perform them without active collaboration with State governments. Because the Constitution did not envisage "absolute autonomy" for the Local Governments, it gave the State House of Assembly powers to make laws for them and equally did not create a Local Government Judiciary distinct from the State Judiciary.

The two legislations passed by the progressive Anambra House of Assembly seek to achieve three objectives: consistency with the Constitution and judgment of the Supreme Court; enhanced transparency and productive collaboration; and promotion of sustainable finance, democracy, and development at the local government. The laws seek to codify the collaborative arrangements to promote transparency and accountability. We seek to avoid ad-hoc or arbitrary arrangements---- building to last! The good news is that the eminent jurists at the Supreme Court did not outlaw collaboration and cooperation among the LGs in funding joint or common services, nor did they nullify Section 7 of the Constitution. What the new laws simply require is that ALL the chairmen/mayors of the local governments, meeting under the aegis of the State Economic Planning Board (similar to the National Economic Council) decide what percentage of their revenues to contribute to a Joint Local Government Account to pay for common/pooled services such as: (a) payment of salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions of workers and retirees under the Local Government Service Commission; (b) provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational education including all salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions payable in that regard; (c) provision and maintenance of primary health services including all salaries, allowances, gratuities and pensions payable in that regard; (d) payment of allowances to traditional rulers and Presidents-General of the communities; (e) Subventions to the Local Government Service Commission; and even for community security.

What many people do not know is that the Constitution puts primary education and primary health care under the local governments. Many also do not know that primary school teachers are pooled under the UBEC—Universal Basic Education Commission. Workers in all the LGs are also pooled staff under the Local government service commission. Ditto for primary health workers. Absolute autonomy would mean that each LG would have its own primary education policy, employ its own teachers, and pay them whatever it can afford and whenever it can do so, etc. Now that Anambra has free education for primary and secondary education in all public schools, some LGs may decide that they cannot afford it. It might even get to a point where some LGs might ask “non-indigenes” who are workers in the LGs or teachers in primary schools to “go home” to their LGs of origin due to budgetary or other constraints.

Indeed, absolute autonomy of LGs would mean that institutions that pool resources and workers would be scrapped including the Local Government Service Commission, Local Government Pension Board, the Anambra State Universal Basic Education Board (ASUBEB), the Primary Health Care Agency, etc. Does it mean that the federal UBEC or Federal Ministry of Health would have to deal with each of the 774 LGs in respect of primary education or primary health care instead of coordinated through the State UBEC or state primary health care agency? This would be a recipe for humongous chaos, not only for the administration of local government and pensions, but more so in the primary education and primary health sectors. My administration inherited 4 years arrears of gratuity which we have been clearing systematically. How do you share the outstanding balance among the LGs or pay pensions to over 15,000 LG retirees who served the LGs as a pool without pooling of funds? Some years ago, some LGs rejected teachers posted to their LGs because it would jack up their wage bill.

Yes, our nascent federation is evolving but some of us as practitioners are determined to make it work for the people while we have the opportunity. I believe in building enduring institutions, especially ones founded upon due process, transparency, and rule of law. People remind me that many of the institutional reforms we established at the CBN still endure. Since assumption of office as Governor 30 months ago, we have devoted a lot of efforts in reforming and strengthening institutions, including the local government administration. Today, Anambra State under my watch is ranked number 1 among the 36 states on fiscal transparency by BudgIT, and among the top five states on financial sustainability. We inherited a local government system with four-year arrears (2018-2022) of gratuity to retired primary school teachers and other staff of local government. We have restructured their finances back to sustainability. Everyone who retired from the local government and State civil service since my tenure is paid gratuity/pension, and we are on course to clear the outstanding arrears soon. Three years’ arrears on counterpart funding for Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) has been cleared, resulting in billions of Naira recently invested in our primary schools. Some 326 primary health centres are being constructed or modernized in all the 326 wards in the state as well as employing hundreds of medical personnel to man the primary health centres. Most of the local government secretariats have been remodelled and equipped, and the LG system is once again alive. This is not to mention that 3,615 out of the 8,115 new teachers recruited under my administration are for primary schools and they are being paid. We do not want to go back! 

So, the laws are designed to protect our gains so far and strengthen the system for the future consistent with the Constitution and laws. I always remind myself that I am a bird of passage, and eventually, I will leave office. But we must build to last--- for the next generations. More specifically, the new laws are designed to protect our workers at the local level and protect our primary education and primary health care from chaos and collapse. Many teachers and pensioners wrote me to passionately plead that they do not want the agony of the 1990s--2003 when some primary school teachers in some LGs were paid and others owed salaries. I just read a report that the organized labour (particularly the Nigerian Union of Local Government Employees, NULGE; Nigerian Union of Teachers, NUT; and Nigerian Union of Pensioners) were urging the FGN not to transfer workers/teachers salaries to the local government in the name of “local government autonomy”. No law protects the workers against nonpayment of salaries or pensions by governments. In Anambra we want to ensure that we do not wake up and hear that some LGs paid salaries of primary school teachers and others did not or that some pensioners are paid and others not, or that some contribute towards UBEC counterpart-funding while others do not. The laws seek to create a framework to ensure that the basic functions mandated by the Constitution for the local governments are discharged as a matter of first-line charge or the irreducible minimum. With these laws, workers, and retirees from the local government system in Anambra (primary school teachers, primary health workers, workers in the local government system under the local government service commission) can sleep with their two eyes closed. The LGs and State government can also collaborate in the security of the communities, just as the States and FGN collaborate in funding even the federal security agencies.

It is equally important to understand that the Constitution mandated this collaboration between the States and Local Governments when in its section 7 (3), it provides that "it shall be duty of a local government council within the State to participate in economic planning and development of the area referred to in sub section 2 of this section and to this end, an economic planning board shall be established by a Law enacted by the House of Assembly of the State". This provision gave rise to the establishment of the Anambra State Economic Planning Board of which all the local government chairpersons are members and who, among other things, decide on the percentage to be contributed to the Local Government Joint Account. It is important to appreciate that this money is not handed over to the State but remains with the Local Governments under a joint pool for the discharge of certain services by the local governments which services are uniform/common among the local governments as stated earlier.

In sum, the laws ensure that the State can function in a cohesively planned, transparent and sustainable manner to maximize the security and welfare of the citizens. They constitute a very smart solution to a possible systemic threat.

Governors are often accused of seeking to “control” LG funds with insinuations that LG funds are mismanaged. Of course, in a society where public office is seen as “dinning table” and public trust is low, people judge others by their own standards: by what they would do if they were in the position. I often ask: control for what? While I cannot hold brief for every governor, I know that most states are struggling to ensure a solvent local government system. I wish I can be spared the headache, if not for the predictable collateral damage to the system if we abdicate from structured oversight and collective accountability. The challenge ahead can be daunting given the quantum rise in wage bills because of the new minimum wage, as well as consequential rise in future pension/gratuity payments. Without active collaboration and coordination between state and local governments, many LGs will end up in a huge financial mess, requiring bailouts by state governments or will FGN directly intervene in every case of insolvency among the 774 LGs?

In conclusion, the progressive legislations by the State Assembly are designed to unleash the creative powers of the LGs, encourage peer learning, optimal development outcomes in planning and execution among the LGs, as well as novel accountability and transparency. The laws are ingenious by creating multiple layers of collaborative oversight whereby the LGs agree on monies to set aside and managed collectively by them for common services or first-line charges, while the rest is appropriated by the Congress of Councillors in each LG. In an innovative sense, the legislative powers – including powers of appropriation and oversight now largely reside with the local government legislature—Congress of Councillors, which is empowered to make bye-laws, which are in the nature of regulations, for the Local Governments (as it is the House of Assembly that is empowered by the Constitution to enact laws to guide the Local Governments).

Since neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court judgment prescribes the manner of appropriation, expenditure, and audit/accountability for local government funds, the House of Assembly and the Congress of Councillors fill in the blanks under the new laws pursuant to Section 7 of the Constitution. The evolution of our federalism is a work-in-progress, and the new Anambra laws constitute creative and progressive additions to institution-building. May the Federal Republic of Nigeria continue to win!