Opinion

Scrap Local Governments Or …

Published

13 years ago

July 11, 2012

Those who came up with the idea of three tiers of government must have thought of the inconveniences and challenges inherent in placing all the burden of a nation on just one arm of government at the centre. Just as the separation of power among the three arms of government – the executive, legislature and judiciary, serves as a check on the abuse of power, the idea of three tiers of government was conceived to pave way for easy and convenient administration.

In particular, the creation of local government is, by all intent and purposes, to bring government and development nearer to the people at the grassroots. The 1999 Constitution recognises this noble objective and thus confers the status of a third tier of government on the local government. Regrettably however, what the 1999 constitution gave with the right hand, it took it back with the left hand.

It is tempting to assume that the Nigerian constitution deliberately places the local government councils in Nigeria at the mercy of the states, especially given the ridiculous garb the third tier of government has assumed in recent time. It is hardly convenient to regard local government council as a tier of government again. It is, at best, an appendage or a department of the state.

The idea of running local governments in Nigeria with political appointees of the state governors in the name of caretaker committees is a typical example.

It is true that the constitution would never have contemplated the idea of a caretaker committee because the position of local government as the third tier of government is clearly stated. But the ambiguities and inconsistencies in the constitution again provide a leeway for manipulations by the state governments.

Again, the running of joint account between the state and local governments is another issue that calls to question the autonomy of local government. This also is made possible by the inconsistencies of the constitution. The place given to local government in the constitution is not only weak, but also ambiguous.

For instance, section 162, sub-section 6 of the 1999 constitution says, “the amount standing to the credit of local government councils from the federation account shall also be allocated to the state for the benefit of their local councils on such terms and such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly”.

While this provision could be said to be cut and run, section 162, sub-section 8 totally strips local government of its economic autonomy required to function effectively as a tier of government. It says, “The amount standing to the credit of the local councils shall be distributed among the local government councils of that state on such terms and such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the state”.

This particular section subjects the local government councils to a law they do not have control over, thereby placing them at the mercy of the state. By this section, the constitution has vested or conferred on the state the power to dictate what goes to the local government councils from the federation account. What then makes the local council a tier of government when the state governors are the custodians of the cheque books to the joint account?

The desire of the state governors to continue to maintain a joint account with the local government councils, has particularly lent credence to the notion that local government is a conduit pipe through which money is routed to the state from the federation account.

There is no doubt that local governments in Nigeria have not lived up to their responsibilities as the third tier of government. But we must acknowledge too that the enormity of demands and responsibilities imposed on the local governments by the constitution is far more than the internal revenue they generate from the registration of wheel barrows, goats, market stalls etc. Placing the local governments at the mercy of the state as regards what accrue to them from the federation account therefore amounts to giving them responsibilities without appropriate authorisation to their finances. How do we expect them to perform?

If truly local government is one of the federating units and the third tier of government, it should be made autonomous both politically and economically, in such a way that neither its political structure nor economic fortune would be determined or subjected to manipulation by the states. The same reason that makes the states to fight tooth and nail for economic autonomy from the federal government makes it equally expedient for local government to be totally independent of the state. The state governments therefore have no moral right to insist on maintaining joint account with their respective local government councils.

Meanwhile, the constitution should reserve a safe place or provide a soft landing for local government to have its own executive, legislative and judicial arms of government as obtained at the state and federal levels.

Again, our electoral law should be reviewed in such a way that would make it difficult, if not impossible, for the state governors to have control over who takes charge of the affairs of the local government. The state electoral commission should be under the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Though not totally impossible, it will be difficult for state governors to manipulate elections into local governments if the chairmen and members of the state electoral commission were appointed by the INEC chairman.

The current process of electing local government chairmen and councillors is not different from caretaker committee arrangement. This is because the electoral process that brings in the local government leadership is not independent. The state governors appoint the state electoral umpires. This explains why the ruling parties in all the states sweep all the polls in various local governments in the country. This process has far-reaching effects. It does not provide room for grassroot democracy. It rather places the people at the helms of local governments affairs at a disadvantaged position that makes them accountable only to their godfathers who put them there. They therefore have no moral justifications to complain, let alone make noise when allocations due them are being withheld. He who pays the piper dictates the tune.

The option A4 we experimented sometimes ago, has clearly shown that if grassroot democracy is given a chance, the people at the local government level shall determine who becomes what in both the state and federal levels. This will, in turn, strengthen our democracy.

As a nation, we have the option of either to scrap the local government system from our constitution, so that we know we have two tiers of government, or to strengthen our local government system with all its status and autonomy guaranteed by the constitution.

Boye Salau

Opinion

Kudos Gov Fubara

Published

22 hours ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area. This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.

The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people. He said, “our isolation is over.” That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.

The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.

Samuel Ebiye

Opinion

… And It Came To Pass

Published

22 hours ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Leadership is not measured by how hard one strikes back, but by how steady one remains under provocation.”

Tell it in Rivers State, publish it in the streets of Port Harcourt, so the daughters of the State could rejoice, and the daughters of the uncircumcised triumph and know that Fubara is not vindictive”. And it came to pass that Rivers State emerged from one of the most delicate chapters in its political journey, the period of emergency rule that spanned from March 18 to September 18, 2025. It was a season that tested institutions, strained loyalties, and exposed the fragile balance between power and principle. During that time, the suspended Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara DSSRS, was widely believed to have suffered not only political setbacks but personal betrayal, allegedly from some top civil servants within the state apparatus. These were individuals expected to uphold neutrality and professionalism, yet were accused in public opinion of taking sides against the very government they served.

As the emergency rule ended and Governor Fubara resumed office, expectations were shaped less by policy and more by emotion. Many assumed that revenge would quietly find expression through governance. The loudest suspicion centered on the 2025 Christmas bonus of ?100,000 traditionally paid to each worker. The thinking was simple and cynical: a wounded governor would surely withhold goodwill. Some voices even mocked workers openly hoping that the governor would refuse to pay the bonus. To them, denial of the bonus would serve as proof of political strength and justified retaliation. In reality, such thinking revealed a troubling desire to see governance reduced to personal vendetta. Yet, it came to pass, the governor chose a path that confounded suspicion. Against all expectations, the 2025 Christmas bonus was paid.

That single decision quietly but firmly reframed the narrative. It showed a leader focused on governance rather than grudges, on institutional continuity rather than emotional satisfaction. The payment was not a favor, nor was it a concession; it was a statement that public administration must rise above personal injury. By honoring the bonus, Governor Fubara demonstrated that leadership is not measured by how hard one strikes back, but by how steady one remains under provocation. He made it clear that workers’ welfare would not become collateral damage in political disagreements. This action also served as a moral rebuke to those who celebrated division and hoped for punishment. Governance is not validated by the suffering of workers, nor is leadership strengthened by withholding entitlements. At the same time, the issue of alleged sycophancy and betrayal within the civil service cannot be brushed aside. If proven, such conduct deserves firm, lawful, and institutional correction. Civil servants are bound by duty to the state, not to political conspiracies or shifting loyalties.

However, justice must never be confused with revenge. The strength of governance lies in correcting wrongs without destroying the system itself. Governor Fubara’s restraint suggested an understanding that the future of Rivers State mattered more than settling scores. For workers, this moment carried an important lesson. Celebration should be rooted in good governance, not in the expectation of another’s downfall. Rejoicing in rumors of denial or punishment undermines the very stability that protects workers’ welfare. Public service thrives where professionalism, mutual respect, and accountability are upheld. Pettiness, gossip, and political scheming only weaken institutions and erode trust. History often remembers leaders not for the crises they inherit, but for the character they display in response. In paying the 2025 Christmas bonus, Governor Fubara chose legacy over impulse, maturity over malice.

And so, it came to pass that focus defeated revenge, governance triumphed over bitterness, and Rivers State was reminded that true leadership is proven when restraint is expected least but delivered most. Beyond the symbolism of the Christmas bonus lies a deeper question about the kind of political culture Rivers State intends to cultivate in the years ahead. Periods of emergency rule, anywhere in the world, often leave behind residues of suspicion, fear, and silent realignments. Institutions do not emerge untouched; individuals recalibrate loyalties, some out of conviction, others out of self-preservation. What distinguishes stable democracies from fragile ones is not the absence of such moments, but the discipline with which leadership manages their aftermath. River.

King Onunwor

Opinion

That Withdrawal of Police Orderlies From VIPs

Published

22 hours ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Balancing VIP security with public safety remains a tightrope walk in a country where the majority of citizens are still under-protected.”

The Presidential announcement on the removal of police orderlies from persons in authority and their relations ( Very Important Persons ) last month came as a relief to many Nigerians who felt deprived of one major role of government ; security of lives and property.The higher population of Nigerians missed needed security because the VIPs and the VVIPs kept retinue of Police Officers totalling over 100 ,000 to themselves and their family members as if they are all that matter while some communities under attack of terrorists have no single unit of police station located there in. While many hailed the announcement , some said perhaps the government has just woken up to her major responsibility of securing the lives and property of all citizens while many expressed indifference on the note that it may be one of those pronouncements which come only in words but no action .Many keep their fingers crossed watching how it will play out , how Mr President will go about the implementation of the seemingly dicey policy .

Benjamin Franklin said “well said is better than well done ” It is sufficient today to say that many Nigerians including me are still waiting and watching to see how well and how long this return of the Police service to the ordinary people will go . Wishing hopes will not be crashed , It is note worthy, that the recent complaints by the VIPs of being exposed to attacks may in a way affect the action on implementation. Recently, at Senate plenary , another worrisome angle came up as Senator Abdul Ningi coming through a motion disclosed that he had only one police officer attached to him ( his office ) and that the officer was recalled the week before following Mr President’s directive . Senator Ningi said the withdrawal exposed him to high risks but underscored the angle that while his orderly was recalled , many other politicians , men and women in authority, business concerns foreigners and even children of some VIPs are still enjoying retinue of police protection ( officially attached to them ).

It’s note worthy also that the Deputy Senate President , Distinguished Senator Jibrin Barau, who presided over the session revealed that the leadership of both chambers are already in discussion with President Tinubu on the need to exempt the law makers from the new policy . Senator Ningi may not be wrong . After all he emphasized he is okay provided that the removal of the Police Orderlies be done across board . Senator Barau noted that talks are on over the issue of law makers’ in line with international practice . Further details from the Presidency noted that Presiding officers will retain their police officers , others would have Civil Defense officers ( NSCDC) as orderlies while any other VIP who feels he or she deserves personal police protection should get clearance from his office . In the midst of all issues weighing in on the proper implementation , it becomes necessary to bear in mind that the decision hinges on the realization that Nigeria has peculiar security issues (of kidnappings, banditry, and terrorism.) and that majority of Nigerians are under protected.

More so, that if well implemented, Police officers will focus on core duties; even as 30,000 new police officers are to recruited to enhance security .That implementation must be made in a way that leaves no room.for selective treatment loss of confidence and controversies. Looking at previous attempts of implementation of this policy gives faint hope as several attempts consistently failed . Former IGPs like Tafa Balogun (2003), Ogbonnaya Onovo (2009), and Ibrahim Idris (2018) tried the policy but all failed due to political resistance from various angles. All the failed attempts were tied to lack of political will mostly due to the fact that the directives came from police chiefs, not the president. Selective Enforcement was another killer to the policy as partial implementation met resistance and later reversal . Egbetokun (2023) and Adamu (2020) saw minimal impact.

Further more entrenched corruption in the system saw Politicians and VIPs quietly regain police escorts due to ‘transactional economics”and pressure. Worse still the mindset of the police officers withdrawn didn’t help the policy Underpaid police prioritize VIP duties for extra benefits. Many wish President Tinubu’s move can break this cycle. As at today, he still insists the move is non-negotiable while stressing collaboration with states to upgrade training facilities. As citizens look forward to success of the policy without undue exposure of both sides, balancing VIP security with public safety remains a tightrope walk. Talk fades ; action echoes. How the Presidency implements this policy. has much to tell on the governments stand on national / community security , choice of priority and the ability to stand uncomprised . The known goal is clear: The outcome is not yet certain. Fingers crossed , we await . Definitely , time will tell.

By: Nneka Amaechi-Nnadi.

s State stood at such a crossroads in September 2025. The temptation to rule with a long memory and a heavy hand was real. Yet, the choice made signaled a preference for healing over hardening. Leadership after crisis demands more than administrative competence; it requires moral clarity.

Governor Fubara’s decision reminded the state that authority is not best exercised through silent punishment or selective generosity. Rather, it is strengthened when rules remain rules, irrespective of personal injury. By keeping faith with workers, the government preserved an essential firewall between politics and public service. That firewall, once breached, turns governance into a battlefield where livelihoods become weapons. Rivers State narrowly avoided that descent. In doing so, it affirmed that institutions must outlive tempers, and governance must not mirror the bitterness of political seasons. This moment also invites sober introspection within the civil service itself. Allegations of partisanship, if left unresolved, corrode professionalism and weaken public confidence. A civil service that drifts into political camps loses its moral authority and operational effectiveness.

Therefore, reform, where necessary, should be guided by due process, transparency, and institutional review—not whispers, witch-hunts, or mob verdicts. Accountability strengthens systems when it is fair; it destroys them when it is arbitrary. The restraint shown by the executive places a corresponding burden on administrative leadership to restore discipline, neutrality, and pride in public service. For the wider political class and the commentariat, the episode serves as a caution against normalizing cruelty as strategy. The eagerness with which some anticipated workers’ suffering revealed a dangerous appetite for scorched-earth politics. When governance becomes a spectator sport where pain is cheered and deprivation is weaponized, society inches toward moral exhaustion. Rivers State has seen enough turbulence to know that stability is not sustained by triumphalism, but by restraint.

The lesson is simple yet profound: power is fleeting, but institutions endure; leaders pass, but precedents remain. In the end, the payment of the 2025 Christmas bonus was more than a fiscal act—it was a civic statement. It told workers they were not expendable. It told political actors that revenge would not be policy. And it told the state that maturity in leadership is not weakness, but strength under control. In a climate where many expected fire, restraint prevailed; where bitterness was predicted, balance emerged. Thus, Rivers State was offered a rare reminder that governance, at its best, is an act of discipline, and leadership, at its highest, is the courage to rise above provocation.