The idea of local government autonomy has come under criticism by Dr. Kayode Fayemi, previously the Governor of Ekiti State and ex-Chairman of Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), who believes that it is a misinterpretation and anomaly within a federal system of governance.
Fayemi, formerly Nigeria’s Minister of Mines and Steel Development, discussed the topic “Secrets of Audacious Leaders” at the St. Racheal’s People Consulting 2024 Leadership and Economic Summit held in Lagos on July 25th with a focus on achieving economic prosperity.
According to Fayemi, the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of local government autonomy resulting from the Federal Government’s legal action against state governors does not effectively tackle Nigeria’s wider socio-economic and security challenges.
Fayemi voiced apprehension that Nigeria is transitioning from a federal system to one that’s unitary, even as restructuring talks are ongoing.
Read Also: Ekiti Govt Adopts AI for Livestock Production Boost
He maintained that genuine federalism doesn’t entail the central government dictating affairs of local governments.
Fayemi observed that federalism operates on the basis of dual federal units, which can be seen in countries such as the U.S., Canada and Australia.
He further mentioned that individual states should determine their own number of local authorities based on their specific requirements.
Fayemi criticized the current approach for being unworkable and not conforming to standard global practices in regard to federal systems.
Fayemi stressed the importance of prioritizing local solutions to critical issues such as security and energy, instead of imposing federal control over local governments.
He maintains that effectively addressing these areas at a grassroots level would greatly enhance Nigeria’s overall performance.
On July 11, the Supreme Court issued a ruling that grants complete independence to local governments. Initially brought forth by Attorney General Lateef Fagbemi and his team on behalf of the Federal Government, this lawsuit aimed to stop state governors from unlawfully removing elected officials at the local level as well as mishandling their funds.
With its decision now in place, one major goal is for direct fund transfers between parties within each locality instead of stately interventions interfering with progress.
