Nigeria?s House of Representatives is now at an impasse over the future of local government autonomy, following the passage of two conflicting bills that aim to decentralise power to Local Government Areas (LGAs) on one hand and reinforce state oversight on the other.

The bills, which passed their second readings earlier this week, have sparked intense debate among lawmakers, with stark divisions emerging between those advocating for greater autonomy for local governments and those who believe in a more controlled, centralised system.

While one bill proposes robust amendments to strengthen local government?s financial autonomy, administration and promote transparency, the other aims to remove local governments as a constitutionally recognised tier of government, placing them under state control.

The first Bill, ?A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Review the Framework for Local Government Administration, Establish a Robust Legal Regime to Strengthen Administrative Efficiency, Promote Transparency, Accountability, and Deepen Democratic Practices at the Local Government Level and for Related Matters (HB. 2121)?, was sponsored by Benjamin Kalu, the deputy speaker and six others.

The Bill seeks to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Cap C23 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 to provide for a comprehensive review of the legal and administrative framework governing Local Government Councils. The primary aim is to establish a robust legal regime that will enhance the administrative capacity of local governments, promote efficient service delivery, transparency, and accountability, and further deepen democratic culture at the grassroots.

This Bill seeks to amend Section 7 of the Constitution, ensuring that local governments are democratically elected and not governed by caretaker committees. It aims to improve governance at the grassroots by enhancing transparency, efficiency, and accountability.

Conversely, the second Bill, ?A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Remove Local Government as a Tier of Government Constitutionally Recognised and Funded by the Federal Government and to Vest Their Creation, Funding in the State Governments and for Related Matters (HB. 1215),? sponsored by Solomon T. Bob, proposes that local governments be placed entirely under state government control.

According to experts, this means that local governments would no longer have direct constitutional backing, they would exist only if state governments choose to create them. The federal government would stop funding local governments ? instead, state governments would decide how much money (if any) to allocate to them. State governments would have total control over local governments ? including their structure, existence, and finances.

The debate is unfolding against the backdrop of a Supreme Court ruling that affirmed full financial autonomy for local governments under Section 162(3) of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates that funds from the Federation Account be shared among federal, state, and local governments.

Weighing in, Mike Ozekhome, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, highlighted that Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution guarantees democratically elected local governments with full autonomy but administratively and financially. However, he noted that state governors have persistently undermined this constitutional provision by treating local governments as extensions of state administrations.

He further explained that since the introduction of local government administration in 1976, Nigeria has operated a three-tier system of government, although some, including himself during the 2014 National Conference, advocated for a two-tier system ? allowing states to create and manage local governments at their discretion ? such recommendations have not been implemented.

?It was this dire situation that forced the Supreme Court in July last year to deliver that judgment, to defend that. Many of these states had engaged in by just simply setting up ad hoc local government councils instead of true democratic elections.?

?The National Assembly must do it in such a way that the local governments are finally removed and cut off root and branch from the income streams of state governors and state governments. That is the only way to have development and that is the only way we can say we are practicing true federalism in a multi-religious, multi-ethnic and pluralistic society of delegated forces?, he said.

?Not only financially but administratively and in every facet of the world, local governments are autonomous just as state governments are autonomous of the federal government. For example, the federal government does not dictate to states how they should put up their projects, what allocation they should make to each facet of their life. It is not the business of the federal government?, the legal expert stressed

Ozekhome further noted that local government autonomy will boost grassroots development. ?Local governments are the closest to the people. They know when roads are impassable, when maternity clinics lack facilities, or when communities are drinking from contaminated water sources. Yet, state governments, which are far removed from these realities, often hijack funds meant for them,? Ozekhome stated.

He praised the Supreme Court?s 2024 ruling, which declared that only states with democratically-elected local governments would receive federal allocations. According to him, this decision is crucial in preventing governors from arbitrarily appointing caretaker committees to run local government councils. He urged the National Assembly to ensure local governments are permanently freed from the financial control of state governments.

Legal and political analysts have reiterated the need for full autonomy for local government areas (LGAs) in Nigeria, emphasising that financial and administrative independence is essential for grassroots development and democratic governance.

Similarly, Jide Ojo, public affairs analyst, stressed that the Constitution already recognises three tiers of government ? federal, state, and local ? and mandates that local governments be democratically governed. He argued that the Supreme Court?s decision granting financial autonomy to local governments has provided the missing legal framework necessary for true federalism.

?The best course of action is to strengthen the existing local government structure rather than weaken it. We already have primary healthcare centers, primary schools, and other functions under local government control. Strengthening their independence aligns with constitutionalism and good governance,? Ojo stated.

Innocent Awuzie, a political analyst, argued that a more ideal situation should be where local governments should fall under state control. But he said since the Constitution recognises them as third tier, they should be given autonomy.

?Local government autonomy should be properly defined. In a true federal system, governance is between the federal and state governments, with local governments operating under the states. We can grant autonomy to LGs, but they should not be independent of state oversight. Even financial autonomy must include mechanisms for transparency and accountability,? Awuzie stated.

Similarly, Bakare Al-Majeed, a political economist noted that while Section 162 allows local governments direct access to funds, state governments should still play a role in fund management.

He noted that the local government is not supposed to be autonomous in the full sense, and Section 162 was amended to grant them access to funding, but states should still be involved in joint management to ensure accountability.

He added that autonomy could improve governance, but that states must remain part of the oversight structure, and also contribute to funding LGs. (BusinessDay)

Update news