The proposal by the National Assembly to introduce a uniform four-year renewable tenure for elected local government officials across Nigeria has generated mixed reactions among legal experts, with Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) raising constitutional, political, and governance concerns.

The proposal Is part of ongoing efforts to reform the local government system amid persistent agitation for autonomy, accountability, and improved grassroots governance.

Speaking on Monday in an exclusive interview with the Nigerian Tribune, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Olalekan Ojo, described the proposed tenure extension as largely political, arguing that it lacks clear constitutional or legal justification.

Ojo questioned the rationale behind the National Assembly’s move, noting that while there has been sustained clamour for local government reforms, extending tenure alone does not address the fundamental problems affecting local governance in Nigeria.

“In my view, this is one of those decisions that can only be justified on political grounds. I fail to see any legal or constitutional justification for extending the tenure of local government officials to four years, particularly when there is no constitutional limitation on the number of times a person can be elected as a local government chairman,” Ojo said.

He contrasted the situation with that of governors and the president, whose tenures are constitutionally capped at two terms of four years each.

According to him, the absence of similar limits at the local government level makes a tenure extension potentially problematic.

“A local government chairman can be elected repeatedly — three times, four times, or even more, if he remains in the good books of the governor and the electorate.

“So extending the tenure without addressing term limits is, honestly speaking, totally unjustified,” Ojo said.

The SAN further argued that the push for a four-year tenure appears to be driven by a desire for parity with governors, who serve four-year terms, rather than by any compelling governance necessity.

“The cosmetic advantage is parity. If governors are elected for four years, then some ask why local government officials should not also serve for four years.

“But governance should not be about cosmetic balance; it should be about accountability and effectiveness,” he added.

Ojo also raised concerns about the current structure of local government elections, which are conducted by state electoral bodies under the control of state governments.

He questioned how a four-year tenure would function in practice, given that governors often determine the timing and conduct of local council elections.

“As things stand today, the states conduct local government elections. How will this four-year tenure align with the tenure of governors, especially when governors still exercise overwhelming influence over the councils?” he queried.

However, Ojo acknowledged that the proposal could carry some political advantages if implemented alongside broader electoral reforms.

He suggested that synchronising local government elections with gubernatorial elections and transferring the conduct of council polls to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could reduce undue interference and enhance autonomy.

“If INEC conducts local government elections, and they are held in the same year as governorship elections, then it may help ensure the much-desired local government autonomy,” he said, adding that such reforms would be more impactful than merely extending tenure.

On his part, another Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Afolabi Olatunde, offered a more cautious but receptive perspective, stressing that the proposal cannot be implemented without constitutional amendments.

Olatunde explained that although the Nigerian Constitution guarantees the existence of local governments, their structure, operation, and tenure are largely governed by state laws.

As a result, the National Assembly lacks the authority to unilaterally prescribe a uniform tenure through ordinary legislation.

“The National Assembly cannot just sit down and prescribe four years as a uniform tenure for local government chairmen across Nigeria. For that to happen, the Constitution must first be amended to make such a provision,” Olatunde said.

He noted that until the Constitution is altered, state houses of assembly retain the power to determine local government tenure, leading to inconsistencies across the federation.

“If the Constitution is amended to standardise a four-year tenure, then it should be a welcome development. It will prevent situations where some state governments manipulate tenure, reducing it to two or three years, for political convenience,” Olatunde added.

According to him, a constitutionally backed uniform tenure could promote stability, continuity, and fairness in local governance, provided it is accompanied by genuine autonomy and credible elections. (Nigerian Tribune)

Update news