The Supreme Court on Friday delivered a divided judgment in the case instituted by the Osun State Attorney General against the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), challenging the Federal Government’s alleged unlawful seizure of funds meant for local government councils.
In a majority decision of six to one, the court struck out the suit, ruling that the Osun Attorney General lacked the legal standing to file the action on behalf of the state’s 30 local government councils.
According to the apex court, only constitutionally elected and sworn-in local government officials have the legal right to institute or defend actions relating to their administration and finances.
Despite dismissing the suit, the Supreme Court declared that the Federal Government’s withholding of local government allocations was unconstitutional, describing it as a “grave violation” of the 1999 Constitution and of the court’s earlier pronouncements affirming financial autonomy for local councils.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Mohammed Idris held that the Federal Government had acted improperly and urged immediate compliance with constitutional provisions mandating the direct release of funds to local government accounts.
He also dismissed the contempt allegations raised by the AGF against Osun State, insisting that it was, in fact, the Federal Government that stood in violation of the Constitution by refusing to disburse the funds.
Justice Idris further pointed out that there was no documentation showing that Osun’s Attorney General had been explicitly authorised by the local councils to initiate the suit.
In a lone dissent, Justice Emmanuel Agim argued that the Osun Attorney General had the right to bring the matter before the court.
He criticised the Federal Government’s withholding of funds, warning that such conduct risks undermining local governance across the country.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria Musibau Adetunbi, counsel to the Osun Attorney General, represented the state throughout the proceedings.
