This is yet another open quarrel between the States and the Federal Government, This Court is by now thoroughly familiar and used to such quarrels, as they come before it fairly regularly in the last few years or so, the open quarrel dovetails to a subtle one between the concepts of Federalism and unitarism in constitutional law and politics. Paradoxically, the two concepts do not have the slightest inkling or knowledge of the open quarrel they are roped in subtly, as they remain quiet in reference and text books. The open quarrel seems to wake them up to their apparent consternation. They seem to be used as conduit pipes in the carriage of the case of each party to a successful end. I will deal with the two concepts in this judgment. Albeit briefly.
The cynosure or fulcrum of the quarrel is in respect of some Sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and some Sections of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act, 2005. It looks an apparently short Act of ten Sections but has caused so much anxiety, furore and turbulence. It has caused so much ill-feeling and rancor too, particularly in the States. That has caused this large litigation involving the Federal Government and all the States.
The Attorney-General of Abia State, the 1st Plaintiff, ignited the candle that raised the fire. He set the ball rolling as he initiated the first action. He was followed by his colleague of Delta State, the Attorney-General of Delta State, the 2nd Plaintiff. The Attorney-General of Lagos State took the third position, not in an examination setting though. As the reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs are basically similar, this Court consolidated the three suits on 20th October, 2005. He filed the action last and so he took the rear as the 3rd Plaintiff. This was on the application of the 2nd and 3rd Plaintiffs.
Although the suits were consolidated, I should set out the reliefs of each Plaintiff. The 1st Plaintiff claims as follows:
-
a
"A declaration that no law made by the National Assembly can validly direct the Plaintiff or any other State Government to include a Commissioner of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commissioner as a member of the State Joint Local Government Allocation Committee envisaged by Section 162 of the Constitution
-
b
A declaration that no law made by the National Assembly can validly direct the Plaintiff's Joint Local Government Allocation Committee to tender monthly returns to the Federation Account Allocation Committee or at all.
-
c
A declaration that save and except for laws of the Federation with respect to:
-
i
The prescription of such terms and in what manner any amount standing to the credit of the Federation should be distributed among the Federal and State governments and the Local Government Councils;
-
ii
The establishment of the Federal Capital Territory Joint Area Council Allocation Committee and the Federal Capital Territory Joint Area Council Committee-
-
iii
agents broke in and entered upon the aforementioned piece or parcel of land, that is to say, 'Okimkim Mbak Okpongo' situate and lying in Ikot Ede Village aforesaid, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, while still in the possession of the Plaintiff; and cut down and g destroyed and damaged economic trees such as oil palm trees.
“it is the House of Assembly of a State not the National Assembly which may make a law prescribing the terms and manner in which the amount standing to the credit of the Local Government Councils in a State shall be distributed
-
d
A declaration that the provisions contained in Sections 1, 3, 6(1), 7 and 9 of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act, 2005 are from the date of commencement of the Act, inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999and are accordingly null and void and inoperative."
The 2nd Plaintiff claims as follows:
-
1
"A declaration that Sections 1, 2, 3 and 7 of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act, 2005 as they relate to the Plaintiff are unconstitutional and void being inconsistent with Sections 4, 5, 7 and 162(5), (6) and (8) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
-
2
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the government of the Federation, its functionaries, agencies whomsoever, including the Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission or any of its Commissioners, the Accountant General of the Federation or his representative from enforcing or purporting to enforce by S.A.Nctions in any way or manner whatsoever directly or indirectly the provisions or any of the provisions of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act, 2005 against the government of Delta State, its functionaries, public officers, servants and agencies whomsoever."
The 3rd Plaintiff claims as follows:
-
1
A declaration that the provisions of Sections 1, 2, 3, 6(1), 7 and 9 of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act 2005 are inconsistent with the provisions of Sections 4, 7 and 162(5), (6) and (8) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.
-
2
A declaration that the provisions of Sections 1, 2 and 3 of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act 2005 by imposing a duty arid obligation on the State government violate the principles of Federalism enshrined in the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 and relevant case law and are therefore unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void.
-
3
A declaration that by virtue of the provisions of Sections 4, 7 and 162(6) and (8) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 the House of Assembly of Lagos State is the body competent to make laws for the establishment, composition and functions of the State Joint Local Government Account Committee for Lagos State.
-
4
A declaration mat having regard to me provisions of Sections 7 and 128 of the Constitution of Nigeria the Defendant cannot by the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act 2005 or any other Act of the National Assembly exercise oversight functions over Local Government administration in any State of the Federation.
-
5
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Federal government of Nigeria represented by the 1st Defendant by itself, agents and servants or howsoever from implementing or giving any effect whatsoever to the said Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act 2005.
-
6
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Federal Government of Nigeria represented by the 1st Defendant by itself, agents and servant or howsoever from acting in any manner in contravention of the provisions of Sections 4, 7, 128 and 162 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria of 1999.”
While the 1st Plaintiff seeks four reliefs, the 2nd Plaintiff seeks two reliefs. The 3rd Plaintiffs seeks six reliefs. There is yet another aspect of the reliefs. While the 1st Plaintiff's relief seek to nullify Sections 1, 3, 6(1), 7 and 9 of the Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Governments Act, 2005, the 2nd Plaintiff's reliefs seek to nullify Sections 1, 2, 3 and 7 of the Act. The 3rd Plaintiff's reliefs seeks to nullify Sections 1, 2, 3, 6(1), 7 and 9 of the Act.
The Monitoring of Revenue Allocation to Local Government Act 2005, which is the bone of contention in this matter, was passed by the National Assembly and assented to by the President on the 12th day of April, 2005. As indicated above, the Act contains ten Sections. Section 1 provides for the establishment and membership of the Joint Local Government Account Allocation Committee for each State. Section provides for the functions of the Committee. Section 3 provides for rendering of monthly returns by the Committee to the Federal Account Allocation Committee for the Federal Capital Territory and Section 5 provides for the functions of Section 4 provides for Joint Area Councils Account Allocation Committee for the Federal Capital Territory and Section 5 provides for the functions of that Committee. Section 6 provides for limitation of power of borrowing by state Governments. Section 7 prohibits State or the Federal Capital Territory to alter, deduct or re-allocate funds standing to the credit of the State Joint Local Governments Account or the Federal Capital Territory Joint Area Councils Account. Section 7(3) contains penalty for contravention of breach of the provisions of Section 7(1). Section 8 enjoins the Accountant- General to report to each house of the National Assembly on a quarterly basis the payments were correctly made under the Act. Section 9 enjoins the Auditor-General of the Federation to report to the National Assembly at the end of each financial year how the monies allocated to each State for the benefit of the Local Government Councils within the State and the Area Councils in the Federal Capital Territory were spent. Section 10 is the citation clause. The above in brief is the run down of the Act.
