DOUBLE STANDARD: WHEN YOU’RE GOV YOU CREATED LOCAL GOVTS, NOW YOU TELL US NOT TO INTERFERE – BAUCHI GOVERNOR CARPETS TINUBU

th 67 2 jpeg

DOUBLE STANDARD: WHEN YOU’RE GOV YOU CREATED LOCAL GOVTS, NOW YOU TELL US NOT TO INTERFERE – BAUCHI GOVERNOR CARPETS TINUBU

Governor Bala Mohammed of Bauchi State has tackled President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for pushing for local government total independence from state governments
Naija News reports that the federal government had secured a Supreme Court ruling that had given local governments financial independence.

Speaking to Daily Trust on the powers of governors, Bala Mohammed stated that governors are significantly less powerful that the President of Nigeria.

He said that Governors are chief executives in their states, but their powers have been reduced by President Tinubu.

According to him, unlike former governors, they are not exerting the same pressure on the presidency.

He said: “For example, when Tinubu was governor, he created local governments and had full control. Now, he tells us not to interfere or collaborate with local governments-how is that possible? States cannot function effectively without coordination with both the local government and the presidency.

The majority of Nigerians live in local governments and states, and only Abuja is directly under the presidency. Without joint efforts and shared resources, how do we ensure security and good governance?

“People overestimate the power of governors. The federal government controls the resources. It takes the largest share and do what they want with it, while we stay silent.

“They argue that giving states more money would cause inflation, yet they award inflated contracts. For instance, we need railways, not more roads, but contracts are awarded for unnecessary projects.

“Governors are not as powerful as people think. If you become a governor, you’d realise it’s more about challenges than power. You have limited resources, and everyone looks to you for solutions, especially in smaller states like ours, with no manufacturing base. We respect the president, but he should also respect us and not blackmail us.”

  • Dons Eze

    DONS EZE, PhD, Political Philosopher and Journalist of over four decades standing, worked in several newspaper houses across the country, and rose to the positions of Editor and General Manager. A UNESCO Fellow in Journalism, Dr. Dons Eze, a prolific writer and author of many books, attended several courses on Journalism and Communication in both Nigeria and overseas, including a Postgraduate Course on Journalism at Warsaw, Poland; Strategic Communication and Practical Communication Approach at RIPA International, London, the United Kingdom, among others.

    Related Posts

    NO MERGER DEAL WITH PDP, NNPP – PETER OBI

    NO MERGER DEAL WITH PDP, NNPP – PETER OBI The Labour Party (LP) 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi, has dismissed reaching a merger deal with the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) or any other party. Peter Obi made this known on Thursday morning during a press conference in Abuja on the state of the nation, stating that no agreement has been established with other parties. The former Governor of Anambra State called on all lovers of Nigeria in the political space to unite in 2027 and defeat the All Progressives Congress (APC), which he accused of mismanaging the country’s resources. According to him, the level of corruption in Nigeria remained high, including the cost of governance, which has led to an astronomical increase in public debt under the current administration of President Bola Tinubu of the APC. Peter Obi maintained that government officials willfully mismanaged public funds in 2024 through incessant foreign travels. Speaking further, Peter Obi frowned at the insecurity situation in the country, stating that it is unfortunate that Nigerians are dying needlessly due to banditry, terrorism, and kidnapping-for-ransom. Meanwhile, the NNPP 2023 presidential candidate, Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, has dismissed the purported report of reaching an agreement with the opposition presidential candidate of PDP, Atiku Abubakar, and Peter Obi, to share power by alternating terms. Kwankwa , in an interview with the BBC, expressed anger over the lies. He stressed that he was unaware of such a claim but had heard reports that Atiku’s camp had been meeting with regional leaders, including clerics, to propagate the narrative. The former governor of Kano State also explained that he had found peace since leaving the PDP for the NNPP and distanced himself from the power-sharing agreement.

    DEFECTION: WHY EXECUTIVE OFFICE HOLDER CANNOT LOSE SEAT

    DEFECTION: WHY EXECUTIVE OFFICE-HOLDER CANNOT LOSE SEAT While interpreting Section 221 of the 1999 Constitution relating to prohibition of political activities by certain associations, the apex Court rightly held in Amaechi v. INEC (2008) 5 NWLR (Part 1080) 227, 317-318 that: “The above provision effectually removes the possibility of independent candidacy in our elections; and places emphasis and responsibility in elections on political parties. Without a political party a candidate cannot contest. The primary method of contest for elective offices is therefore between the parties. If, as provided in section 221 above, it is only a party that canvasses for votes. A good or bad candidate may enhance or diminish the prospect of his party in winning, but at the end of the day, it is the party that wins or loses an election. I think that the failure of the respondents’ counsel to appreciate the overriding importance of the political party rather than the candidate has made them lose sight of the fact that whereas candidates may change in an election but the party do not. In mundane or colloquial terms, we may say that a candidate has won an election in a particular constituency but in reality and in consonance with section 221 of the Constitution it is his party that has won the election.” This judicial standpoint of the Supreme Court was followed in the later decision of Faleke v. INEC (2016) 18 NWLR (Part 1543) 61, thereby re-affirming that without a political party, a candidate cannot contest in an election; and where a candidate has won an election in a particular constituency, in consonance with Section 221 of the Constitution, it is his party that won the election. However, a calm perusal of the foregoing decisions pointedly shows that the apex Court were not interpreting any of the provisions of Sections 131, 137, 177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution or considering the issues of disqualification of an elected executive office holder for the purposes of his removal from office or whether an elected executive office holder can lose or vacate his office by leaving the party that sponsored him at the election. The inapplicability of judicial authorities to mutually distinct and unrelated instances have been noted by the Court and in Adegoke Motors Limited v. Adesanya & Anor (1989) 5 SC 113 at 166 the Supreme Court per Oputa, JSC held that: “….It also appeared in rather bold relief that there is now a tendency among our lawyers, to consider pronouncements ….in unnecessary isolation from the facts and surrounding circumstances of those particular cases in which those pronouncements were made. I think it ought to be obvious by now, that it is the facts and circumstances of any given case that frame the issue for decision in that particular case. Pronouncements or our Justices whether they are ratio decidendi or obiter dicta must therefore be inextricably and intimately related to the facts of the given case. Citing those pronouncements without relating them to the facts that induced them will be citing them out of their proper context, for without known facts, it is impossible to know the law on those facts…” Similar judicial attitude was expressed in the case of Oyeneyin v. Akinkugbe (2010) 4 NWLR (Part 1177) 265, 286 E-F, where the apex Court per Adekeye, JSC held that: “Cases are not to be cited at large. The facts of the case must be similar, whereas generally speaking cases are decided on their peculiar circumstances or facts. Citing cases that are inapplicable to the peculiar findings in a particular matter lead to grave misconception and ultimately miscarriage of justice. Embarking upon the exercise of comparing and distinguishing an irrelevant case amounts to an unproductive academic exercise –…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    YAR’ADUA REJECTED DANGOTE’S BID TO RUN NIGERIA’S REFINERIES – OBASANJO

    TINUBU’S GOVT LACKS IDEAS, DYNAMISM, TURNING INTO A MONARCHY – USMAN BUGAJE

    OBASANJO DOUBTS CAPACITY OF NNPC RUNNING GOVT-OWNED REFINERIES

    ENUGU HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY GETS NEW CLERK

    INFLATION: ORGANISED LABOUR PUSHES FOR MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE IN 2025

    NO MERGER DEAL WITH PDP, NNPP – PETER OBI