BOLU-OLU ESHO
The political atmosphere of OndoState became cloudy on Thursday when Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa released the list of appointed transition committees for the 33 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) and the 18 local government areas of state.
There was jubilation across the state by the beneficiaries of the appointment and a number of them had organised emergency social parties rolling out beer, wine and Palm wine for their well-wishers who had thronged their residences when the news broke.
But the celebration was short lived by the judgement of the Supreme Court a couple of hours later and the music stopped abruptly.
Ordinarily, this couldn’t have raised any dust, but it was an outright disregard for the rule of law.
Justice Adegboyega Adebusoye of Akure High Court had ruled in a suit filed by the people of Akoko on the creation of the 33 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs).
The litigants told the court that the creation was lopsided.
Justice Adebusoye ruled that the creation of the LCDAs was “inchoate and unlawfully created” and consequently nullified the 33 LCDAs created by the late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu-led administration.
The transition committees hurriedly constituted by GovernorAiyedatiwa have created suspicions that he was only playing games with dreams and aspirations of members of his party.
Some chieftains of his party, All Progressives Congress (APC), who spoke with INDEPENDENT on condition of anonymity, said the people of the state, particularly the 357 members of the party who benefitted from the appointment, should ask Aiyedatiwawhy he decided to release the list of the appointment few hours to judgement of the Supreme Court on the local government autonomy.
Aiyedatiwa had played the ostrich when the opposition party, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), went to court to stop caretaker committees constituted for the 33 LCDAs by the Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu-led administration from operating.
When Aiyedatiwa took over as the acting governor of the state before the demise of his boss, Akeredolu, he ostensibly chose to obey the court verdict that restrained the caretaker committees of the LCDAs from operating as prayed by PDP.
But some members of his party, who were loyalists of Governor Akeredolu as at then, disclosed that Aiyedatiwa wasn’t happy about the creation of the LCDAs and constitution of the caretaker committees for the LCDAs because he had no input in the exercises.
They claimed that when PDP went to court to stop the caretaker committees, he didn’t bother to order the state Attorney General to defend the actions of his boss.
It was alleged by some APC stalwarts that Aiyedatiwa was the one who sponsored the litigation filed by PDP.
But according to a member of APC close to the governor, the strategy was to reconstitute the caretaker committees and fill them with his loyalists.
When Governor Akeredolu eventually died and Aiyedatiwawas sworn in as the substantive governor of the state, he met with the leadership of his party and all members of the caretaker committees of the 33 LCDAs.
At the meeting, he was said to have promised the leadership of the party that he would reconstitute the caretaker committees, but would return all the chairmen.
He was said to have promised that in a few LCDAs where he could tinker with the chairmen, he would ensure the party’sinterest is protected.
The governor, therefore, requested that the caretaker committees should withdraw from appealing the judgement of the lower court.
But Aiyedatiwa never fulfills the promise as soon as he promised to.
Until Thursday when he hurriedly released the list of members of appointed transition committees.
Assessing the action of the governor, some political pundits aligned with the suspicion of some chieftains of APC, wondering why the appointment of the transition committees was done in a hurry.
One of them queried why the governor would make such appointments without the list passing through the state House of Assembly.
He noted that if the governor had returned the previous members of the caretaker committees, it would have been considered to have been in line with the constitution because they appeared before the state House of Assembly before they were sworn in.
But the list of members of the transition committees released by the governor revealed that the previous members of the caretaker committees were dumped and replaced with his loyalists.
Another pundit suspected that Governor Aiyedatiwasuspiciously deceived the 357 members of his party who are loyal to him who he appointed to the transition committees because he neither appealed the judgement that nullified the creation of the 33 LCDAs nor filed an application for stay of execution.
But all beneficiaries of the transition committees would now see Aiyedatiwa as being ready to offer them appointment but for the Supreme Court judgement.
Governorship candidate of PDP and former Deputy Governor of the state, Agboola Ajayi, condemned the constitution of the transition committees for the nullified LCDAs, calling on the governor to stop disgracing the state in the comity of states by his disrespect for the law of the land.
It was suspected that Aiyedatiwa decided to obey the court when he asked the caretaker committees constituted by Akeredolu to step aside so that he could hold on to the funds meant for the 18 local government areas of the state in preparation for his party’s primary and subsequently the gubernatorial election because they were at the brink of opening accounts for the operations of the LCDAs and LGs.
The judgement of the apex court on Thursday has put paid to the appointment of the 357 members of the transition committees.
But in spite of the Supreme Court judgement, the state Attorney General was quoted to have backed the action of Aiyedatiwa though without citing any constitutional reference.
Pundits said that it would be assumed that the attorney of the state was referring to the action of the governor prior to the delivery of the apex court’sunanimous judgement on local government on Thursday.
Though PDP in the state has called for immediate resignation of the Attorney General, saying “If a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who is expected to know the laws of our land is the person urging Hon Lucky Aiyedatiwa to trample on our Constitution and Supreme Court pronouncement, then, he no longer deserves to serve as the Chief Law Officer of the State.”
When the rumour became so rife that the governor wanted to go ahead with the inauguration of the appointed transition committees on Friday after the Supreme Court’s verdict, a lawyer and human right activist, Tope Temokun, advised him not to embark on such Illegal move.
He cited the danger in imposing the transition committees on the LCDAs that is non-existent in eye of the law and the existing 18 Local Governments.
He said: “In view of the decision of apex Court on Thursday the 11th of July 2024 in SC/CV/343/2024, which declared unelected caretaker or any administering committee under whatever guise in our local councils unlawful and unconstitutional and which further ordered that allocations from the federation account should be paid directly into individual local government accounts, which by implication has nullified the section 162 of the 1999 Constitution that created the State Local Government Joint Account, I want to implore His Excellency, in the overall best interest of our dear state, that the planned inauguration of the transition committees appointed by the His Excellency to oversee the affairs of our local governments in OndoState till further notice in view of ODIEC’sindefinite postponement of our local government elections be cancelled.”
The lawyer, who is an indigene of the state, also threatened to drag the state government to court in case the governor went ahead with the Illegality.
Some of the chieftains of APC, who are loyalists of the governor, declared that Aiyedatiwa would continue to play the game because the leadership of the party in the state was 100 percent loyal to the late Governor Oluwarotimi Akeredolu during the crisis between the duo.
One of them said: “Do you expect him (Aiyedatiwa) to trust them again? They were loyalists of Aketi and those who are loyal to Aiyedatiwa would want to take charge now that he is the governor.
This is expected because it’s nothing new in the political circle.”
It is a known fact that some chieftains of the party are currently disgruntled because in preparation for the governorship primary of the party, Aiyedatiwaallegedly promised to appoint them as his running mate, but eventually dumped them all
They are disgruntled because he was said to have deceived them to spend their money on the primary election process even when he knew right from outset that he would not choose them as his running mate.
The allegation of deceit came to fore when the affected chieftains began to express their disappointment in the governor when he chose his deputy, Adelami, as his running mate for the November 16, 2024 gubernatorial election.
Leader of Pan Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Afenifere, Pa Reuben Fasoranti was allegedly not exempted by Aiyedatiwa in his move.
He was said to have assured the nonagenarian that he would pick his pharmacist son as his running mate if he could help him prevail on President Tinubu to favour him as the party’s candidate for the November 16 gubernatorial election.
But after President Tinubu decided, out of respect for the elder statesman, to drop his favourite candidate, Wale Akinterinwa, and supported Aiyedatiwa, he (Aiyedatiwa) jettisoned the gentleman agreement he had with the old man.
Pundits noted that President Tinubu is currently riding on the back of a tiger and would surely end up in its belly, because Aiyedatiwa would surely betray him because he has just one term to spend in office.
According to pundits, the first sign the president should not ignore is his affront in challenging the suit filed before the Supreme Court on the autonomy of the local government.
They noted that he could feign loyalty to the President till his election in November, but thereafter he would mete out to the president same thing he did to some chieftains of the party in the state.
Nevertheless, the judgement handed down by the Supreme Court on the fiscal autonomy of the local governments remains a watershed in the political arrangement of the federation.