The Osun State House of Assembly recently passed a resolution reaffirming legal guidelines for the use of Local Government funds, and even went further by constituting a committee to investigate troubling allegations that monies meant for grassroots development were being diverted into private accounts and managed by unauthorized individuals.
This decision has ignited debates in legal and political circles. While some argue that recent Supreme Court judgments have entrenched Local Government autonomy, others maintain that the Assembly acted squarely within its constitutional mandate, noting that autonomy does not negate the constitutional responsibilities of the House of Assembly.
In constitutional advocacy, whenever disputes arise, the Constitution must serve as the ultimate guide and reference point. When we turn to its provisions, the picture becomes clearer. The Constitution is the supreme authority, the grundnorm from which all other laws derive their powers. Amending it is a rigorous and deliberately inflexible process.
Section 7(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) states plainly, ‘The system of Local Government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to Section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils.
What this means is simple, Local Governments, though recognized by the Constitution, are creations of State law through the instrumentality of the State House of Assembly. They are not sovereign entities standing apart from the constitutional framework.
In A.G. Abia State v. A.G. Federation (2006) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1005) 265, the Supreme Court held that Local Governments ‘owe their legal life to the House of Assembly of a State.’ The language of the apex court is clear, authoritative, and overriding.
Even earlier, in A.G. Lagos State v. A.G. Federation (2003) 12 NWLR (Pt. 833) 1 (SC), the Supreme Court affirmed that only a State House of Assembly has the constitutional authority to legislate on the establishment, structure, finance, and functions of Local Governments.
It is therefore settled that the State House of Assembly serves as the legal guiding light for Local Governments. From time to time, the Assembly is empowered to enact laws that affect the structure and operations of Local Government Councils.
Accordingly, the decision of the Osun State House of Assembly to establish a committee to investigate the finances of Local Governments is firmly backed by law. Far from being an overreach, it is a constitutional duty, an affirmation that the Assembly will not abdicate its responsibility to safeguard public funds.
Sections 128 and 129 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) empower a State House of Assembly to investigate any matter in order to expose corruption, inefficiency, or waste in the management of public funds. The Constitution authorizes the Assembly to summon persons, compel the production of documents, and even issue warrants. Notably, these provisions mirror Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution, which vest similar powers in the National Assembly.
In El-Rufai v. House of Representatives (2003) FWLR (Pt. 170) 1203, the Court of Appeal affirmed that the investigative powers of legislative houses are constitutional and binding. If this holds true for the National Assembly, it must, by necessary implication, hold true for the Osun State House of Assembly as well.
Similarly, in Governor of Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2012) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1285) 445, the Court of Appeal reinforced that State Assemblies have legislative competence over Local Government finances and operations.
From my years in practice, I have come to learn that autonomy is one of the most abused words in our political vocabulary. Autonomy does not mean immunity from scrutiny. It means independence to function without undue interference, but always within the boundaries of law.
The Independent National Electoral Commission and some agencies of government are constitutionally independent in their operations, yet their finances are still subject to investigation.
Sections 120(2) and (4) of the Constitution are unambiguous, no money shall be withdrawn from the public funds of a State or Local Government except as prescribed by law. In Osun State, the Local Government Administration Law and the Financial Regulation Law, 2020, already spell out who can sign and how such funds must be administered.
So, when questions arise about money allegedly being funneled into private accounts, I see no contradiction in the Assembly stepping in. This is not a takeover of Local Government functions; it is a constitutional duty to safeguard the public purse.
If I am to be candid, doing nothing in the face of allegations of mismanagement would have been worse. Imagine a legislature that looks away while funds meant for roads, schools, and health centres vanish into thin air. That would not be autonomy; it would be abandonment.
Oversight, therefore, is not about reducing Local Governments to subordinates. It is about ensuring that funds meant for grassroots development reach the people for whom they are intended. Autonomy and oversight must walk hand in hand.
Our Constitution created a balance, Local Governments are entitled to autonomy, but State Houses of Assembly have oversight powers to ensure accountability. One without the other invites abuse, and abuse is the death of good governance.
Pelumi Olajengbesi Esq. is a Legal Practitioner and Senior Partner at Law Corridor, where he leads the Business Development & Policy Group. He is a constitutional advocate and thought leader shaping conversations at the intersection of law, governance, and public policy in Nigeria.
[email protected]
