The Nigerian House of Representatives recently took a bold step towards amending the country's constitution as it relates to the local government system.
By this initiative, the local government is granted autonomy as against the practice over the years wherein the third tier of government was constitutionally tied to the apron of state governments in Nigeria.
Clamour for this autonomy by opinion leaders, public analysts and the mass of people of this nation had been on for decades. To this end therefore, it is viewed by many as a glimpse of light at the end of the tunnel and a ray of hope of better things to come.
Under the old order (which is being repealed now), local governments are practically hamstrung in many ways.
First, a state governor could dissolve a local government executive council (the cabinet of the grassroots government) at will.
Secondly, the governors were empowered to appoint a caretaker committee to run the affairs of local government for a specific period till election was conducted to fill the positions of the Chairman and Councillors etcetera. Thirdly, a state governor or government was granted power to determine when local government election could hold just as they were responsible for appointing members of the state electoral commission to conduct the election.
Owing largely to the far-reaching powers vested on state governors by the old constitutional provisions, it became easy, under different administrations and political parties, to turn the grassroots government machinery into puns in the governors' political chessboard. For the most part, the governors did not stop at emasculating the local governments administratively but succeeded in turning them into a robust platform for compensating errand boys, party stalwarts, friends and relations who assisted them in campaigning for votes or for anyone to whom they felt obliged to so do.
As it played out in the last 14 years of " democratic governance" in Nigeria, the majority of state governors went beyond the provisions of the constitution in meddling with the affairs of this third tier of government.
For example, these governors could not hide their preference for caretaker committee over a dully elected cabinet to administer local government areas. Usually, the governors tactically delayed conduct of election into local council whenever they sensed their party was not firmly footed enough to win in all the local government areas of the state. To this end, they quickly resorted to floating caretaker committees which unavoidably responded to the governors' demand. Often, they dissolved an adhoc committee and constituted another to beat the duration set by the law for its lifespan.
In most cases, elections were conducted only as response to severe and prolonged criticisms by the mass media, pressure from opposition parties, the people or court verdict.
Again, it became extremely difficult and almost impossible for local government elections to be won by members of a political party other than that of the incumbent governor. This had been the trend among states in Nigeria.
In states where governors were replaced through court judgement, some local government cabinets were spared a few months before the "new governor" and his party over-ran the territory. This also was not common as such governors usually embarked on instant dissolution of the grassroots government and replacement with caretaker committee.
Another trend or political fad noticeable in this state's high-handedness of the grassroots government, was that as soon as another political party took over a state governorship seat, a lot of politicians from other parties, in particular the displaced political party, switched over en mass to the one holding the ace. Often, a rally was held by the latter to publicly announce the defection to the new bride. In Ondo State for example, key political figures moved in droves to three political parties under three different governors.
First, it was Alliance for Democracy (AD), followed by People's Democratic Party (PDP), and presently the Labour Party (LP).
Between 1999 and now, the incumbent state governor, Dr. Olusegun Mimiko had moved through the three political parties in the order above. Each time he has held key position in government; first as Commissioner for Health (under AD), Secretary to the State Government and later a Federal Minister (as PDP member) and now state Governor (on the platform of LP). The situation was similar in Edo, Ekiti, Anambra, Osun and other parts of the country at one time or the other where election results were overturned by the Law Court several months after a governor had been sworn in. With ease, politicians in Nigeria hop from one party to the other.
Indeed, a compendium of the contemporary Nigerian political history would be incomplete without a pride of place given to the phenomenal political promiscuity among politicians in the six geo-political zones of the country.
On the other hand, governors routing for state's control of the local government argued it helps to keep the system in check one way or the other. Those in favour of independent local government however dismissed the view of the governors saying it lacked in merit and substance. To them the governors were being deceitful by hiding their main reasons for moving against the people"s preference and choice.
State governors' reckless usurpation of the financial resources of local governments is said to be the real reason behind moves to oppose this pro-autonomous local government system..
For a long while and in brazen defiance of the Nigerian constitution, the governors (including the self-acclaimed progressives), do "commandeer" local government monthly allocation from the federation accounts and release to the grassroots government a paltry sum. Not only did the 1999 Nigerian Constitution provide for separate accounts for a state and local government, it bestowed independent financial status on each. In practice however, the governors usually make special arrangement or an accord with their stooges in the local government that ensure the former do have access directly to the federal monthly allocation of local governments. By this arrangement, the governors decide what part or percentage to release monthly to the local councils. Being a party leader and of course, the benefactor, local government chairmen, councillors or committee members and other officials have no option than to comply. To do otherwise is to risk being blacklisted or branded as "not loyal" or as usual " working against the party's interest".
In a nutshell, local government funds or allocation is probably the worst victim of the Nigerian politicians' looting spree. Due largely to the prolongation of this untoward practice in the system, the third tier of government, today, merely exist in words and not in action in the people's reckoning. While the mass of people lament daily over poor infrastructure and total negligence of responsibility by local governments throughout the country, governors do feign ignorance about the situation and always do prefer to look the other way.
From all indications, this initiative of the House of Representatives to grant full-fledged autonomy to the grassroots government is, undoubtedly, a step aimed at making representative government more beneficial to the people. "Independence for local government in Nigeria is freedom to the people (the majority of Nigerians).
Be that as it may, feelers have it that some ex-governors and incumbent, mainly from the opposition, are making moves to lobby the Nigerian Senate against autonomous local government system. A particular political party was said to have mobilized its members in the Senate in readiness for counter action. Some analysts however believe that as the same party members had failed in the Lower House so it would in the Upper Chamber.
Given the political complexion of the Nigerian nation, its susceptability or vulnerability to manipulation, it becomes reasonable for the House of Representatives and indeed the National Assembly as a whole to go a step further to actualize this long awaited dream of the Nigerian people. In other words, the real autonomy for the grassroots government could only be achieved in real terms, if election into local government is freed from the party system. Citizens do not need political party to know what they (the masses) need, neither do they require a political party for their needs to be supplied. Let the people be organized into Resident Associations (which had been in existence in virtually all parts or geo-political zones of Nigeria for years), and the candidates to emerge on the platforms of these Residents Associations (R-A), which in turn, can be grouped into A, B, C, D, E Districts in each local government area. Since 1953 that we have had political parties, how much of our needs have been met? What has not political party system experimented with Nigeria? Do you see anything new in their arsenal? - Amalgamation, Coalition, Unity Government, Mega Party, National Outlook, Two Party System, Multi-Party System, Parliamentry System, Presidential System etcetera. Is anything new among the parties or what they parade? "nothng", except self-delusion.
On the other hand, many R-A's in the neighbourhood have officials elected by the people themselves who coordinate the residents' affairs. By this, the process would naturally and legitimately involve the people directly in all segments. The benefits derivable from this pattern are inexhaustible.
The government would be saved the huge sum of money usually voted for election every year. Secondly, the residents know themselves intimately and as such, one who will not serve the people's interest would not be elected. Thirdly, influence of political party godfathers is removed from the equation. Candidates for election would not need to part with millions of naira or dollars anymore as normaly required by political parties.
Another immediate benefit is that, acts of violence, thuggery, intimidation, hooliganism and vendatta that often charaterize party- based elections would disappear from the scene. Electoral fraud, manipulation and "win- at all cost- mentality" would fade out without delay and the nation would be the greatest beneficiary of this.
It is very important for the new law to set aside a day in a month (Grassroots Day) where the leadership of each local government would interface with the people in a (public) location within the territory, and table the state of affairs regarding finance, project and all activities of the council. The project to be given priority should be determined by the people at this forum.
The Grassroots Day (G-DAY) is as important to the new thinking as the government itself. For once, it gives room for the people to be involved in their own government, but much more importantly, it helps to fill the gap to be created by the exit of political demagogue and usurpers.
It helps to keep the system in check perpetually and forecloses any attempt to derail the pattern. It provides direction for both the people and government simultaneously. The people would no longer be separated from their government and could easily nip in the bud, any untoward attitude, disposition or tendencies. It guarantees efficient management of resources; provides opportunities for cross-fertilization of ideas and effective solution to challenges.
The local government reform in this regard may as well mark the turning point for the current National Assembly, the 7th in the history of Nigeria and under the leadership of Sen. David Mark and Hon. Aminu Tambuwal, either to etch its name in the annals of democratic reforms and social change or pass away into oblivion like others before it. Anthony Enahoro would always be remembered for moving the motion for independence of Nigeria and Obafemi Awolowo could not be forgotten for his role in ending the civil war in Nigeria and the impact he made as Premier of the South Western part of Nigeria. The time is now.
No comments:
Post a Comment