 The Senate has approved financial autonomy for state legislators, judiciary and local governments in the country. Now, this was revealed during House voting sessions on the report of the Senate committee on the review of the 1999 constitution, the fifth alteration bills of 2022. Now, senators during the voting on the report, however, rejected pension for presiding officers of the legislature. Well, joining us to discuss this is the former director general of Nymasa, Dr. Dacucu Adolpiteisai. It's good to have you join us. Good evening. It's good to have you here. So let's go straight to the point. Why is the issue of local government autonomy something that we're still discussing in 2022? It's dragging on for so long. All right. Thank you very much. Two important things. The first is that the constitution in section seven sub one guarantee the existence of local government by democratic means, meaning, you know, having democratic elected officials run local government. Nigerians to date have not optimized the benefit of that provision of the constitution. And there are a lot of reasons for it. One of the reasons is the fact that when you give people responsibility, you must also give them resources. And given there's a specific provision of responsibilities for the local government without corresponding resources. Now, whereas by the constitution, there's a provision of allocation for local government, but in practical experience, in practical terms, local government don't get these resources. And because they don't get resources, the people are not able to hold them accountable. The people are not able to hold them responsible to drive development at the grassroots. The people are not able to hold them responsible for provision of services as enshrined or as provided for in the constitution and relevant provisions of the constitution. So you now have given them responsibility without corresponding resources. And in addition to lack of provision of resources, we have also observed over time that local governments are being strangulated by various state governments. And it comes in diverse ways. One is that through the joint state local government accounts, money will obviously not get to local governments. There are cases too where states force local governments on the projects to execute. And so those projects are not the parities of the people. The state is far from the people so they don't understand what the parities of the people are. That's a great concern. Now, the thought is that we've also had experience where various states were simply emasculate the tortilla of government. In fact, in many places, there are no democratically elected governments at the tortilla level. Governors perpetuate themselves by appointing, sometimes you call them caretaker committees, sometimes you call them by whatever name. But these so-called caretaker committees or appendages to state governments and the guys of local governments didn't really start until recently. I mean, I'm saying this from experience. Let's say some early 1999 local governments were really working. You could see local governments doing what they ought to do, in a sense. But then down the line, we started seeing local government elections becoming a sham of sorts. I mean, you know these things more than I do, but I'm saying I have seen local governments work before now. But now we hardly see them. We see governors, like you said, caretaker committees, elections don't hold. And the people who need government the most really don't know where to go to because if you go to your local government chairman or the man who's representing you as a councillor and he's unable to help you, how do you get to the governor? All right. Let me take it from another perspective or a historical perspective. In 1999, it is very possible that we had democratically elected local governments in place because it was a transition from the military to civilian administrators or civilian governments in place. But immediately after 1999, we started having what I call them caretaker committees. Excuse me, we called them interim government by whatever name so-called. So it didn't start recently. From 2003, we started experiencing all forms of aberration in local government administration. And I recall clearly, I had served as local government chairman before, I recall clearly that a few of our colleagues as early as 2002 had started complaining that state governments were tampering with their funds. They didn't have access to their location, they were actually damning projects for them and forcing them to do joint projects that were not part of their priorities. And they didn't even have budgets in some cases. Budgets were being forced on them. State houses were simply and so many, in some states, most states, the state houses were simply approved budgets whereas it should be the responsibility of local government council with elected councillors. So we've had this over time. I acknowledge the fact that one president, at least a gov'r senior was in office, he made attempts to correct this abnormally. But it didn't quite succeed because it's a tedious process to amend the constitution. And they've passed four times that there was an attempt to amend the constitution. In all cases, there was an attempt to amend that provision, that provide for physical autonomy for local government. And all four occasions it failed because as you progress from the status of assembly to various progress from national assembly to various state houses of assembly, the governors, in ways I cannot explain, they always have a way of having control of the status of assemblies, will get the status. Isn't that obvious? I mean, isn't that a practice in Nigeria? Isn't that a practice? If the government of the day is, for example, the APC, then the rubber stamp legislature follows. Isn't that a practice? It is a practice, it's not right, it doesn't make it right. So that's where we are. So it's got historical antecedents. And I hope that this particular attempt will succeed. It's my prayer, I'm optimistic that this attempt succeeds. So that at least we can free the local government, empower them actually to provide services and hold them responsible and accountable for resources allocated to local governments. It's interesting that you mentioned the fact that the legislatures in the States also are part and parcel of this problem. We've seen judicial workers, we've seen legislative workers go and strike over and over again because of financial autonomy issues. But then these people are supposed to be representing our interests, the interests of the people being that, again I like to use the term people who need government the most, who are at the grassroots. That should be the priority of these lawmakers but that isn't the case. So I'm wondering, does it have to do with how we're practicing the form of government that we say we're practicing, of course it's a unitary form of government but we call it a federalism. Does that also play a role in why things are a bit skewed as it is and why are governments so adamant on giving these people their opportunity to govern at those levels because those levels of governments are suffering and the people who are living in those local government areas also? There are three reasons for it. Now the problem is not as much with the constitution or with the framework as it is with the way we practice it. I don't think the real challenge is the constitution or the legal framework under which we operate. It is part of the problem but I don't think it's the main challenge. Part of the challenge we face is the leadership recruitment process. How are these guys elected? Are they true representatives of the people? If you notice, you may have observed that in the political process I don't think very often it is governors or some very powerful political elite that will literally handpick those who will run on the platform of various political parties. So these guys come with a mentality that they're not representing the people representing whatever interests that have forced them on the ticket of the political party. Now of course they provide resources, they get elected and they know that primarily they're not representing the people. So the sense of service is lost in all of this? Of course! So the fear that many because we did a little poll on social media to find out if governors would adhere because again this is not necessarily a state government problem and I'm talking about adherence to law. We've had several disobedience to laws in this country at all levels. What's the guarantee that governors would adhere to this particular move by the National Assembly to give autonomy to these local governments? If they do not, what else can these people hold on to to get these governors to comply? It's important to say that the National Assembly passing this specific clause of the alteration on to the constitution is only a first step in the long process. Now you expect that concurrently two-thirds of the state house of assembly will have to concur with the National Assembly before it becomes part of the constitution, becomes the law. Now if eventually it becomes the law, I don't see state governments disubain the provisions of the constitution. Of course it can be challenged in court and there are other measures to ensure that they can't afford to flaunt the law. The first step is that it means there will be no more state local government joint account. Monies will go to local governments directly. That's why Mr President came up with that executive order number 10 which was thrown out by the courts. It was not in consonance with the provisions of the constitution. Of course, which we all agree on and that's why it was thrown out by the courts. I was trying to solve a problem, but again, I think that a more sustainable way of solving a problem is this constitutional amendment. But there's just a first step. And so my prayer is that they succeed in amending this clause of the constitution. I don't see governors flagrantly disubain that provision of the constitution. There are enough safety valves built in that will make it impossible for governors to disubain that provision of the constitution. Houseman, do we see this playing out because again, the elections are around the corner and what would hope that in the next few years if we are going to the polls for local government elections we would see a free and fair process? Is there any guarantee in that regard? That's a different matter altogether. Now, the provision for financial or fiscal autonomy for local governments is an instant issue from whether elections will be free and fair to local governments. Mind you, the constitution provides for the establishment of state-independent electoral commission as distinct from independent national electoral commission. So it will still be under the poor view of various state governments to conduct elections for local governments. Now, governors appoint members of the state-independent electoral commission. Maybe apart from Carduna, I've not seen too many governors that appointed an independent electoral commission that can say are non-nationally members of their party or they've got some level of integrity that will give confidence to the people that these guys can conduct elections that are free and fair. I don't see that happening. And that's why if you notice a pattern, a trend, in most states of the federation the dominant parties or the parties that control the state government very often win all the seats, which in parties is not possible. Win all the seats for councilorship, win all the seats for chairmanship, which of course you know is an aberration, it's not normal and it means something is wrong, it sends a message that something is wrong. So, yes, let's get this right. Then we begin to make a case for proper local government elections. You know, the two must go together for us to get maximum benefit from the local government system. Let it serve the purpose for which it was established. Let them be able to discharge their responsibility. Okay. All right. Well, that's all the time that we have. Da cwku, adult, fitosite, doctor, fitosite is a former director general of Nymasa and we thank you for being part of this conversation. Thank you. We'll keep our fingers crossed on that one. Well, that's all we have for you on the show tonight. I'm Mary Anna Cohn. Thank you for watching. We'll see you tomorrow as we talk for development. Have a good evening.