Tinubu’s Executive Order on LG Autonomy: A Constitutional Crisis or a Misguided Fix?

An in-depth analysis of the deepening conflict between Nigeria’s federal government and states over local government control, and why a financial solution may be missing the constitutional point.

President Bola Tinubu’s threat to use an executive order to force direct funding to Nigeria’s 774 Local Government Areas (LGAs) has ignited a fresh debate on the country’s foundational governance flaws. While framed as a battle for financial autonomy and against gubernatorial overreach, a deeper examination reveals a struggle over the very meaning of federalism in Africa’s most populous nation.

This analysis is based on a report by The Citizen, which argues that the President’s approach, prompted by a contentious Supreme Court ruling, may inadvertently cement a system it seeks to reform.

The Impasse: Supreme Court Ruling vs. Political Reality

In July 2024, the Supreme Court of Nigeria, following a suit by the Attorney-General of the Federation, ruled that LGAs should receive their monthly allocations from the Federation Account directly, bypassing the long-established State-Local Government Joint Account system. The judgment was hailed by some as a victory for grassroots development and a check on powerful state governors.

However, seventeen months later, implementation has been a mirage. State governments, citing constitutional responsibilities and the need for oversight, have found ways to maintain control. Anambra State Governor Chukwuma Soludo, for instance, passed a state law effectively neutralizing the court’s order. This standoff led President Tinubu to threaten an executive order compelling the Federal Accounts Allocation Committee (FAAC) to make direct deductions and payments.

Beyond the Cash: The Federalism Fault Line

The core controversy, experts contend, is not merely about fund management but about Nigeria’s distorted federal structure. In classic federations like the United States, Germany, and Australia, local governments are creatures of the state or regional governments, not the central government. The federating units create, fund, and manage their subordinate councils based on local needs and resources.

Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, a product of military rule, anomalously lists all 774 LGAs, placing them in a constitutional limbo between the federal and state tiers. This creates what analysts call a “nagging injustice”: the number of LGAs per state, which influences federal revenue allocation, is uneven and politically contentious. For example, Bayelsa State, a major oil producer, has 8 LGAs, while Jigawa State has 27.

A History of Problems: Why Both Sides Have a Point

The debate is fraught with historical baggage. Proponents of direct funding argue that the Joint Account system has been abused by governors, turning LGA allocations into a slush fund and stifling local development. Conversely, state governments point to a pre-Joint Account era when LGAs received funds directly, which was marred by “rampant inefficiency and graft” so severe that many councils could not pay primary school teachers—a burden states subsequently assumed.

This presents a paradox: centralized control by states breeds corruption, but full financial autonomy for poorly equipped LGAs has historically led to administrative collapse.

The Tinubu Paradox: Governor vs. President

The current situation is rich with irony. As Governor of Lagos State in 2003, Bola Tinubu created 37 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) to improve governance. The federal government under President Olusegun Obasanjo withheld Lagos’s LGA allocations in retaliation. Tinubu took the matter to the Supreme Court and won, defending a state’s right to determine its local administrative structure.

Today, as President, Tinubu is championing a Supreme Court ruling that critics say undermines that very principle of state control, using a legal precedent opposite to the one that benefited him two decades prior.

The Path Forward: Restructuring Over Executive Orders

Constitutional scholars argue that executive orders and forced compliance miss the mark. The sustainable solution, they posit, is a return to true federalist principles:

• Constitutional Amendment: Removing the listed 774 LGAs from the national constitution.
• State Empowerment: Allowing each state to create, fund, and manage its own local government system according to its resources and needs, much like the 50 U.S. states manage over 90,000 local governments.
• Accountability Shift: Under such a model, voters would hold state governments directly accountable for local governance performance, creating a clearer line of political responsibility.

Conclusion: A Crossroads for Nigerian Governance

President Tinubu’s proposed executive order on LGA allocations is a symptom of a far deeper constitutional malaise. While aiming to break gubernatorial strangleholds on local funds, the approach risks further centralizing power in Abuja and entrenching a flawed model. The enduring fix requires the political courage to champion a comprehensive restructuring of Nigeria’s federation, moving from a militarized, unitary-in-practice system to a genuine, balanced federalism where states are true masters of their domestic affairs. The financial autonomy of LGAs is a worthy goal, but it cannot be sustainably achieved without first addressing the federalist framework that makes them constitutional orphans.

Primary Source: This report was developed using analysis from the original article, “LGs: Executive Order Opposes Federalism”, published by The Citizen.