By Lemmy Ughegbe, Ph.D
Nigeria’s fragile democracy faces a creeping danger that goes to the very foundation of grassroots governance: the arbitrary abridgement of local government tenure.
This disturbing pattern of governors interfering with the life span of elected councils, whether through premature elections or outright suspensions, is not only unconstitutional but also destructive to the values of predictability and continuity upon which democracy depends.
If not urgently addressed, this trend will erode Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees a system of local government through democratically elected councils.
The case of Osun State illustrates the danger starkly. In February 2025, the state government conducted fresh local government elections even though councils whose tenure was to expire in October were still in office.
By this act, duly elected officials were pushed aside before their mandate expired. The Attorney General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), intervened and directed that allocations to Osun’s councils be suspended pending judicial clarification.
His actions have provoked heated debate, lawsuits, and a media storm. Yet at its core, his step raises a simple but profound question: can the tenure of duly elected councils be unilaterally cut short by a governor’s fiat?
Section 7 of the Constitution was never meant to be ornamental. It was inserted to ensure continuity and prevent state governors from turning local governments into extensions of their political agendas. For decades, governors dissolved councils at will and replaced them with caretaker committees.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly condemned this practice, most recently in Attorney General of Abia State v. Attorney General of the Federation (2024), where it held unequivocally that only democratically elected councils are constitutional. Yet Osun demonstrates that even when elections are conducted, tenure stability is still under threat.
Tenure stability is not a luxury. It is the lifeblood of effective governance. Local governments are closest to the people and are responsible for delivering basic education, primary healthcare, rural roads, and water supply.
These responsibilities demand continuity. They require planning, budgeting, and implementation over several years. When tenure is cut short arbitrarily, projects stall, resources are wasted and trust in governance is eroded. The Latin maxim ubi jus ibi remedium is apposite. Where there is a right, there must be a remedy. Elected councils have the right to serve their mandate in full, and the remedy must be protection against arbitrary truncation.
The Federal Attorney General’s concern is that if Osun’s elections are allowed to stand unchallenged, other governors will follow.
Already, in Edo State, elected chairmen and their deputies were suspended on allegations of maladministration, raising further concerns about the creeping trend of undermining local government autonomy.
If such actions are normalised, a dangerous precedent will spread like wildfire. Soon, local government will be reduced to a revolving door controlled by state executives, its autonomy shredded and its democratic essence hollowed out.
Critics argue that Section 162 of the Constitution makes it mandatory that allocations “shall” be paid to councils and contend that the Federal Attorney General’s directive withholding Osun’s funds is unlawful.
Yet his defenders point out that he acted not to subvert the Constitution, but to preserve it. His step was preservatory, a holding action pending judicial clarification, taken in the spirit of the maxim salus populi suprema lex — the welfare of the people is the supreme law. Without tenure protection, grassroots governance collapses, and the people ultimately bear the consequences.
The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence offers valuable context. In Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986), the Court warned against the government resorting to self-help, insisting that disputes must be resolved according to law.
In Attorney General of Lagos State v. Dosunmu (1989), it affirmed the responsibility of the Attorney General to act in the public interest even while awaiting judicial pronouncements. These cases illustrate the delicate balance. Fagbemi’s directive sits at that intersection: not an attempt to usurp judicial power but an effort to forestall disorder until the apex court decides.
Other decisions also shed light. In Saraki v. Kotoye (1992), the Supreme Court described abuse of court process and forum shopping as grave threats to the administration of justice. In Dingyadi v. INEC (2010), it warned against litigants pursuing multiple remedies in different fora.
These are relevant here because Osun and its allies have combined litigation with media campaigns, simultaneously dragging the matter before both the courts and the court of public opinion. The principle of lis pendens requires restraint. Once a dispute has been submitted to a court, public posturing and self-help must give way to the legal process.
Comparative jurisprudence underscores the importance of tenure stability. In South Africa, the Constitutional Court, in MEC for Local Government, Eastern Cape v. Qaukeni Municipality (2009), struck down the arbitrary dissolution of councils.
In Ghana, the Supreme Court has consistently invalidated attempts to interfere with the district assemblies, stressing that democracy requires respect for both elections and the tenure of office. Kenya’s 2010 Constitution establishes five-year terms for county governments, with no provision for truncation.
In India, the Supreme Court in Kishan Singh Tomar v. Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad (2006) affirmed that once elected, local bodies must complete their tenure unless dissolved under strict conditions laid down by law. The global consensus is unmistakable: elections without tenure protection are a hollow ritual.
What is particularly troubling in Nigeria is the posture of the Nigerian Bar Association and senior lawyers.
Rather than interrogating the constitutional question at the heart of the Attorney General’s position, many have preoccupied themselves with demanding the immediate release of Osun’s funds. Healthy disagreement is welcome in a democracy, but silence on the principle of tenure stability is deeply disturbing.
To focus only on allocations while ignoring the larger danger is to miss the forest for the trees. The Bar, which has historically opposed caretaker committees and arbitrary dissolutions, now appears curiously reluctant to defend tenure when it is cut short through premature elections.
The maxim lex prospicit non respicit reminds us that the law looks forward, not backwards. Institutions require continuity. Local governments, as the closest tier to the people, cannot operate effectively in an atmosphere of instability.
Arbitrary removal undermines service delivery, wastes scarce resources and offends the spirit of federalism. Cutting short the tenure of elected councils undermines the autonomy that the Constitution sought to preserve.
The Supreme Court must now provide clarity. Its decision will not only settle Osun’s immediate dispute but also set the tone for grassroots democracy across Nigeria. If it affirms that governors cannot abridge tenure, it will entrench democratic stability and protect institutions from arbitrary manipulation. If it fails to do so, the local government will remain vulnerable to the whims of state executives, and the people will bear the consequences.
The Osun controversy is therefore more than a local quarrel. It is a national test of fidelity to the Constitution. The maxim dura lex sed lex reminds us that the law may be harsh, but it is the law. Fidelity to constitutional provisions is not negotiable. For democracy to have meaning, elected officials must be guaranteed their term in office.
If Nigeria fails this test, grassroots democracy will be gravely weakened. To undermine tenure is to undermine trust. Once trust in institutions is lost, democracy itself becomes hollow. For Nigeria’s fragile democracy, the stakes could not be higher.
*Lemmy Ughegbe writes from Abuja
Email: lemmyughegbeofficial@gmail.com
WhatsApp ONLY: +2348069716645
