The Federal Government has declared that no state government has the legal right to control, disburse, or spend statutory allocations meant for local governments across the country.
Reaffirming its stance before the Supreme Court, the FG emphasised that all 36 states must comply with the apex court’s previous ruling on local government autonomy.
Bellnews reports that the declaration comes in response to a suit filed by the Osun State Government, seeking a directive to compel the federal government to release local government funds for use in health and education projects.
But the FG, in an affidavit deposed to by the Special Assistant to the President (Federal Ministry of Justice), Taiye Hussain Oloyede, urged the Supreme Court to reject Osun’s application.
According to the affidavit, the federal government argued that while Osun claimed to be requesting the funds for development purposes, the law does not permit any state to divert or assume control over allocations constitutionally assigned to local councils.
The Federal Government’s affidavit reads in part, “I, Taiye Hussain Oloyede, Nigerian, Special Assistant to the President attached to the Federal Ministry of Justice Central Area, Abuja do make oath and say as follows:
“I am a Special Assistant to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCTR and I am attached to the office of the Minister of Justice.
“By virtue of that fact, I know the facts of this case and I have the authority of the defendant and Chief Akin Olujinmi, CON, SAN, lead counsel to the defendant, to swear to this counter-affidavit.
“I have read the affidavit in support of the Originating Summons 9: the plaintiff and admit paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 9 of the affidavit.
“Paragraphs 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 25, 24, 24. 2G, 27, 28, 29 and 30 of the affidavit of the plaintiff are not true.
“I have also read the judgment of the Supreme Court in Attorney General of the Federation vs, Attorney General of Abia State & Ors., Suit No.SC/CV/343/2024 delivered on 11th July, 2024 reported in (2922) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1966) 1, in which the following reliefs, amongst others, were granted:
“A declaration that the amount distributed to and standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account can be paid by the Federation directly to democratically elected Iocal government councils.
“A declaration that the amount distributed to and standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account must be paid by the Federation to only democratically elected Local Government Councils and no other body or institution.
“A declaration that by virtue of S.162(3) and (5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, the amount standing to the credit of Local Government Councils in the Federation Account shall be distributed to them and be paid directly to them,
“A declaration that a Local Government Council is entitled to a direct payment from the Federation Account of the amount standing to its credit in the said Federation Account.
“A declaration that a State either by itself or its Governor or other agencies has no power to keep, control, manage, or disburse in any manner allocations from the Federation Account to Local Governments,
“An order of injunction restraining the Defendants, by themselves, their privies, agents, officials or howsoever called from further collecting, receiving, spending or tampering with local government council funds from the Federation Account for the benefit of local government Councils,
“An order that the Federation or Federal Government of Nigeria through its relevant officials forthwith commence the direct payment to each local Government Council of the amount standing to the credit of each of them in the Federation account.
“An order of immediate compliance by the states, through their elected or appointed officials and public officers, with the terms of this judgment and orders made in this suit; and successive compliance by successive State Government officials and public officers.
“I know that effectuating direct payment of allocation to local governments in states requires no logistics that the Minister of Finance should comply with beyond paying the allocation due to the accounts of the local governments.
“The local governments are the ones to forward their account particulars to the Minister of Finance.
“I know as a fact that it is those elected in the local government election conducted by the immediate past government of Osun State on the platform of All Progressives Congress that are running the affairs of the local governments, and their tenure will expire at the end of October, 2025.
“This explains why the plaintiff could not say in its affidavit that the local governments in the state have forwarded their account particulars to the Minister of Finance.
“The plaintiff did not state in its affidavit that it had the authority of the local governments of Osun State to institute this suit on their behalf even though as the court held in the judgment referred to above, at page 111F of the report thereof, that the local governments are the owners of the allocation distributed to them.
“The plaintiff has even indicated in its affidavit that it will use the local governments allocation to finance health care system and education contrary to the judgment of this Court quoted above barring state governments including the plaintiff from spending local government money on behalf of the local governments,
“That I know that contrary to the deposition at paragraph 11 of the plaintiff’s affidavit that the judgment it referred to delivered by the Federal High Court has been set aside by the Court of Appeal.
“On 22nd May, 2025 the defendant, Hon. Attorney- General of the Federation, told me in his office at the Central Area, Abuja at about 3.00pm, and I verily believe him, that contrary to the deposition of the plaintiff at paragraphs 21 and 22 of its affidavit was not addressed to him and he could therefore not have replied to same.
“That on the same 22nd May, 2025, the Minister of Finance told Chief Akin Olujinmi, CON, SAN, in my presence at about 3.15 pm. in the office of the defendant at the Central Area, Abuja and I verily believe him that:
“Contrary to the deposition at paragraphs 23 and 24, of the plaintiff’s affidavit, he at no time said that he acted on the instruction of the defendant or anybody for that matter and further that the Federation has never withheld the funds due to Osun State or the local governments therein
“That the local governments of Osun State have given their account details to the office of the Minister of Finance for the receipt of their allocation monthly.
“I know as a fact that based on the order made by this Court in its judgment referred to above, the monthly allocation due to local governments in each state of the Federation should be paid directly to the local governments.
“It is also clear in the judgment that no state should collect or receive the monthly allocation due to the local governments or spend the money for the benefit of the local governments.”
In a written address by Akin Olujinmi (SAN), leading seven other counsel, the Federal Government said Osun State was being deceitful.
It stated that Osun State wanted the council funds to be paid to it, contrary to the Supreme Court’s judgment.
It described the demands of the Osun State Government as “shocking.”
It said there is no proof before the court to show that the state government has the backing of legally elected local governments in the state to initiate the suit.
The Federal Government said: “The complaint of the plaintiff in this case is that the statutory allocation due to the 30 Local Government Councils of Osun State for the month of March 2025 was not paid to the plaintiff by the Minister of Finance.
“The plaintiff admitted that he was aware of the decision of this Court in Attorney-General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & Ors (supra) in which it was decided that henceforth statutory allocations due to local governments in each state should be paid directly to the local governments.
“The plaintiff further admitted that before the current State Government came into office, the former Government conducted local government election which was won by the political party of the former State Government, the All Progressives Congress, and they were the ones running the local governments.
“The plaintiff however added that the election conducted by the former State government was nullified by the Federal High court but failed to disclose that the judgment of the Federal High Court that nullified the election had been set aside by the Court of Appeal.
“The effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal Exhibit A to the counter-affidavit, is that the tenure of those who were elected into the local government councils under the former administration comes to an end in October, 2025.
“It is those who were elected into the local governments during the term of the former State Government that are running the affairs of the councils currently.
“This explains why the plaintiff could not claim that the local governments in the state have forwarded their account details to the Minister of Finance for the direct payment of their statutory allocation.
“The plaintiff, however, by this suit wants the allocation due to the local governments to be paid to her contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above.
“It is indeed shocking to find the plaintiff State claiming at paragraphs 15 and 16 of its affidavit that notwithstanding the clear decision of the Supreme Court in the judgment referred to above barring states from collecting or receiving the allocation due to the local governments in the state, that it had collected such allocations from July 2024 to February 2025 in disobedience to the judgment.
“The plaintiff state could not also claim that it was authorized by the local governments to institute this suit on their behalf. But the plaintiff state is by this suit seeking to overturn the judgment of the Supreme Court by now by asking that the Minister of Finance should pay the allocations due to the local governments to her.
“The Plaintiff has even disclosed that it will take the initiative from the local governments on how they will want to spend their money and on its own spend the money to finance the healthcare system and education.”
The Federal Government raised a preliminary objection to the suit because, as it said, the Osun State Government has no locus standi to institute it.
It said: “Without any doubt therefore, the plaintiff state has not shown any dispute between her and the Federation. If there is anybody that may have a grievance for the alleged non-payment of the allocations due, it is certainly not the plaintiff state but the local government councils in Osun State who are the “owners of the money” distributed to them, which by the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to above, must be paid directly to them.
“Of course, if wrongly deprived of their allocation after it has been distributed, the local governments are entitled to sue the Minister of Finance for payment of the allocation due to them in the appropriate court.
“The alleged failure of a functionary of the Federal Government, in this case, the Minister of Finance as canvassed by the plaintiff, even if true which is not conceded, does not qualify as a dispute capable of triggering the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
“The contention of the defendant in this ground of objection is that this suit as constituted does not fit into the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Section 232(1) of the 1999 Constitution which is exercisable only inn dispute between the Federation and a State or between States in so far as that dispute involves any question (whether of law or fact) on which the existence of extent of a legal right depends.
“The plaintiff has not disclosed any dispute, let alone a justiciable dispute, between Osun State and the Federal Government.
“In support of this contention, we rely on paragraphs 9, 10, 16, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27 of the plaintiff’s’ affidavit.”
The Federal Government said the suit amounted to disobedience of the order of the Supreme Court.
“We submit, nobody has a right to disobey the judgment of the court and still come back to the same court whose process the state in this case has spurned, and ask the court to make fresh orders on its behalf to continue to disobey the judgment of the court.
“We submit that the only way to vindicate the authority of this Court is to order the plaintiff to pay back to the Minister of Finance all the money due to the local governments of Osun State which the plaintiff claimed it had collected from July 2024 to February, 2025. The Minister of Finance will then pay the money to the “owners of same” i.e. the local governments of Osun State.
“Accordingly, we humbly urge the Court to uphold this objection and decline hearing the plaintiff and dismiss this case,” it added.
The Osun State Government is seeking an order of the Supreme Court to compel the Federal Government to release the withheld allocations and to restrain it from further withholding or suspending payments due to the state’s local councils.
It asks the apex court to decide whether the withholding of the funds, despite the existence of democratically elected councils, is lawful.
It seeks to have the court declare the federal government’s action not only illegal but also a threat to the existence and governance of its local government institutions.
The state Commissioner for Finance, Ogungbile Adeola Olusola, in a sworn affidavit in support of the originating summons, claimed that the continued seizure of the funds could paralyse critical sectors such as education and healthcare across the state.
He said: “If the defendant is not urgently restrained from further withholding…the local government councils would not be able to function and perform their constitutional obligations.
“The continuous seizure…would cripple the governance and subsistence of the local government councils and, by extension, the governance of the state itself.”