The 36 state governors have been hauled before the Supreme Court by the federal government for alleged misbehavior in Local Government Area management. According to a lawsuit brought by Lateef Fagbemi, Minister of Justice, and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), all local government regions in the nation are to have complete autonomy. In the lawsuit, the federal government requested that the Supreme Court issue a directive that would forbid state governors from removing democratically elected local government leaders in a unilateral, capricious, or illegal manner. Through their respective Attorneys General, the 36 states' governors were sued.
If a state does not implement a democratically elected local government system, it also applies for an order of injunction prohibiting the governors, their representatives, and privies from accepting, using, or interfering with money released from the federation account for the benefit of local governments. The Federal Government claimed that Nigeria, as a federation, was created by the 1999 Constitution as amended, with the president serving as the head of the federal executive branch and taking an oath to defend and carry out the provisions of the constitution. This claim was made in support of the lawsuit on 27 different grounds. The federal government informed the Supreme Court that the executive governors of the federation, who have also pledged to obey the constitution, represent the component states via their governors.
According to this, the Nigerian constitution recognizes three levels of government: the federal, state, and local levels. These levels of government rely on the federation account that the constitution established to support their operations. ‘’That the local government system must be democratically elected by the constitution's provisions, and that the constitution does not provide any provisions for alternative local government governance systems. That the governors have failed to implement a democratically elected local government system in defiance of the explicit requirements of the constitution, even in cases where no state of emergency has been proclaimed to justify the suspension of democratic institutions.
The governors' refusal to implement a locally elected democratic system of governance is a purposeful violation of the 1999 constitution, which they and the president have pledged to protect. That there has been no progress in getting the governors to implement the 1999 constitution's requirements for a democratically elected local government system, and that it would be improper to continue giving governors money from the federation account for a democratically elected local government that does not yet exist to compromise the integrity of the 1999 constitution.
That the federal government is not required by section 162 of the constitution to pay any state, monies standing to the credit of local governments when no democratically elected local government is in place, in light of the 1999 constitutional infractions. The Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing for May 30.
