i

POS 431 Theory and Practice of Local Government

ii

Ibadan Distance Learning Centre Series

POS 431 Theory and Practice of Local Government

By

Bulamin Ayinde Oyadare Department of Political Science

University of Ibadan

Ibadan

Published by Distance Learning Centre

University of Ibadan

iii

© Distance Learning Centre

Faculty of Education

University of Ibadan

Ibadan.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored, in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronics, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the-prior permission of the copyright owner.

First published 1995

Reprinted 2008

ISBN: 978-021-092-x

General Editor: Prof. F. O. Egbokhare

Series Editors: Mrs. Adeyemo Olubunmi ‘Olukunle Ogunsola.

Typesetted @ Distance Learning Centre, University of Ibadan.

iv

Table of Contents Page Vice-Chancellor’s Message… … … … … v

Foreword: … … … … … …. … vi

General Introduction and Course Objectives… … … vii

Lecture One: Conceptualising Local Government … 1

Lecture Two: Theory of Local Government… … 6

Lecture Three: Theoretical Foundation of Local

Government… … … … 11

Lecture Four: Functions of Local Government… … 18

Lecture Five: Local Government Finance… … … 22

Lecture Six: Local Government in Nigeria During

the High Days of Colonial Rule… … 27

Lecture Seven: Liberal Local Government Reforms in

Southern Nigeria of the 1950s… … 33

Lecture Eight: Modernization of the Native

Authorities in Northern Nigeria… … 43

Lecture Nine: Local Government and Administration

Under the Military I… … … 52

Lecture Ten: Local Government and Administration

Under The Military II… … … 57

Lecture Eleven: Local Government and Administration

Under The Military III… … … 62

Lecture Twelve: The 1976 Local Government Reforms… 68

Lecture Thirteen: Local Government under the Second

Republic… … … … … 77

Lecture Fourteen: Local Government System under the

Babangida Regime… … … … 84

Lecture Fifteen: Local Administration in France… … 90

v

Vice-Chancellor’s Message

I congratulate you on being part of the historic evolution of our Centre for External Studies into a Distance Learning Centre. The reinvigorated Centre, is building on a solid tradition of nearly twenty years of service to the Nigerian community in providing higher education to those who had hitherto been unable to benefit from it.

Distance Learning requires an environment in which learners themselves actively participate in constructing their own knowledge. They need to be able to access and interpret existing knowledge and in the process, become autonomous learners.

Consequently, our major goal is to provide full multi media mode of teaching/learning in which you will use not only print but also video, audio and electronic learning materials.

To this end, we have run two intensive workshops to produce a fresh batch of course materials in order to increase substantially the number of texts available to you. The authors made great efforts to include the latest information, knowledge and skills in the different disciplines and ensure that the materials are user-friendly. It is our hope that you will put them to the best use.

Professor Olufemi A. Bamiro, FNSE

Vice-Chancellor

vi

Foreword

The University of Ibadan Distance Learning Programme has a vision of providing lifelong education for Nigerian citizens who for a variety of reasons have opted for the Distance Learning mode. In this way, it aims at democratizing education by ensuring access and equity. The U.I. experience in Distance Learning dates back to 1988 when the Centre for External Studies was established to cater mainly for upgrading the knowledge and skills of NCE teachers to a Bachelors degree in Education. Since then, it has gathered considerable experience in preparing and producing course materials for its programmes. The recent expansion of the programme to cover Agriculture and the need to review the existing materials have necessitated an accelerated process of course materials production. To this end, one major workshop was held in December 2006 which have resulted in a substantial increase in the number of course materials. The writing of the courses by a team of experts and rigorous peer review have ensured the maintenance of the University’s high standards. The approach is not only to emphasize cognitive knowledge but also skills and humane values which are at the core of education, even in an ICT age. The materials have had the input of experienced editors and illustrators who have ensured that they are accurate, current and learner friendly. They are specially written with distance learners in mind, since such people can often feel isolated from the community of learners. Adequate supplementary reading materials as well as other information sources are suggested in the course materials. The Distance Learning Centre also envisages that regular students of tertiary institutions in Nigeria who are faced with a dearth of high quality textbooks will find these books very useful. We are therefore delighted to present these new titles to both our Distance Learning students and the University’s regular students. We are confident that the books will be an invaluable resource to them. We would like to thank all our authors, reviewers and production staff for the high quality of work.

Best wishes.

Professor Francis O. Egbokhare Director

vii

General Introduction and Course Objectives A study of local government is justified on two main grounds. In the first instance, modern government began at that level. As one authority in the field puts it, “local government is a necessity of nature while central government is a luxury of civilization”. Gladden extends this argument further when he asserts that all government began in the localities and the division between central and local levels occurred only, when means had developed to exercise power and co-ordinate functions over wider areas.

More importantly however, local government is generally seen as a vehicle for national development. This position has been forcefully advanced by Dr. A. B. Lewis, an agricultural economist, who for more than twenty-five years studied developmental problems in the United States, Asia, Latin America and Europe. He asserts that basic services such as good elementary schools and adequate roads from farms to market towns are indispensable prerequisites to economic development, and that such services can only be provided in adequate measure by local governments. He further postulates that local government is the secret of the technically advanced countries. In this vein, he offers a recommendation that "if an underdeveloped nation wants to achieve economic development, it must first change its governmental structure so as to provide local self-government for its villages and rural districts".

This Course looks at the concept of local government, its functions and theoretical basis as well as its development in Nigeria. It winds up on a comparative note with a discussion on the French System of local Administration.

1

LECTURE ONE

Conceptualising Local Government

Introduction

This lecture opens a discussion on this course. Before we can fully understand the Course, we should know what local government is and what it is not. It is only when this is done that our subsequent discussions can be meaningful and fully appreciated.

Additionally, the lecture takes a look at the purpose of local government. This will make us fully understand the various definitions advanced for Local Government better.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to clarify the meaning of local government and state its purpose.

Pre-Test 1. What do you understand by the term ‘local government’?

2. “Local government and local administration refer to the same thing". Do you agree?

3. What purposes do local governments serve?

CONTENT Local government like any other concept in the Social Sciences has been variously defined. However, unlike these other concepts, it' seems not much controversy exists over its definition. In order to buttress our

2

position, we shall cite some of the definitions that have been put forward and thereafter point out the areas of agreement on our definitions.

According to M. P. Barbar, "local government involves the administering of services on a local basis by local bodies".

In the same vein, the United Nations Office for Public Administration defines local government thus:

“a political subdivision of a nation or (in a federal system) State, which is constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs, including the powers to impose taxes or to exact labour for prescribed purposes- The governing body of such an entity is elected or otherwise locally selected”

Humes and Martin in the book titled The Structure of Local Governments throughout the World defines local government in the following words:

“Local Governments are infra-sovereign geographic units contained within a sovereign nation or quasi-sovereign state. They include provinces and other intermediate units as well as municipalities and other basic units”

They continue that:

“Like all units of government, each government unit has a defined area, a population, a continuing organisation and the authority to undertake the power to carry out public activities many of who are legal persons, which means they can sue and be sued, and enter into contracts. (They) may levy taxes and must have independent budgets. The main distinguishing characteristic of local government is that they are infra-sovereign that is; they do not have aspects of sovereignty”

3

A clearer picture is given by Whalen in the following words:

“Each unit of local government in any system is assumed to possess the following characteristics: a given territory and population, an institutional structure for legislativ.executive, or administrative purpose: a separate legal identity: a range of power with functions authorised by delegation from the appropriate central or intermediate legislature: and lastly, within the ambit of such delegation, and autonomy - including fiscal autonomy -subject always, at least in the Anglo-American tradition: to the limitations of common law such as the test of reasonableness.”

From various definitions cited above, we can identify, as R. F. Ola has pointed out, the following facts:

• local government is a subdivision of the nation

• it can impose taxes and incure expenses

• it exists within defined territory

• it has its autonomous existence and legal identity

• it is comprised of elected members who run it.

Local Government and Local Administration Having defined local government and the way it is, we can also enhance understanding of the concept by comparing it with a similar concept by pointing out the difference between the two. This other concept is known as local administration. By local administration we mean the government of all parts of a country through local agents appointed, and responsible only to, the central government.

Thus, while local government is defined as local democracy, exercised through locally elected councils, whose main purpose is to provide or administer social services. with as great a degree of independence as modern circumstances allows. Local administration is often used to refer to a local body where the criterion of legal personality and substantial independence is absent. In local administration, the central or state government directly appoints and controls both the staff and finances of the local body. There is neither the election of councilors, nor

4

is there any genuine devolution of powers and functions to the local body. (You do not need to worry yourself about what this last sentence means as we are going to discuss it in detail in lecture three). The administration at the local level only functions at the pleasure of the central state government to which it acts as an agent for transmitting policies and programmes. This was the type of system practiced during the colonial period through the indirect system. It is also practiced under the various military regimes when Sole Administrators were appointed to run the administration of local areas.

Purpose of Local Government The purpose of local government can be summarized, following Sady and taking a cue from both the 1961 Cambridge Conference on Local Government in Africa and the 1961 Geneva meeting of United Nations Working Group on Administrative Aspect of Decentralisation for National Development as follows:

a. Decongesting government at the centre and thereby freeing national leaders from onerous details and unnecessary involvement in local issues and facilitating. coordinating and expediting action at the local level.

b. Increasing the people's understanding support of social and economic development activities and as a result gaining the benefit of their own contribution to these activities and of personal and group adjustment of needed changes.

c. Making programmes to foster social and economic betterment at the local level more realistic and lasting i.e. to provide basic services to the local communities.

d. Training people in the art of self government; and

e. Strengthening national unity.

All these will be treated more fully in the next lecture.

5

Summary a. Local government refers to a political sub-division of a nation,

constituted by law and has a great deal of control over local affairs. It is a legal entity, can raise taxes and ministers to local needs. The governing body is chosen by the local populace.

b. Local government is not the same thing as local administration. In the latter, the local authority is an agent of, and responsible to the central government.

c. Local people are able to participate in their governance through local government which is also sensitive to immediate local needs.

References Ebonyi Ozor (1987): "Local Government or Local Administration

Which Way Nigeria?" in S. O. Olugbemi (ed.). Alternative Political Future for Nigeria Nigerian Political Science Association.

M. P. Barber (1972): Local Government. London: MacDonald & Evans Ltd.

Robert, F. Ola (1984): Local Administration in Nigeria. London: Kegan Paul International.

J. A. A. Ayoade et. al. (eds.): Grassroots Democracy and the New Local Government System in Nigeria. Centre for Democratic Studies.

6

LECTURE TWO

Theory of Local Government

Introduction Different authors tend to see the usefulness of local government in different ways. Some see the system as an instrument for achieving self-rule and a vehicle for development of local areas. Some have a contradictory view. They believe that the existence of local governments will bring opposite of these identified advantages. In this lecture, we are going to examine the arguments of these two contradictory positions and assess them.

Objectives At the end of this lecture, you should be able to:

1. discuss difference in the perception of local government system; and

2. underscore the fact that no unanimity exists in the attitudes of various authorities as to the desirability of the system.

Pre-Test How valid is the argument that local government is the bedrock of democracy?

CONTENT Basically, there are two classes of theories of local government. According to Alex Gboyega, the first class attempts to justify the need for the existence of local government as being essential to a democratic

7

government and for practical administrative purposes like responsiveness, accountability and control. The other class of theories however takes directly opposite stand to the first class. Its own argument is that effective local government system can only obstruct the realization of democratic goals of responsiveness, accountability and control. We shall examine the arguments of proponents of the two schools. A leading figure in the first class is J. S. Mills. Mills justified local government on three main grounds. In the first instance, he argues that there are certain concerns or interests which only a section of the community has in common. Therefore it is convenient and advisable that only those who share this community of interests should administer them. In the words of J.S. Mills "the very object of having a local representation, is in order that those who have any interest in common, which they do not share with the general body of their countrymen, may manage that joint interest by themselves". His second argument is that local government is one of the "free institutions" which provides political education. While expanding this argument of Mills, Keith Panter-Brick asserts that participation in local administration teaches the participant the art of weighing and choosing between competing claims. The third reason is that of accountability. According to Mills, the original appointment of officers required for purely local duties, the function of watching and checking them, the duty of providing, or 'the discretion of withholding the supplies necessary for their operation, should rest with the people of the locality. ' C.H. Wilson is another proponent of this class of theories. He argues that the higher ultimate purposes that local government serves are political. One of such is that local government affords political education through participation. Wilson argues that the political education is “in the first place, an education in the possible and the expedient: in the second place, it is an education in the use of power and authority and in the risks of power: in the third place, it is education in practical ingenuity and versatility”. Bentham sees local government as a training ground for national politicians. Moreover, through local government, first hand knowledge which makes administration concrete and relevant to a locality can be more easily and perhaps cheaply made available to the local and central government authorities.

8

Paul Ylvisaker has also argued that area distribution of power, that is, decentralization as embodied in local government, helps to realise the basic values of a democratic state (liberty, equality and welfare) through the achievement of other values which lead to the attainment of the democratic values. He explains further that liberty is realized through local government because it (local government) provides the individual access to power and to points of pressure and control. It also enables minorities to make use of governmental position and power, and keeps power close to the people thereby facilitating control of government officials by the people.

We now turn to the arguments of proponents of the second class of theories. In the first instance, it argues that it is impossible to distinguish between interests or services which are of local importance 'only and those which have national importance. According to L. J. Sharpe, "Today, almost all services can have national implication". In actual fact, all the services that constitute the core of local government's activities are national in character. This is because those projects that may be of only local interests like fish pond and town hall are equally not central to the main services and activities of local government. Those matters that are locally important like health, education, water supply and roads are as well nationally significant. Neglect of any of these in any part of the country will be reflected, at the national level in disease, ignorance and poor communication or isolation.

Secondly, theorists in this school of thought have cautioned against overrating the training-ground capability of local government. According to Smith, there does not seem enough evidence to conclude that local government provides training for a successful career in the British Parliament. He concludes that the best that could be said was that local government provided "some sort of political training" whose experiential value for national leaders or legislators should not be over-estimated

The position that local government ensures greater flexibility, accountability and sensitivity has also been criticized. Smith has pointed out that there are important factors which militate against local flexibility and responsiveness. These factors include the need to maintain minimum national standards and the fact of inadequacy of locally generated finances.

9

The argument that local government promotes democracy is also problematic. Professor Georges Langrod for instance has argued that there is a fundamental contradiction between local government and democracy. He puts his argument in the following words:

“Democracy is by definition an egalitarian, majority and unitarian system. It tends everywhere and at all times to create a social whole, a community which is uniform, leveled, and subject to rule... On the other hand, local government is by definition, a phenomenon of differentiation, of individualization, of separation… Thus, since democracy moves inevitably towards centralization, local government by the division which it creates, constitutes, all things considered, a negation of democracy.”

This position is also shared by Dr. Leo Moulin who argues that democracy should not be defined only in terms of external characteristics like ballots and elections. According to him, democracy implied the existence of a public spirit or respect for human rights and the rights of minorities, fair play, decent methods, tolerance and the observation of the rules of the game. Moving from these premises, Moulin drew the conclusion that local government:

“far from being the best training for the exercise of democracy at the state level, the realities of local political life are so little in conformity with the spirit and ethics of a democracy as defined above, that they usually tend to distort and debase the processes of democracy, first at the municipal level and then at the national level.”

The evidence put forward by Moulin for his position is the “bargaining and collusion inherent in local politics and the limited number of active participants in local political processes”.

All said and done, the arguments in favour of local governments appear weightier than those against it.

10

Summary a. There are two sets of opposing views or theories of local

government. The first set justifies the existence of local government as being essential to a democratic government. This is because local government allows purely local issues to be administered by people concerned: it provides basic civic education and political attitudes and enhances accountability.

b. The second group of arguments is that local government subverts rather than promotes democracy. It is also further argued that there is nothing like affairs which have any significance.

However, in terms of theory and practice, the advantages of a local government system far outweigh the arguments of those who are against it

Post-Test Do you agree with the position that local government subverts rather than promotes democracy?

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Value, and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malt house Press.

11

LECTURE THREE

Theoretical Foundation of Local Government

Introduction This lecture highlights the logic behind the local government system. It is therefore appropriately titled Theoretical Foundation of Local Government. You should patiently read this lecture as this will help you to master the concept of local government while at the same time help you to identify what local government is not.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to show the premise on which the whole concept of local government rests. Such a discussion will enhance student's understanding of the entire course.

Pre-Test 1. Explain what is meant by decentralization?

2. What are the objectives of decentralization?

3. Discuss the various types of decentralization.

CONTENT In order that our knowledge of a particular institution can be deep, we have first to seek the theoretical underpinning of that institution. In other words we have to probe the theoretical basis of the institution. This will expose the philosophy as well as the working principle of the subject of our study. This is the approach we intend to follow in this work.

12

The institution of local government is premised on the concept of decentralization. This lecture is therefore devoted to this concept. Indeed, local government is just but one type of decentralization.

Decentralization According to M. P. Bramoulle

“Decentralisation is the fact of a superior "collectivity" (homogenous human group linked by geography and history) permitting the existence beneath it of secondary "collectivities" endowed with autonomous powers.”

Prof Dennis Rondinelli on his own part defines it as

“the transfer or delegation of legal and political authority to plan, make decisions and manage public functions from the central government and its agencies to field organisations of those agencies, subordinate units of government, semi-autonomous public corporations, area wide or regional development authorities; functional' authorities, autonomous local governments, or non-governmental organisations.”

Objectives of Decentralisation 1. It reduces overload and congestion. Decentralisation improves

government's responsiveness to the public and increases the quantity and quality of the services it provides.

2. It is a way of increasing the ability of central government officials to obtain better and less suspect information about local or regional conditions, to plan local programmes and more responsively and to react more quickly to unanticipated problems that inevitably arise during implementation.

3. In some countries, decentralization is seen as a way of mobilizing support for national development policies by making them better known at the local level.

13

4. In countries where administrative capacity is low, decentralization is sometimes seen as a means of creating larger number of skilled administrators and managers. Such skills, it is argued, are only strengthened when administrators have meaningful managerial responsibilities.

5. Moreover, it has become clear that many functions that are currently the responsibility of central ministries or agencies are performed poorly because of the difficulty of extending central services to local communities. Such activities as maintenance of roads, irrigation channels and equipment and other basic physical infrastructure is sometimes done better by local governments or administrative units when they are given adequate funds and technical assistance.

6. Decentralization is also seen as a desirable political objective. It is often associated with objectives of self-reliance, democratic decision making, popular participation in government and accountability of public officials to citizens.

Forms of Decentralization Decentralization can either be functional or areal. Functional decentralization implies "the transfer of authority to perform specific tasks or activities to specialized organizations that operate nationally or at least across local jurisdiction". One can cite as an example of this the creation of field offices within national ministries dealing with health care or highway construction.

Areal decentralization, on the other hand, has as its primary aim, the transferring responsibility for public functions to organizations within well-defined sub-national spatial or political boundaries - a province, district, municipality, river basin or geographical region usually; the transfer or delegation of authority is to an institution that may legally perform those functions only within a specified geographical or political boundary. Local government fits more into this category.

Types of Decentralization Decentralization can be categorized into four types namely; deconcentration, delegation, devolution and privatization.

14

Deconcentration Deconcentration is the "handing over of some amount of administrative authority or responsibility to lower levels within central government ministries and agencies". It involves the shifting of the workload from centrally located officials to staff or offices outside the nation’s capital. It gives some discretion to field agents to plan and implement programmes and projects, or to adjust central directives to local conditions, within guidelines set by central ministry or agency headquarters

The distinguishing characteristic of deconcentration is that the authority of responsibility for specific functions has been shifted by the central government to a lower level of administration, but one that remains within the central government structure. However, decision-making discretion has been transferred to field staff, allowing them some latitude to plan, make routine decisions and adjust the implementation of central directives to local conditions, within guidelines set by the central ministries.

Delegation This process "transfers managerial responsibility for specifically defined functions to organizations that are outside the regular bureaucratic structure and that are only indirectly controlled by the central government". Delegation implies that a sovereign authority creates or transfers to an agent specified functions and duties which the agent has broad discretion to carry out. However, ultimate responsibility remains with the sovereign authority.

Under this arrangement; decision-making and management authority for specific functions are delegated to organisations that are only under the indirect control of central government ministries. More often than not, these organisations to which public functions are delegated have semi -independent authority to perform their responsibilities, and may not even be located within the regular government structure. More appropriately therefore, delegation implies "the transfer or creation of broad authority to plan, and implement decisions concerning specific activities - or a variety of activities within specific spatial boundaries - to an organisation that is technically and administratively capable of carrying them out".

15

Devolution This is the "creation or strengthening - financially or legally - of sub-national units of government, the activities of which are substantially outside the direct control of the central government" Under devolution, local units of government are autonomous and independent, and their legal status makes them separate or distinct from the central government. Central authorities, however, frequently exercise indirect, supervisory control over such units in normal circumstances, local governments have clear and legally recognised geographical boundaries within which they exercise an exclusive authority to perform explicitly granted or reserved function. In addition, they have corporate statutory authority to raise revenues and make expenditures. It should further be pointed out that devolution establishes reciprocal and mutually benefiting relationships between central and local governments. In other words, local governments are not merely subordinate administrative units, but they also have the ability to interact on an equal basis with other units of government in the political system of which they are a part.

Thus, devolution implies "the divestment of functions by the central government and the creation of new units of governance outside the control of central authority" According to Rondinelli; devolution has certain characteristics which are as follows

i. it requires that local government be given autonomy and independence and be clearly perceived of as a separate level over which central authorities exercise little or no direct control

ii. the local units must have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries over which they perform public functions.

iii. local governments must be given corporate status and the power to raise sufficient resources to perform specified functions

iv. devolution implies the need to "develop local governments as institutions" in the sense that they are perceived of by local citizens as organizations providing 'services that satisfy their needs and as government units over which they have some influence.

v. devolution is an arrangement in which there are reciprocal, mutually benefiting and coordinate relationships between central and local governments: that is, the local government has the ability to interact reciprocally with other units in the system of government of which it is a part.

16

Privatization Some governments have given up their responsibility for certain functions and have either transferred them to voluntary organizations or allowed them to be performed by private enterprise. In many cases therefore, government may decentralize by shifting the responsibility for producing goods and supplying services that were previously offered by parastatal or public corporations to privately owned or controlled enterprises.

Summary a. Decentralization is the pillar concept on which local government is

based.

b. Decentralization is defined as the transfer of legal and political authority to make and implement decisions on public function to a body by the central government.

c. The aims and objectives of decentralization are to make government responsive to immediate local needs by reducing the workload at the headquarters. This will in turn mobilize the citizenry to support the government. Local people are further trained in the art of self management.

d. There are four main types of decentralization-deconcentration, delegation, devolution and privatization. Privatization appears to be the most extreme because it transfers responsibility totally from the public sector to the private sector. Devolution is however the most profound because responsibility is still within the public sector but with a lot of popular participation. Local government is the best example of devolution.

Post-Test 1. Local government is synonymous with decentralization. Do you

agree?

2. What is the philosophical basis of local government?

17

References Dennis, A. Rondinelli (1981): "Government Decentralisation in

Comparative Perspective: Theory and Practice in Developing Countries". International Review of Administrative, Science Vol. 2.

Dennis, A. Rondinelli, John, R. Nellis and G. Shabbir Cheena (1984): Decentralisation in Developing Countries: A Review of Recent Experience. Washington D.C. The World Bank.

18

LECTURE FOUR

Functions of Local Government

Introduction This lecture discusses the main functions carried out by local government. For practical purposes, it brings the reader home by listing the functions allotted to local governments in Nigeria under the 1989 Constitution.

Objectives At the end of this lecture, you should be able to familiarize with the major functions being carried out by local governments.

Pre-Test What functions do modern local governments perform?

CONTENT Montagu Harris has stated what he calls the two main principles regarding the functions which may be exercised by local governments. The first one is that a local authority may do anything which it considers good for the community, provided that it is not specifically forbidden by law or attributed to some other authority. The point, as Orewa and Adewumi have pointed out is that, a local authority should be able to point to legislative provisions for its actions; otherwise they are beyond its powers and therefore can be challenged in the court of law.

The second principle which is also an extension of the first is that no local authority may do anything which it is not definitely entitled to do by virtue of the constitution which is the supreme law of the country.

19

The second principle which is also an extension of the first is that no local authority may do anything which it is not definitely entitled to do by virtue of the constitution which is the supreme law of the country.

If one takes a cursory look at the extent of the functions usually laid down in the laws, one will find out that almost all the functions of other levels of government had their equivalents at the local government level In addition, however, there are other activities of very local character such as maintenance of cemeteries, markets and motor parks which local authorities perform exclusively.

It was the 1976 Local Government Reform which first introduced proper spelling out of the functions of local government in Nigeria. These functions were later enshrined in the 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. These functions also came up for discussion during the Constituent Assembly deliberations of 1989. They were largely unaltered. Consequently, they have again been incorporated into the 1989 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. They are contained in the Part one of the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution and are reproduced below:

The main functions of a Local Government Council are as follows:

a. the Formulation of economic planning and development schemes for the Local Government Area

b. collection of rates, radio and television licenses

c. establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, burial grounds and homes for the destitute or inform.

d. licensing of bicycles, trucks (other than mechanically propelled trucks) canoes. wheel barrows and carts;

e. establishment, maintenance and regulation of slaughter houses, slaughter slabs. markets, motor parks and public conveniences'

f. construction and maintenance of roads, streets, street lightings, drains, parks, gardens, open spaces, or such public facilities as may be prescribed from time to time by the House of Assembly of a state

g. naming of roads and streets and numbering of houses.

h. provision and maintenance of public conveniences, sewage and refuse disposal

20

i. registration of all births, deaths and marriages

j. assessment of privately owned houses or tenements for the purpose of levying such rates as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of a state.

k. control and regulation of

i. out-door advertising and hoarding

ii. movement and keeping of pets of all descriptions.

iii. shops and kiosks

iv. restaurants, bakeries and other places for sale of food to the public.

v. laundries: and

vi. licensing, regulation and control of the sale of liquor.

2. The functions of a Local Government shall include participation of such Local Government in the government of a State as respects the following matters, namely:

a. the provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational education..

b. the development of agriculture and natural resources, other than the exploitation of minerals.

c. the provision and maintenance of health services, and

d. such other functions as may be conferred upon a Local Government by the House of Assembly of the State.

In May 1984, the Federal Military Government appointed a 21-member committee headed by Alhaji Ibrahim Dasuki (one time Sultan of Sokoto) to review the Nigerian Local government System. The Committee recommended, among other things. that subject to the constitutional provisions stated above, some functions should be given top priority. This recommendation was endorsed by the Political Bureau. The functions are:

a. Basic environmental sanitation and other aspects of preventive health.

b. Maternity centres, dispensaries, leprosy clinics and health centres.

21

c. Roads and drains, excluding federal and state roads.

d. Inland waterways.

e. Rural water supply and extension of urban water supply.

f. Community development.

g. Agriculture and veterinary extension services.

h. Construction, maintenance, equipment of primary schools.

i. Town Planning.

j. Markets, motor parks, parks and gardens.

k. Maintenance of law and order.

l. Afforestation.

Summary a. A local government has to carry out its functions within the

stipulated law. If a local government acts contrary to the law, its activities can be challenged in law courts.

b. The 1989 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria empowers the local governments to formulate development schemes for the economic development of their areas and provision of social services to make life meaningful for the people.

Post-Test What functions are expected to be performed by local governments under the 1989 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?

References G. Montagu Harris: Comparative Local Government. London:

Hutchinson's University Library.

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1989. Federal Government Press.

22

LECTURE FIVE

Local Government Finance

Introduction Finance is vital to any human undertaking. To achieve the purpose for which they were created, local governments must have reliable sources of income. One of the reasons for poor performance of local government is inadequate revenue base.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to discuss the various openings to a local government for making money and the significance of such sources.

Pre-Test What are the sources of revenue open to your local government?

CONTENT To finance their expenditure, local governments rely mainly on taxation and on grants. Traditionally therefore, sources of local government revenues can be categorized into Internal or Independent as well as External sources.

Internal Sources The internal sources of raising revenue open to the local government are:

i. local rates and community tax.

ii. income generated from services rendered by local governments,

23

like rent on market stalls, rates on motor parks etc.

iii. fees from bicycle licenses and market fees.

iv. tenement rate - a tax payable annually based on the value of buildings by 'their owners.

v. pool tax.

vi. development levies.

vii. investment revenue and commercial undertakings.

viii. court fines and fees.

The list of available internal sources of revenue generation for local governments appears long. Unfortunately the amount realizable from such is as insignificant as it is long. Worse still the revenue that accrues from this source is continuously on the decline. However, we must point out that this situation is not a result of insufficiency of these revenue sources. Rather, it is as a result of a combination of factors which are beyond the local governments themselves. Some of these reasons include:

i. many states either abolished or discouraged the collection of community tax, the main component of the internally generated revenue either to achieve political gain or to stem the tide of anti-tax agitations.

ii. Some sources of revenue, belonging to local governments by right were taken over by the states. For instance, take-over of some services like forestry and native courts considerably reduced local government revenue in many states.

iii. Local governments were prevented from exercising their powers of taxation over property in some states.

Another crucial factor in this respect however is the character of each local government. Sources like tenement rate, flat rate, rents on market stalls etc., can be substantial in urban local governments. The opposite however is the case in a rural local government.

The external sources of finance open to a local government principally fall into three categories. These are: statutory allocation, special grants from Federal and State Governments for specific projects as well as loans and borrowing from capital markets.

24

Statutory allocation is a recent development in the Nigerian local government system. Incidentally, it is also the most significant of external sources of revenue to local governments. Prior to 1976 reforms, statutory allocations to local governments were unknown to local government revenue allocation systems in the country. External source of revenue largely consisted the various forms of grants-in-aid like block grant, percentage grant, unit grant and equalisation grant which were not very regular. The grants were given for varying reasons and tied to specific purposes.

It is in recognition of inadequacy of finance as part of the problems facing local governments in Nigeria that made the 1976 local government reform in the country introduce statutory allocation of revenues to the local governments. This was later enshrined in S. 149 of the defunct 1979 Constitution. It is also retained in S.160 (2) of the 1989 Constitution. The impact of this development has been dramatic. It (statutory allocation) has become the dominant source of not only external sources of local government income but also of the entire local government revenue.

In specific terms, we can identify five implications of this measure, following Gboyega, on the financial health of local governments. In the first instance, it affords the local governments the funds which they need to finance the provision of social- services and capital expenditure. Sound management of these vast sums of money from the State and Federal Governments will enable the councils to provide the services which will restore the confidence and support of their citizens.

Secondly, the statutory grants enhance the independence of local government councils. In the past, government grants in support of local government services and projects have tended to increase government control and supervision, since they were usually specific grants in aid of the provision of the grant-aided services to a certain standard. Of course government controls and supervision were usually necessary to ascertain proper application of the grants and the fulfillment of the government's standards.

With the coming into force of constitutional provision for statutory allocation, local governments therefore are free from the controls and supervision which specific grants attract. Moreover, the size of the allocations now gives local government freedom in another sense. They now have the capacity to initiate and implement projects which they could not consider to the past as a result of poverty.

25

Thirdly, that the allocations to the local authorities are proportions of national and state revenues is bound to promote the joint commitment and obligation of the three levels of government to the generation of greater public revenue. Such greater public revenues can only further enhance the financial capacity of the local governments since unlike before, when grants to local authorities could be varied downwards from year to year, their share is a fixed proportion.

Fourthly, the certainty that some estimable sum of money will be available to support local government expenditures will, ultimately impact favourably upon local development planning, especially in respect of capital expenditures. That is not all. The surplus funds which are building up as a result of the lack of executive capacity to apply all the available funds, if not wasted or misappropriated, will boost the investment portfolio of the councils.

Fifthly, the guarantee of statutory revenue underscores a more fundamental shift in political attitude and values. From the attitudes that local authorities were mainly field agents of the central government, which derived from the colonial origin of native administration, has emerged the prevailing view that the local authorities are intrinsically good as local representative institution. Consequently, a constitutional provision guarantees their existence and the financial provisions strengthen their status as a level of government, conferring a quasi-autonomous identity in the federal government structure.

However, statutory allocation of revenue to local governments is not without its own disadvantages. Firstly, an examination of loca1 government estimates since 1976 shows that lesser effort is being made in the collection of community tax and the other traditional sources of local government revenue. The declining effort is revealed by the stagnating or lower levels of internally-generated revenue of the local authorities.

Secondly, many State Governments have taken advantage of the statutory &rants to abolish some traditional sources of local government revenue, such as the community tax, 'or to take them over. Furthermore, the State Governments have resorted to the practice of saddling the local authorities with the financial, but not the executive, responsibility for some services requiring substantial funding, some of which have increased phenomenally as a result of the policies of higher levels of government.

26

Thirdly, the illusion of sudden wealth, an affliction which distorted the vision and priorities of higher levels of government at the inception of the oil boom, has occasioned widespread wasteful expenditure, not to say corruption, both fuelled by party patronage and party political competition

Finally, dependency attitudes are being fostered instead of the policy-intention of quasi-autonomous operations. In many localities, community self-help efforts and spirit have lost their vitality because of the prevalent views that the local governments have adequate funds for local needs.

Summary a. The sources of income to a local government can be categorized

into internal and external. The internal sources are in most cases insignificant and continuously on the decline.

b. Statutory allocation has become the most important source of finance to local governments. It was first introduced in 1976 and has since been enshrined into both 1979 and 1989 Constitutions.

Post-Test Do you think the introduction of statutory allocation of revenues has had any impact on local government in Nigeria?

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse.

27

LECTURE SIX

Local Government in Nigeria during the Heydays of Colonial Rule

Introduction The goal of colonial rule was economic exploitation of the colonized people. This therefore did not call for participation of the local people in the administration of their own affairs. Rather, local administration was adopted instead of local government. Traditional rulers were used by the colonial rulers and were supervised by white officials. This lecture discusses the system of native administration under colonial rule.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to:

1. highlight the necessary agreement between the aim of the colonial enterprise; and

2. highlight the structures and institutions of governance especially at the local level.

Pre-Test 1. What factors prompted the white rulers to adopt the native

administration system during the peak of colonialism?

2. What were the main features of native administration?

3. Discuss the role of the Resident under the colonial local administration?

28

CONTENT Nationalist agitations against colonial rule were stepped up immediately after the end of the Second World War. This led to a gradual involvement of Nigerians in the administration of their own affairs by the colonial government. It is therefore worthwhile to critically examine how local areas were administered and governed during this high period of colonialism.

During this period, local government was known as the Native Administration System. This Native Administration System had four main parts which in turn depended on one another. These were:

a. the Resident who provided direction and control.

b. the Native Authority which in most cases was headed by a chief who enjoyed legitimacy under the indigenous political system and often supported by a council of elders.

c. the Native Treasury and

d. the Native Court which comprised representatives of the native administration.

All these structures of the Native Administration System were created and maintained in line with the principle of indirect rule with which the Colonial Authorities governed. This principle is stated by Major Burdon, one of Lord Lugard's military administrative officers in the following words:

“Our aim... is to rule through the existing chiefs to enlist them on our side in the work and progress of good government... (our) hope is that we may make of these born rulers... types of British officials working for the good of their subjects in accordance with the ideals of the British Empire.”

The objective therefore was to rule through the chiefs and local institutions. This was more of a necessity in view of some practical problems of administration then. These problems analyzed by I.M. Okonjo were as follows:

1. The size of and population of the area to be administered were vast and expansive. For instance, Lord Lugard thought that the size of Northern Nigeria was 32,000 sq. miles with a population of twenty

29

million. Coupled with these was the few number of European civil servants available to undertake the business of administration.

2. There was the problem of scarce material resources stemming from the need to deploy troops to quell resistance to British Colonial rule, keep trade routes free, protect traders and to promote trade in new commodities which had become essential following abolition of slave trade all at the same time. Also the fact that most European civil servants lived under harsh climatic and poor hygienic conditions meant that they were not always available for duty.

3. There was also the problem of communication. Distances were wide and the roads, which were the only available means of transportation, were very bad. There was therefore the difficulty of maintaining contact between headquarters and the field. Thus the local officials had great latitude to operate.

The characteristics of the system of native administration have been summarized by Crowder and Ikime these are, in their own words:

1. Legitimacy: In so far as possible pre-colonial dynastic lineages were continued.

2. Territorial Jurisdiction: The territorial jurisdiction of the traditional rulers was maintained; that is, the land boundaries of pre-colonial times were respected except where the chiefs or people by their own consent agreed to federate for purposes of greater efficiency, larger revenues etc.

3. Native Authorities: Chieftaincies were designated native Authorities, in which the chief might be sole native authority or the Chief in Council, constitute the native authority. A native authority had specific functions

i. collection of taxes of which a fixed percentage was rendered up to the colonial administration;

ii. control of a budget established to spend the taxes retained by the Native Authority, which included initiating local development programmes, building and maintaining native authority schools and dispensaries, building and operating permanent markets, the construction 'of local feeder roads to join up with central government roads.

30

4. Legal System: The chiefs and their traditional legal officers controlled the administration of law, including local police functions and the prisons, according to customary legal principles shorn of abuses and repugnant aspects as determined by the colonial government.

5. Appointment of Officials to Native Authority: The Native Authority controlled appointment and dismissal of its officials; the colonial authorities, however, had to sanction the appointment of the chief himself.

6. The Role of the Political Officer: Essentially the role of the political officer in the Native Authority system was as an adviser, almost as a lobbyist vis-a-vis the Native Authority in so far as local government affairs was concerned. The less sophisticated the Native Authority, however, the more his role became that of supervisor rather than adviser. In matters of trans-Native Authority affairs, e.g. decisions made for the whole colony, the political officer could order rather than suggest action.

7. NAs as Legislative Bodies: The Native Authorities were Legislative organs. With regard to legislation concerning traditional matters, the political officers would not interfere unless they were repugnant to 'human justice'. With regard to legislation concerning modem administration much of the legislation would originate from the political officers but be promulgated in the name of the Native Authority.

Gboyega has however pointed out that Crowder and Ikime have tended to underplay the role of the political officer. According to him, the objective of the colonial rule which basically was exploitative did not allow any form of parity of status between the chief (traditional ruler) and the Resident. Consequently the Resident directed and controlled the Native Authority. He maintained a very tight control over both the direction and pace of development in his province. In effect therefore, the political officers were ruling but in the name of native authorities. This was the situation of things until early 1950s when Nigerians started to take effective part in governance of the country.

Of course native administration system had varying degrees of success in different parts of the country. This also in turn determined how soon the system was reformed in various parts of the country and how

31

deep the reform was. In the Eastern part of the country for instance, the system recorded its least success. This was because before the colonial rule, the society had known no centralized system of administration. Thus, the colonial authorities had to establish the system of "warrant" chiefs who did not enjoy any legitimacy among the people. Moreover, there was no indigenous system of taxation to provide financial support for the native authorities. But because native authority could not survive without a native treasury, direct taxation had to be introduced by the colonial government between 1927 and 1929. The result was a number of uprisings known as Aba riots.

Moreover, there was also the attempt to substitute the warrant chiefs for the British or District Officers as presiding officers of the native courts after 1922. These warrant chiefs were extremely corrupt and thus increased the sense of imposition which the masses of the people felt. All these summed up together, not unexpectedly, led the Eastern Region to be the first to reform the native administration system.

Native administration system was more successful in the Western part of the country. Before the advent of colonialism, the people of this part of the country had lived in kingdoms with their political organization featuring centralized authority under the leadership of a king aided by a council of elders.

In addition to the existence of a relatively centralized political structure, there was also a tradition of royal courts, a practice by which the king’s court was the ultimate court of jurisdiction for all civil and criminal proceedings. This kind of arrangement therefore did not render the native courts a strange structure.

However, taxation, which sparked off a chain of protests in the East, was equally not well received in the West. Of course tributary relations between paramount kings and minor existed before colonial rule, but the implications of organizing a treasury like the systematization or taxation led to riotous protests in towns like Abeokuta and Ogbomoso.

It was in the northern part of the country that the native administration system recorded resounding successes. This was because it was an entirely fertile land for the system. In pre-colonial days, the Fulani had carried out a successful holy war against the indigenous Habe rulers and had consequently established centralized political control of the Muslim north. In addition to this centralized political authority, there had developed a

32

very efficient administrative system which enhanced the integration and control of the political system. The judicial system, based on the Sharia code, was also highly developed. A system of taxation, which rested upon the right of conquest, had also been established by the Fulani rulers. Thus all the features of the native administration system was well-developed in the emirate areas of the North. The system was imposed with much difficulty in the less centralized non-muslim areas of the North.

Overall, given the success of the native administration system in the North, it was very slow in attempting any reform. Eventually when it did, the reform measures were marginal as we shall see later.

Summary a. The native administration system was used to administer the local

areas in the hey days of colonial rule. Under this system, traditional rulers were appointed to run the local areas under the supervision of the Residents. The Residents combined executive, legislative and judicial powers.

b. The system recorded resounding success in the Northern part of the country. This prompted the colonial masters to introduce the system to other parts of the country. The system achieved a modest degree of success in the western part of the country but it was a near-complete failure in the East.

c. The varying degree of success recorded in each part of the country depended on the kind of traditional authority existing in each society.

Pre-Test Discuss the main features and structures of the colonial local administration.

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos; Malthouse Press.

33

LECTURE SEVEN

Liberal Local Government Reforms in Southern Nigeria of the 1950s Introduction In this lecture the attempt to reform the structures of local administration of the colonial rule when Nigerians began to be involved in the art of governance shall be examined. It was the Eastern Region that blazed the trail, followed closely by the West. So in this lecture, we shall examine the reform measures introduced by the Eastern and Western Regional Governments.

Objectives At the end of this lecture, you should be able to establish the shift in the kind of structures and institutions of governance given the shift in the objective of administration as well as the facilitating factors.

CONTENT The principles and structures of the local administration of the high colonial era were in consonance with the objective of that period - economic exploitation of the colony. However, during the dying days of colonialism, there was a little shift in the attitude of the colonial powers which automatically affected the structures and institutions of governance. This was in the immediate post-second World War time. This prompted Creech Jones, the then newly-appointed Colonial Secretary to State in his Dispatch of 1947 that:

34

“Territories should be administered by colonial powers as a trust for the Native inhabitants, the principal object of the administration being the welfare, education and development of those inhabitants... a primary object of the administration should always be to train the native inhabitants in every possible Way, so that they may be able in the shortest possible time to govern themselves… The test of our policy should not be British advantage, but the happiness, prosperity and freedom of the colonial people themselves.”

He stated further in his elaboration of this policy that:

“In all the planning, they should be consulted, their representative organ should be developed, responsibility must grow in executive as well as legislative machinery, they must be trained to play their part in administration and the services, and in the economic activities necessary for the building of their country.”

The Fabian Society, a progressive philosophical group within the then' ruling Labour Party clearly stated its concept of local government. The society opined that administrative bodies, boards, committees and such bodies were not local government bodies if they were set up by a central government and had their members nominated whether or not the nominated members were local inhabitants. The Fabians saw the election or selection of members by the local inhabitants of the area as the most important factor. That is not all. Local government had- to accept a measure of responsibility for the formulation of policy and its execution, a sufficient degree of authority to plan the services and satisfactory source of funds to maint.ain services at an acceptable level of efficiency. The point being made by the Society was that both in Britain as well as' in the co1onies' good or very efficient government was not a substitute for self-government. The view of the society later became the Labour Party’s position.

35

Consequently, the Macpherson Constitution of 1951 introduced major political changes which included Nigerians assuming ministerial responsibility and the changes in the local government system were to complement and parallel the constitutional changes. The changes were all about transferring political power to Nigerians.

If the message contained in the Dispatch provided a conducive environment, the attitudes of the educated elite acted more as an immediate force to bring about the reforms. As Gboyega has pointed out, there was a more direct linkage between the attitudes of these educated elites and the quickness, as well as the nature of the changes introduced into the system of local government in the early 1950s. In the Southern part of the country, the view of the traditional rulers - colonial official’s collaboration by the educated elites was negative. Thus serious attacks were launched against the native administration system by the leaders of the two regional parties - Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the West and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe in the East. Chief Awolowo for instance pointed out that the system had seriously weakened the conventional but effective restraints which were built-in in all democratic societies which imposed on the actions of a rule by the inalienable right of the people to remove an erring king.

In the same vein, Dr. Azikiwe had declared at a Conference that "We should be careful not to stultify traditional institutions or to vest traditional rulers with absolutist powers which were undreamt of, before the coming of the British". The Eastern Region led the way in the reform bids. Towards this end, the first step was taken in 1948 with the preparation of a memorandum for study by the unofficial members of the Eastern House of Assembly. The members were constituted into a Select Committee and they absorbed the proposals earlier put together by Brigadier E.J. Gibbons who had earlier studied the subject. The report declared that:

“the theory of 'Native Administration' presupposes the existence of a degree of inherent authority capable of development to such an extent that it can provide for effective and efficient administration of the people at all stages of progress. After twenty years experience, it is evident that inherent authority in Eastern Provinces, extending as it does but little beyond the confines of the family, is incapable of such development.”

36

The Government identified four major defects in the system of native administration which a new system of local government ought to redress. In the first instance, the councils were insufficiently represented, especially of the educated elites. The second defect was that the power to provide services and the appropriate size relative to the services were not matched. This was because the subordinate native authorities were responsible to the divisional native authorities, and without the approval of the latter the- former could do nothing. The consequent conflict in the relationship between the superior and the subordinate authority, and the frustration led to declining interest in the subordinate authorities. Thirdly, the Councils lacked a revenue base that was flexible enough to embark on bold ventures. Tax, which was the main source of revenue, was more or less fixed by Government and the expenditure of councils was similarly controlled. Fourthly, the councils lacked the staff and the organization with which to execute their programmes. For instance, in 1948, the District Officer was still the principal executive officer of the native authority. The Local Government Law, 1950 was therefore essentially directed at solving these problems identified. The Government's Policy Paper of 1952 spelt out the four steps which were described as “irreducible minimum” essential to the full and successful implementation of its local government reform programmes. These were:

1. discussion with the people of the area, to ascertain that the organization proposed met with their wishes.

2. explanation of the proposals to the people in every village, to ensure that they were understood, and that the system of election was understood.

3. engagement of Senior Executive Officials by existing Councils. 4. providing training in the practice and method of Local Government

for the existing councils and their officials, both senior arid junior,

The following are the major features of the reform: Firstly, there was the legal requirement that the Instrument establishing a council should specify the time of election to the council and the-size of the elective seats. Before this time, elections were mere expressions of public opinion which were validated for representative purposes by the sanction of the Chief Commissioner for the Region through the Instrument establishing the native authority.

37

Secondly, and relating to the first, the reform made it compulsory that elections should be the means of selecting the councilors. Indeed, initially, all the seats in the councils were to be filled by elections, without the special arrangements made for the representation of traditional rulers. Later, provision was made for some traditional rulers to be included in the composition of the councils by nomination. We should however point out that franchise was narrow - it was limited to tax, and rate payers.

Thirdly, the reform provided for three basic types of local authority - county, district and local councils - each autonomous of one another. This structure was based on Government's view that county councils, the top tier of the structure, should be sufficiently large to undertake services envisaged as/appropriate for that tier of the structure like education. The district council was the intermediate unit, which the Government believed should be within easy reach of its electorate, and certainly “should not be larger than required a journey of one hour on a bicycle to go to meetings". Local councils, the smallest unit of the structure was to "be small enough to be closely in touch with village affairs, and must have a sense of belonging together". They were therefore conceived to be the primary political units, with no specifications for administrative or economic, viability.

The functions allotted to local government under the reform were quite ambitious when related to resources. Each council was to maintain law and order in its area of jurisdiction. Beyond this however, a more extensive range of functions than under the native administration system were assigned to the councils. The functions were apportioned to the various councils according to their status and as local circumstances warranted. County councils had responsibility for functions which required:

i. huge capital outlay; or

ii. large territorial size to rationalize their provision; or

iii. large population to maximize cost-effectiveness.

In effect, they were charged with providing services like education, motor roads, hospitals, agriculture and the maintenance of native courts.

The District Councils had responsibility for public health, dispensaries maternities, markets, primary education, well, and water supplies. Local councils had power to execute only projects of a

38

"communal nature", a qualification which was in the discretion of, the Resident to determine. Each tier was independent of another because it was hoped that this would encourage responsibility in all levels while at the same time helping to excite and retain the interests both of their councilors and electorate.

Fourthly, the reform altered the role of the District Officer. Hitherto, he was the executive officer of the native authorities. The reform drastically curtailed his powers. He could now only visit a council to examine its records so as to report to the minister on the performance of the council. He could be appointed by the minister to conduct an inquiry into the affairs of a council. He could also direct a council in the matter of prevention of crime.

The reform was not static. It was fine-tuned from time to time to adapt to changing circumstances. For instance in 1955, a new Local Government Law was enacted which superseded that of 1950. The 1955 Law expanded the scope of involvement of the District Officer. The resident was now designated Local Government Commissioner and the increased powers of the minister to closely supervise the councils were delegated to these administrative officers. These powers included auditing, approval of some items in the Annual Estimates and the supplementary budget, approval of the appointment of certain levels of staff, minor contracts and tighter controls over accounts.

The 1955 amendment also transferred the powers and responsibilities of the Regional Authority to the Minister of Internal Affairs who had ministerial responsibility for local government. Another innovation was the establishment of the Local Government Service Board to advise the minister on the appointment and conditions of service of local government staff in 1956.

The local government system was also restructured. There were now to be county councils, municipal councils, urban district councils, district, and local councils. On 1 April, 1958 all the county councils were abolished. They were said to be unpopular. They were too large and therefore distant from their electorate. Furthermore, it was alleged that they added to the running cost of local government.

Again in 1960, another Local Government Law was made which replaced the 1955 Law. The names of the councils were now changed. District councils became county councils while urban district councils

39

now became known as urban country councils Committee organizations of Council Management was also introduced. It was mandatory for every council to have at least two committees for finance and for Medical and Health. Many councils however had between eight and ten. Committee organization means that departments in a local council are grouped into 'portfolios' and each portfolio is allocated to a committee, not a single person. Council business was to be president over by an elected chairman and at ceremonial occasions by the President. Local Government reform in Western Nigeria was much similar to its Eastern counterpart; The Chief Commissioner in 1948 stated the following as the principles upon which he sought to re-organize the Native Authorities:

1. Wider representation on Native Authority Council and Committees.

2. Greater Responsibilities.

3. Improved efficiency of the executive.

4. Federation of Smaller Native Authorities into larger and stronger units.

5. Political education of the people, particularly-in the more backward and rural areas.

As in the East, the Loca1 government Law, 1952 provided for three basic types of council - the divisional, district and local councils. Each was a corporate body with perpetual succession, the power to hold land, to sue and be sued. The difference between the various types was to be found in their size and the corresponding powers and functions given to them. The Local Council, a small council, was usually established "where people in a small town or in a group of villages which have close affinity desire to carry on local government as a distinct body”. The District Council was either an all purpose councilor had a limited range of functions. If it was all-purpose, it had an extensive list of functions composed of .all or nearly all the functions permitted to local authorities. If the council had a limited range of function, then there was created above it a divisional council which performed those functions denied to 'the district Council.

The Divisional Council, the largest council existed "Where, by tradition, the people of a wide area, such as a Division, have been subjected to the same paramount ruler or because they have ethnic ties which continue to bind them together effectively".

40

The councils had three-year tenure. In most cases, the council was headed by a President who was the paramount chief for' the area of authority of the Council. Where there was none, the office was filled in rotation by the recognized traditional rulers within the locality. The membership of the councils also included other traditional members some of whom were permanent while others could be elected for three-year tenure.

The totality of the size of the membership of the traditional rulers (excluding the President) was restricted to one-quarter of the total council membership. The remaining three-quarters of the council membership was elected directly in the case of District and Local Councils, and indirectly in the case of the Divisional Councils with the Local or District Councils constituting the electoral college as the case might be.

The councils had the power to elect their respective chairmen and vice chairmen for the running of their meetings. The functions of the President were purely ceremonial - presiding at budget meetings and on other important occasions.

The District Officer stopped being the executive head of local government. Thus, his power to ultimately determine policy for the local authorities was withdrawn. The District Officer was consequently redesignated Local Government Adviser. To compensate him, however, the Minister delegated his power of general control over to the councils to him (District Officer) and he had a right of access to all council and committee meetings could inspect all books, accounts and records of councils, advise them on the performance of their functions, and mandatorily reported on the councils annually to the Minister. The role of the district Officer therefore became purely supervisory and advisory.

This limited role assigned to the District Officer was followed up in 1951 with the abolition of the system of Provincial Administration. The Residents, who had become known as Provincial advisers were withdrawn from the field. The aspects of their function pertaining to local government were given to the Local Government Inspectors who were based in the Ministry of Justice and Local Government at the Government Secretariat.

Like the situation in Eastern Region, the reform was not a once-and-for-all affair. The Local Government Law was comprehensively reviewed in 1951. Firstly, those councils with rating powers were given greater responsibility. Before this time, councils relied for a great proportion of

41

their revenue on receipts from a substantial share of the tax collected under the Direct Taxation Ordinance. This was repealed and replaced by the Income Tax Law which necessitated the councils collecting more of their revenue themselves by way of rates.

Also, the Local Government Service Board was established as a buffer between the senior level employees of the councils and the councils. This was to protect the employees against unnecessary harassment and threat of jeopardy to career by the council. Additionally, the Board was expected to attract competent hands to local government service.

Another provision was that relating to Government nominating one female member for every ten members elected into a council subject to a minimum of two and a maximum of six nominated female members for each council. The amendment also stipulated that the Divisional Council was superior to the District Council which in turn is superior to the Local Council. The list of functions assigned to each tier of government was in no way different from the arrangement made in Eastern Region.

One major difference however in the reform between the Eastern Region and its Western counterpart is that, quite unlike in the former, the latter, the local government system allowed local authorities to establish their own police forces.

All assessments of the local government reforms undertaken by both the Eastern Region and Western Region were unanimous that they were great failures. The factors responsible were however highly controversial. For our purpose however we agree with the position of Gboyega that the kind of local government system adopted, which was borrowed from England, was built-in with some problems: These problems, as Red-Cliffe Maud Commission on Local Government in England found out were:

1. Fragmentation between town and county which hindered planning.

2. Irrational division of responsibilities between authorities.

3. Too many small authorities and

4. Pervasive ignorance of the public about the activities of local authorities.

42

Summary a. Through the Local Government Law, 1950, the Eastern Regional

Government introduced liberal reform measures at the local government law. The West followed the same step by the Local Government Law, 1952,

b. This act was facilitated by the shift in the policy of the colonial government following: the coming to power of the Labour Party in Britain. A more immediate reason however was the negative attitude and perception of the nationalists towards the native administration system.

c. What measures were introduced to revamp local government systems in the Eastern and Western Regions in the 1950s'?

References Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria; Lagos: Malthouse Press.

Robert F. Ola (1984): Local Administration in Nigeria. London: Kegan Paul International.

43

LECTURE EIGHT

Modernization of the Native Authorities in Northern Nigeria

Introduction This lecture examines the attitude of the nationalists to the native administration system during the period of self-rule. It points out that in contrast to the situation in the South; native administration was modernized and not liberalized. Thus, no radical reform measures were introduced in the 1950s as the basic principles and structures of native administration remained.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to show that for a change to take place, a conducive environment is not enough. There has to be precipitant factors.

Pre-Test 1. Why did the Northern Regional Government not introduce radical

reform measures to the native administration system like its Southern counterparts did in the 1950s?

2. What were the steps taken to modernize the native administration system in the 1950s in Northern Nigeria?

CONTENT It has been asserted earlier that the Northern Nigeria proved a fertile land for the native administration system. It was therefore hardly surprising that

44

this part of the country was slow in reforming this type of system which was not oriented towards service delivery and representation. The attitudes of the few educated elites, quite unlike in the Southern region, were equally not negative against the system. Gboyega has identified the factors responsible for the slow pace and moderate nature of the changes made in the structure and composition of the native authorities in Northern Nigeria between 1950 and 1966. Firstly, power was status-linked in the pre-colonial political system in' the Emirate area where most of the population lived. The colonial regime not only accepted and reinforced this linkage but tried as well to extend that pattern of political organization to other parts of the Region. Members of the ruling class strengthened their authority and' enhanced their legitimacy by co-opting some of the more able commoners by granting non-hereditary honorary offices of state in the system.

The status hierarchies and the political privileges and the power of the ruling class were strengthened by the native administration system which made the chief or Emir a legally absolute ruler. Moreover, the structure of the Regional Government favoured the protection of the interests of the traditional authorities. For instance the Regional legislature had two chambers - the House of Chiefs and the House of Assembly. In theory, they had equal powers. In practice however, the House of Chiefs had an edge over the House of Assembly. The reason was that in the event of conflict between the two Houses, the constitution provided for a joint committee of both Houses with equal representation from each House of the legislature. The President of the House of Chiefs would preside with an original as well as a "casting vote" to break a tie. Thus, any conflict between the two Houses was likely to be resolved in favour of the House of Chiefs. Ultimately, this was the constitutional device to prevent any radical changes which might be unacceptable to traditional rulers.

That is not all. The Executive Council of the Regional Government equally included a powerful group of traditional rulers, six of them in 1966. Collectively and with the support of the House of Chiefs behind them, they were a potent force.

The patronage system which enabled the traditional rulers to appoint members of the educated elite into the offices of the Native Authority either through the conferment of traditional titles or their inclusion in the inner Council of Advisers also had the effect of strengthening the power of the traditional rulers. This system effectively blocked any opposition that

45

could have possibly come from the elites who had western education as they considered it a prestige to be honoured by the Emir Opposition party in the legislature was also very weak. There were not many people on the opposition side coupled with the fact that the opposition was not homogenous. Most opposition members were primarily concerned with local issues, having been elected on youth or ethnic platforms. This should however not be construed that there was no opposition to the native administration system. For instance, the strong affiliation between the structures of native administration (Native Authority, treasury and court) and the Northern People's Congress was frequently the subject of complaints and protests by politicians of opposition groups. The Government however refused to act. The demands by the opposition parties to liberalize the conditions of local administration were thus rejected by both the Native Authorities themselves and the Government. The two of them were benefiting from the state of affairs at that time. The decision of Government not to embark on any radical re-organization of local administration was formally made when it published a “Declaration by the Government of the Northern Region on its Relations with Native Authorities". In it, Government promised not to suppress or encroach upon the statutory rights of the Native Authorities. This notwithstanding, gradual changes which began in the 1940s were continued. At the 1945 Residents' Conference, proposals to make the native authorities responsive to public opinion were considered. The decision arrived at was to encourage some form of participation in local a4ministration at the district and village levels. The socio-political structure of each Native Authority area however determined the organizational changes implied by this decision. For instance in the emirate areas which were large and where power was concentrated in the Emir, attempts were made to broaden the base of participation. On the other hand, attempts were made to amalgamate the less centralized areas such as among the Idoma and the Tiv where the traditional political system was more democratic. They had tended to be small and ineffective. In the centralized Emirates, the Chiefs or Emirs had been appointed sole authorities. Efforts after 1945 were directed at institutionalizing consultative process by gradually changing the structure of the Native

46

Authorities. Thus, the traditional rulers were encouraged to accelerate the process of wider consultation by absorbing the few educated elites into their advisory councils as they became available. It was envisaged that this would facilitate the administrative business of the Native Authorities through the use of the literary skills of the educated elites. The result of this measure was that Native Authority treasurers, dispensers, works superintendents and agricultural officers were very often drafted into the advisory council. The limitation of this measure however was that it did not lead to any significant diffusion in the powers of the traditional rulers. This was because the portfolio councilors were mainly drawn from the Chief's family or circle of friends. Besides, nobody could get into the council if the Chief did not want him to be there. The council was also purely advisory as there was no legal requirement that the Chief should consult 'it as all or, even when' he did, to heed the advice that he was given. Attempts were made to fit the District Heads to their jobs through closer supervision and rudimentary training. They are without any doubt the mainstay of native administration in Northern Nigeria. Hitherto, the office was filled purely on the 'basis of patronage. They were usually the sons and brothers and, sometimes, friends or relations by marriage of the Emir. Attempts were now made to bind him as closely as possible to his district. Firstly, he was made to live in the district of which he was the head. Secondly, a District Council was established which had representatives of the constituent villages of the district. Each District Head was made to consult the opinion of the people of his district on a regular basis through this forum. We should however not confuse these District Councils established to advise the District Heads with bodies of the same name in the Southern Regions of Nigeria in the 1950s. The District Council in both Eastern and Western Regions were statutory local authorities and had corporate existence. In contrast, the District Councils in the Northern Region were non-statutory. More importantly however, the District Councils in the Northern Region had no executive powers - they merely debated issues. In 1948, a new structure was created to strengthen the consultative process on an, emirate wide basis. The establishment of these Outer Councils was geared towards providing a platform for the expression of public opinion on native authority-wide basis. the native authority Outer Council was different from the Emir’s advisory council earlier discussed.

47

"Inner Council" was used to refer to the Emir's advisory, council to differentiate it from the Native Authority Outer Council. The "Inner Council" was composed of the Emir's closest advisers almost all of whom belonged by birth' to the ruling class. On the other hand, the outer council comprised all district heads and elected representatives of the District Councils. The Outer Councils had no statutory powers. However, some of them grew in importance on the account of their being the only Native Authority area-wide consultative assembly which brought leaders of opinion into contrast with one another and thus became quite influential. A conscious attempt to reform the native administration system, even if only mildly, by the Northern Regional Government was in 1952. The whole process however started in August 1950 when Malam Abubakar Tafawa Balewa (who later became Nigeria's Prime Minister) successfully prayed the Regional House of Assembly to establish a commission of inquiry into the system of native administration. Messrs K. P. Maddocks and D. A. Pott were saddled with this duty and they submitted their report in November 1950. At the end of deliberations in both houses of the legislature, it was decided to set up a Joint Select Committee to formulate proposals for the Government's local government policy. The Joint Select Committee adopted the positions of the Maddocks-Pott Commission, The most important of these was that the existing machinery of local government native administration system was in keeping with local character and traditions and was capable of being adapted to suit the changing conditions of a modernising society. The select committee did not challenge this opinion and therefore failed to question the premises of the existing structure, As a result, no radical re-organisation was proposed. All the Northern Regional elites were unanimous in identifying the notion of 'Sole Authority' as the status to be ended by the reform required by the native administration system, Malam Abubakar Tafawa Balewa held this view which was equally supported by the joint Select Committee; The Sultan of Sokoto also echoed this position. Therefore, in July 1952, legislation was passed to effect the change in the status of the Sole Native Authorities. They became designated "Chief-in-Council" Native Authorities. In this kind of council, the chief presided at all meetings of the council, had a casting vote in the event of a tie (though he did not have an original vote) and acted in accordance with the opinion of the majority of the council.

48

On July 31, 1954, the Native Authority Law came into effect. Even from the title, it was obvious that the Region had no plan of embarking on any sweeping re-organisation of local administration unlike its Southern counterparts. The reasons responsible for this were to be found in the difference in circumstances between the two divisions of the country. These are, as Gboyega has pointed out, in the first instance, the Western and Eastern Regions were relatively more advanced educationally, and therefore, had many more trained hands to deploy in local governments. Even then, they did not have enough relative to the need. This shortage of trained manpower was more pronounced in the Northern Region.

The second reason was that the centralised Emirates had a tradition of elaborate and effective administrative systems which were thought capable of being adapted to the needs of modern local administration. Thirdly, the Westernisation process in Southern Nigeria was more advanced and pervasive than in Northern Nigeria and had been very corrosive of traditional values and foundations of authority. This had not happened in Northern Nigeria where the traditional rulers still enjoyed considerable legitimacy. Finally, the Northern Region's Chiefs had one important advantage over their southern counterparts: they had had far greater autonomy in local administration than the Chiefs in Southern Nigeria were allowed by the colonial administration.

Thus the objective of the reform was not to diffuse power but to conserve it in the hands of the traditional aristocracy instead of bringing about popular participation as a result of the above stated factors. The Law conferred upon the Governor the authority to establish the office of Native Authority together with the determination of its powers and functions, there were four basic types of Native Authority defined in the Law. These were:

a. any chief or other person associated with a council either

i. as a chief or other person in council; or

ii. as a chief or other person and council

b. any group of persons

c. any council

d. any Chief or other person.

49

The Minister for Local Government was vested with the power to determine how the Native Authority Council (excluding the status of the Chief within the Council) would be composed, and five categories of people might be included in the composition:

a. persons named or approved by the Minister,

b. the holders of offices named by the Minister,

c. persons nominated, in such manner and for such terms as the Minister may prescribe,

d. persons elected in such manner and for such term as the Minister may prescribe.

e. persons selected to be member in accordance with the native law and custom of the community concerned.

In effect, the Native Authority Council might have four different categories of members - personal member, ex-officio member, nominated member and elected member. This contrasts with the arrangement in the South. For instance, in both the Western Region and Eastern Region, there were no provisions for personal or ex-officio members. Even though there were nominated and traditional members in the Southern councils their proportion never exceeded one-quarter of Council membership in the Western Region whose proportion was larger than the Eastern Region's.

We should also point out that more than half of the Native Authorities were the Chief-in-Council type. In this type, the chief had the most influence and personal authority. The procedures for conducting council business afforded him the opportunity to dominate the decision-making process. Firstly, if in the opinion of the Chief, a matter was too unimportant to require the advice of the council, he was free to proceed to decide it personally after reference to any two members of the council. It was mandatory that he consulted any two members of the council for advice but he was not under any obligation to heed the advice.

Secondly, if the Chief was of the opinion that the matter at hand was too urgent, even though it was important, he could consult any two members and then reach a decision. He was required to bring the matter, in this case, as well as his decision and explanation for the decision to the notice of the council at the earliest opportunity. Thirdly, in circumstances in which the chief consulted the council, and he was generally expected to do so and to heed the advice of its majority, but was unable to accept the majority decision, he could veto the council's decision and act as he

50

thought fit in "the interest of order and good government in the area of the Native Authority". In case the chief vetoed a council decision in this way, he was required to report the matter to the Governor who had the power to ask him to reconsider his stand. This procedure therefore emphasized the dominance of the Chief rather than of the council. The implication of his enormous powers was that, if he preferred, he could direct the day-to-day administration of the council alone as long as he consulted any two members. What he would do was simply to categorize his decisions and involving matters either unimportant or too urgent to await council meeting and decision. Because all councils of this nature had a good proportion of traditional and nominated members, the chief could easily meet the obligation of consulting two members within the family; it might merely amount to consulting his brother and his son, or perhaps, his cousin and his nephew.

The powers and functions of the Native Authorities were not any different from those of the local government of Western and Eastern Nigeria. There was however one aspect in which the Native Authorities had a big advantage over the local government councils of the Southern Regions. This was in the area of financial resources. The Native Authorities had a more stable and sound financial base which was the envy of their Southern Nigeria counterparts. This fact had its base in pre-colonial history of efficient taxation system already developed in the Emirate areas. These were strengthened by the Government.

Summary a. Native administration System was compatible with the traditional

political organization of the Northern Nigeria. Therefore the system recorded a resounding success in this part of the country.

b. The elites did not have a negative attitude towards the native administration system. Therefore, only moderate reform measures were undertaken.

c. The Native Authority Law of 1954 conserved power in the hands of traditional rulers. The highlight of the reform was that it ended the status of Sole Native Authority.

51

Post-Test 1. The Native Authority Law of 1954 conserved power in the hands

of traditional rulers in Northern Nigeria. Discuss.

2. Do you agree with the assertion that the only change introduced by the Native Authority Law of 1954 in Northern Nigeria was that it ended the status of Sole Native Authority?

References Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press.

Robert, F. Ola (1984): Local Administration in Nigeria. London: Kegan Paul International.

52

LECTURE NINE

Local Government and Administration under the Military I

Introduction A discussion of practice of local government and administration in Nigeria cannot be meaningful if divorced from the country's political developments. Thus, after examining local government and administration in Nigeria under the First Republic, it is only natural if it is followed by an examination of the system under the military from 1966-1976. This lecture is the first of a three-part discussion of local government and administration in this era.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to justify for the military take-over of 1966 not in words but in action. It is therefore an exploration of the practical need for the 1966 coup d' etat as it affects local government.

Pre-Test 1. What attitude was adopted towards local government at the onset

of the military rule?

2. Was there any significant difference in the attitude of the Military Governors towards local governments in the Regions when the military seized power in 1966?

53

Content The political situation in the country was tense towards the dying days of the First Republic. There was general insecurity to life and property. A section of the Nigerian Army therefore organized a coup d'etat. However, the mantle of leadership fell on the Head of the Army who later took control. Given this unexpected role assumed by the Head of the Army, initially the new regime had no coherent policy towards local government and administration. Thus, between 1966 and 1970, there were no local government policies in the real sense in the Eastern, Western and Mid-Western Regions. In the main, the Military Governors of each Region reacted to identified abuses and shortcomings of the, existing system as they were brought to their notice. In contrast however, the same period saw a rapid transformation of the instrument of local administration in Northern Region.

We must however point out that the same lukewarm attitude prevailed initially in the North until the Region was split into six states. With this split, the stage was set for rapid transformation.

An examination of the local government re-organisation after 1966 however should necessarily be preceded by a discussion of the prominent abuses of the local government machinery which were common to all parts of the country. Firstly, all Regional Governments used local government as an instrument for compelling political support. This was through the instrumentality of the Local Government Police which was used to harass political opponents by arbitrary arrests and detentions. Customary courts were also used as instruments for putting political opponents behind bars without the due process of law. Charges were framed up and the guilt of the accused as well as the punishment was normally pre-determined in party caucuses even before the accused were arrested.

The sanitation function of the local government was also turned into victimization-of citizens. The Sanitary Inspectors of the local government councils were in the habit of arresting opponents, or even personal enemies, of councilors of the ruling party on the council for spurious offences relating to environmental sanitation. That is not all. Tax Assessment Committees levied excessive rates on the politicians and known supporters of the favoured party were either exempted completely from taxation or were under-assessed. All these are just some atrocities which the local government machinery were used to perpetrate.

54

In the Southern part of the country (Western, Eastern and Mid-Western Regions), the antipathetic attitude of the Military Governors was demonstrated by their dissolution of all the Management Committees of local government councils at various times. Administrative Officers were appointed Sole Administrators to take over the powers and functions of all the dissolved councils. The dissolution of the representative local bodies therefore had the effect of centralizing political and executive powers in the locality in the hands of a single public servant who was accountable only to the Governor through his ministry.

At the onset of the military regime in the Northern Region, the Military Governor gave an indication that no fundamental changes were considered at that time. He asserted that the Native Authority system would continue but reform would be introduced. He identified cutting down on unnecessary expenses, doing away with redundant staff and using public funds correctly and efficiently as the three areas in which the Native Authorities were expected to put their own houses in order.

At this time also, the dismissed politicians were re-absorbed into the public offices at the local level. Thus, in contrast to the situation in the South where dismissed politicians were despised, they filtered back to the helm of Native Authority affairs with the approval of the Military Governor. Many of them also became Emirs and District Heads.

However, there were also some actions taken by the Northern Regional Government which were in line with his Southern counterparts. For instance in all parts of the country; the criminal jurisdiction of the customary courts was revoked. They were as such reconstituted and integrated into the state judicial systems. Local government police and prisons were also taken over. This gesture was equally extended to services which required great capital outlay and therefore exceeded the financial capacity of the local authorities. In this category were functions like primary education, water supply and inter-district roads.

When the Northern Region was broken up into six states, all of them embarked upon a fundamental re-organization of their local administration. Far-reaching steps were taken which fundamentally changed the former system. At the end of the day, the system of local government in the Northern part of the country was similar almost in all respects to the situation in the South as laid by the foundation of the reforms of the 1950s. The measures of re-organization involved more detailed structural differentiation of the machinery of local government,

55

the proper definition of the role of Chiefs, institutionalization (even if only in the legal sense) of the participatory ideal, and the fragmentation of those units of local administration whose size appeared excessive for the notion and purposes of local government.

One important measure taken was the rejection of the name "Native Authority" by all the States. This change was supposed to indicate the end of an era and the beginning of another. 'The Kwara State Government described the names inappropriate and outmoded. Benue-Plateau State Government argued that the term might have been useful when it distinguished local or indigenous rulers from expatriate colonial officers. There was no longer any special need to attach "native" to any level of Government since all were now being run by Nigerians. The Kano State Governor described the term as pejorative.

Another remarkable aspect of the re-organization of local government in the Northern States was the fragmentation of the size of the largest units of local administration such as the local authorities for Kano. Bornu, Sokoto and Ilorin. These authorities had remained as single entities of their correspondence to the boundaries of traditional political systems as well as the advantage revenue accruing due to their respective sizes. Beyond these advantages however were disadvantages like the authorities being distant to many citizens the abuses and corruption which escaped correction as a result of their being hidden by the huge size of the administration, and the enormous personal, political power which the chiefs who presided over any of these big local authorities wielded.

At the same time, there were also measures of consolidation of the small-sized local authorities. The reason was that the military governments of these states did not want small, ineffective local authorities either. Different strategies were used to re-group the small quasi-autonomous units into the sizes considered adequate for the planning and implementation of local development. These included mergers and amalgamations into "development areas".

Moreover, the councils of the new Local Government Authorities were reconstituted so as to increase the level of citizen participation. The councils were to be composed of elected representatives of their areas. However, because the country was under military rule, the councilors were appointed for the time being.

56

In addition, some states e.g. Kwara, established Local Government Service Boards for the personnel management functions of the local authorities. such bodies had responsibilities for approving pensionable appointments, promotion, discipline and conditions of service among others. Lastly, local authority staff, like their civil service counterparts, were banned from partisan politics.

These reforms laid the foundation for representative system of local government on the basis of majority vote. The reforms were quite different in details from one state to the other. However, the main features were similar. Moreover, amendments were made to the various Laws from time to time, in each state.

Summary a. Local governments were grossly misused by politicians in the

dying days of the First Republic. They were used to harass, intimidate and incarcerate political opponents.

b. The Military Governors re-organized the judicial system and removed criminal jurisdiction from customary courts.

c. Military Governors of the West and East dissolved all elected councils and replaced them with Sole Administrators. Overall, politicians were treated with disdain. In the North however, politicians sacked from public offices at the Federal and Regional levels were reabsorbed into the local government system. However, after the Region was split into six states, the liberal reform measures introduced into the Southern part of the country in the 1950s were also introduced into these new states.

Pre- Test Attempt a discussion of the state of affairs at the local government level when the military seized power in 1966 and the steps taken by the military to deal with the situation.

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos; Malthouse Press.

57

LECTURE TEN

Local Government and Administration under the Military II

Introduction This lecture is a continuation of lecture nine. It does not however require any elaborate introduction because the opening sentence leads into the discussion by making references to the preceding one.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to show that in crisis periods, participatory principle of local government is often abandoned for effectiveness of administration. Therefore, local government often gives way to local administration in such circumstances.

Pre-Test What was the position of local governments in the Eastern Region during the civil war?

CONTENT In lecture nine, we examined the reforms undertaken by the governments of the States in the Northern part of the country. In this lecture, we are taking a step further by examining the steps taken by the Military Governors in the Southern part of the country.

We said earlier that between 1966 and 1970, no policy in the real sense of the word was pursued by the Military Governors in the Southern part of the country. What we had was adhoc responses to situations as they arose. For instance in the Western and Mid-Western Regions, the

58

inevitability some form of local representative participation was quickly accepted. This led to the appointment of official Advisory Committees to aid the Sole Administrators. The practical effect of this, was that the' Management Committees which had been dismissed at the onset of military rule were restored even though with some modifications. The first modification was that not every council had a separate committee. Secondly, the Divisional Officer as the Sole Administrator could ignore the advice of the committee. Thirdly, the committees were not allowed to consider some matters like the award of contracts for which special Tenders Boards were established, and all functions relating to chieftaincy and establishment matters.

According to Gboyega, the failure of the local government systems under the civilian administration of the First Republic to generate effective local development undermined confidence not only in the structures, but also in the values underlying local government. This led to new structural types of local Authority in the Western State and in the three states carved out of the former Eastern Region. The Mid- Western State took a cue from the example of Eastern Nigeria.

The Eastern and Mid-Western States witnessed a radical philosophy of local government. Shortly before the outbreak of the civil war, the Government of the Eastern Region had dissolved all local government councils. Sole administrators were appointed to take over the functions of local authorities while enquiries were on to ascertain a more appropriate system of local government for the Region. The outbreak of the civil war however forestalled any intentions for local government re-organization.

During the war, the Governments of the three States in the East (South-Eastern, Rivers and East Central) operated in exile initially before moving to their respective locations as parts of their territory became liberated. Thus, Divisional administration preceded State Administration in these states, as the liberated areas were first placed under Sole Administrators before the State Governments could, properly move in to establish a presence.

Starting a new state administration in those areas meant integrating the Divisional Administrations. This experience was to later shape the subsequent re-organization of local government. Secondly, because the civil war had seriously disturbed all social organizations, there were no traditional authorities with stable and legitimate presence, either to complement or compete with Governmental authority. Thirdly, the

59

problems inherited by the new Administrations were of high magnitude. People had been severely deprived both materially and psychologically. The task of reconstruction and rehabilitation therefore made people dependent on government.

Apart from the effects of the civil war, the bad performance of the defunct local government system was also still fresh in the memory of the people. This was compounded in the Southern, Eastern and Rivers States by the perception that the defunct system of local government was unsuitable for these areas and that it used to establish Ibo hegemony on non-Ibo areas of the former Eastern Region. The East Central State Government also had mobilization considerations uppermost in its thinking as the area where the ravages of the war were the greatest. Thus, because of the similarity of their conditions and similarities, the Governments of Mid-Western, East-Central, South-Eastern and Rivers States adopted similar policies and structures in their local administration.

The Ad hoc Advisory Committee set up by the South-Eastern State in 1961 found the old system unsuitable on the following four grounds:

i. there was shortage of trained manpower to run separate central and local administrations;

ii. the few qualified staff would rather work for the Federal and State Government;

iii. war damages were so extensive as to be beyond the capacity of any local government council to repair; and

iv. the inexperience and lack of technical competence of councilors suggested a greater role for the intervention of Government.

Another reason given by the committee for recommending a new approach to local government administration was the need for development. It was advanced that if the system was to satisfy the aspirations and needs of the people for development, it should aim to be efficient and effective. It was further assumed that the old system could not be made to be efficient and effective. It was therefore essential for the Government to seize the initiative to generate and sustain local developmental efforts. The role crafted for Government required the decentralization of State Administration even though local people should be associated with the State’s efforts for local development

60

The position was taken that the role of the people of a locality should not be that of political control.

This was identified as one of the mistakes of the past as the delegation of autonomy involving legislative and executive powers was said to lead to the placing of wrong emphasis on what part local communities could play in the development of civil society. The hitherto emphasis on political activities was said to have led to the proliferation of ineffectual social services.

Therefore, the Committee recommended the abolition of the old local government system as well as the system of provincial administration. In its place, a new system, “Development Administration” was proposed which was to emphasize the “desired shift in the social objectives and attitudes of the people”. It was therefore recommended that Development Councils, which would not have the legislative and executive responsibilities which local government councils had, be established to replace local government councils. The Councils therefore were to have no executive or legislative powers but could recommend measures for by-laws'. They would be summoned to meet from time to time depending on the volume of business, either to be informed of, or to discuss and express opinion and news on, proposals submitted to them by various arms of the administration in the Divisions.

The principal unit of organization in East Central State was to be the community which was defined as "a group of people comprising a village, town or kindred group: people who belong to the same traditional, social and political unit". The stated objective was to "create councils at a level where democratic processes are traditionally established, where revelries and tensions are reduced to a minimum, where local resources and patriotism can be fully utilized and where the people may effectively control their own government at their own level". One should 'however not be misled by such expressions as "democratic process" and "where the people may effectively control" that a truly representative and responsible system of local administration was about to be instituted. The reality however was that the "Draft Policy" specifically provided that the execution of any project in any locality would be subjected to state control.

This state control was achieved through two devices. One, the Local Authority was defined by the Divisional Administration Edict, 1971, as the Divisional Officer-in-council for rural communities: and the Resident-

61

in-Council for the urban areas. Two, the Local Government Service was abolished as a separate service and those staff of the local authorities who had the requisite qualification was reabsorbed into the State service. These two features - control over staff and the legal definition of the local authority as the Divisional Officer - were the most important aspects of the new system of local administration which was adopted in the South-Eastern, Rivers, East-Central and Mid-Western States.

Several amendments were however undertaken at various times in all the states to correct identification anomalies for as long as the arrangement was in force.

Summary a. Given the prevailing circumstances, local governments were

abolished in the Eastern parts of the country starting from 1969.

b. These parts of the country resorted to local administration - local areas were administered by agents of the State Governments.

Pre-Test Discuss the context and highlights of provincial or development administration in the Eastern part of the country after 1969.

Reference

Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press.

62

LECTURE ELEVEN

Local Government and Administration under the Military III

Introduction This lecture concludes our discussions on the local government administration under the military. It looks at the attempt of the Western State Government to make local government efficient and effective.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to show that no social system is perfect. There are always problems, both inherent and operational. Thus another attempt by the Western State Government to make its local government system effective could not match its performance with the hopes it raised.

Pre-Test Critically appraise the Council Manager System adopted in 1973 by the Western State Government to make its local government system functional.

CONTENT Western State of Nigeria adopted the Council Manager System of local government in 1913. The process which led to the adoption of this method however began in the early 1960s. A "Working Party on Local Government Services" headed by Dr. S. O. Biobaku was appointed in November 1959 to:

63

1. examine, the distribution of functions between the Government and the local authorities

2. examine the organization of local government services and the effectiveness with which the services were performed.

3. examine the role of administrative officers in the field, and 4. make recommendations for the more effective performance of

local government services.

The Working Party' which submitted its report in April 1960 recommended that special Services Authorities' be established for the major services such as education, works and health. These Service Authorities were not to be independent of Councils, but to be closely integrated with them and in order to avoid their being confused with the unpopular Divisional Council, there would be a separate Authority for each service. For the purpose of administrative convenience, the service Authorities would have coterminous areas of jurisdiction, even though economic considerations alone could dictate a different scale of operation for each service. The intention of making the Service Boards coterminous with areas of jurisdiction was to make them serve the same councils and therefore, it was also recommended that the Service Authorities should have common administrative and accounting services as well as common Chief Executive Officer to be called Local Government Manager. The following functions were allotted to the proposed office of the Local Government Manager:

1. he would serve as the Secretary to all the Service Authorities for his area;

2. he would be responsible for the administrative and accounting services of the Authorities and be Head of Department over the staff employed on those duties;

3. he would generally coordinate the activities of all the Service Authorities for his area;

4. he would advise and assist the Secretaries of councils within his area in the performance of their duties;

5. he would be the Senior Local Government Official in his area; and 6. he would exercise certain powers in staff matters delegated to him

by the Local Government Service Board.

64

Even though the political climate in the country, especially in the Region at that particular period prevented any serious consideration or adoption of these recommendations, they were to be useful later in the re-organization of local governments. They were readily adopted when the Commissioner of Inquiry who probed the Agbekoya uprisings identified dissatisfaction with the absence of participation in local government and the poor performance of the local authorities in the provision of social services as some of the fundamental causes of the uprising. The commissioner further suggested that "Government should undertake as a matter of urgency a review of the existing Local Government Council structure with a view to finding out which councils are viable, and which are not, and thereafter Government should decide on measures for ensuring that only councils viable and capable of fulfilling their statutory obligations remain".

The features of the new local government system introduced were a reflection of the recommendations of these two sources. The Working Party focused on management organization while the Commissioner of Inquiry focused on structure (that is. size). Thus, government sought to combine representativeness of the councils with their viability.

The Council Manager System of Local Government became operative in April 1973. A dramatic aspect of the reforms was the very drastic reduction in the number of local authorities from 114 to 39. This was in line with the belief of the Government that "the solution to the incapacity of councils definitely lies in regrouping them into larger and more viable units that will not only be capable of effectively providing essential services to the communities but also be able to offer the staff the opportunity for attractive employment and security of tenure which progressive administration demands".

This 65% reduction in the number of local authorities led to a serious setback to the principle of participation. Fewer local authorities meant fewer people had access to local points of political influence and decision-making. To make matters worse, the role of the representative council in the decision-making process, and more especially in the implementation, was carefully restricted in such manner as to clearly undermine the effectiveness of popular participation. A discussion of the operation of the councils will buttress this point.

65

The new Councils for the 30 Local Government Councils were called Management Committees and were all appointed by the Governor because of the ban on party politics. The Government set limits on the number of councilors for each council. No Management Council was to have below 25 members' with 50 being the upper limit, depending on the population or geographical size of the council. Thus, Ibadan City Council which had 93 councilors before now had 50.

To counteract the effect of the remoteness of these councils, 320 Area Committees were established all over the State. These Area Committees represented between 10,000 and 25,000 people and they had been 10 and 30 members. The Area Committees however had no statutory powers and functions. They were therefore mere talking shops. Only the Management Committee had the main responsibility for determining local priorities.

The Management Committee was required to hold four statutory meetings in the year for the purposes of laying policy, passing the budget, and reviewing progress half-way through the year. The hub of council’s management was its Standing Committee. The Standing Committee composed of about a quarter of the Management Committee members. It met at least once a month to review and consider the progress report of the council prepared by the Council Manager. It also has as part, of its functions, determining the agenda for the plenary meetings of the Management Committee and being the only committee, examining and policy options and submitting recommendations for the consideration of the Management Committee.

This system undermined the extent of participation. The Management Committee met infrequently as the law demanded only four meetings annually with the membership of the only Committee restricted to barely a quarter of the membership of the Management Committee. The overwhelming number of Councilors was therefore marginalized. It was not long before the councilors who were not members of the standing committee began to lose interest in the affairs of their Council. They would all gather (about three-quarters of them) to be acquainted with council business a total of four half-days in the whole year.

This anti-participatory attitude also manifested in the balance of power in the relationship between the administrative head of the council, the Council Manager, and the policy-making body. The councilors could develop programmes, set priorities and allocate resources on the advice of the manager. However, the Council Manager alone had control over the

66

resources (human and material) essential to the successful implementation of the Council's programmes. He alone could deal directly with other council staff and some powers of discipline over junior staff were delegated to him by the Local Government Service Board. It was left to his professional competence and integrity to achieve council goals once priorities are determined and resources allocated.

Quite unlike in the United States where the Council Manager System of local government originated, the council Manager in the Western State was neither appointed nor disposable by the Council. He was then the employee of the Local Government Service Board. The career development of the Council Manager depended on what the Local Government Service Board thought of his performance and not the perception of the Management Committee. At worst, the Management Committee could request his transfer to another Councils subject to the discretion of the Board to accede to the request or not. His primary loyalty therefore was to the Local Government Service Board and the Ministry of Local Government rather than the Management Committee.

The Ministry of Local Government was represented at the locality by a Divisional Officer whose power strengthened central bureaucratic control of local administration. No meeting of the Management and Standing Committees was valid if held in his absence or that of his representation. Councils were this obliged to schedule meetings to suit his convenience. He could delay the implementation of council policy for one month while trying to persuade the Ministry of Local Government to counter ban the decision, if he thought the decision was contrary to overall Government policy. He also had the powers of inspection of council records, book and accounts, and he wrote annual reports on the performance of the council to the commissioner for Local Government.

The most critical failure of the council Manager System was in the area' of finance. The period immediately preceding the reform had been characterized by massive tax-evasion and a unilateral reduction in the level of local flat rates by the Government in order to appease anti-tax agitators. The consequence was that the councils faced declining revenues.

At the same time the expected benefits of a larger revenue base resulting from the merger of many councils did not materialize. They were offset by the consolidated council assuming responsibility for all staff of the defunct councils. Moreover, the tenement rates which the government permitted all the councils to levy did not yield the huge sums expected to

67

cover the lasses from reduced flat rates, not to mention any excess for new capital projects.

Eventually, the system was swept away by the tide of the 1976 nation-wide reform.

Summary a. Western State government borrowed the Council Manager System

from the US to make its local government system effective and efficient.

b. Under the arrangement, the number of local authorities was reduced by 65%. This therefore led greatly to a setback on participation principle.

c. However, unlike in the US where the system originated. The council could not dismiss the Manager which meant that he was responsible to the Government and not the local citizens.

d. The local government was planned to be multi-purpose and single-tiered. The local authorities however faced serious financial handicaps.

Post-Test Would you say that the Council Manager System introduced in Western state in 1973 achieved its, objectives?

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press.

68

LECTURE TWELVE

The 1976 Local Government Reforms Introduction 1976 was a watershed in the history of local government and administration in Nigeria. For the first time, Federal Government took interest and got involved in the re-organization of local government. The various types of local government systems in various states of the country were abandoned and uniform system introduced across the board. Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to discuss the fundamental reform measures introduced through the 1976 local government reforms. Pre-Test

1. What were the roots of the 1976 local government reforms in Nigeria?

2. What were the objectives of the reforms? 3. What measures were introduced in the reforms?

CONTENT Local government administration in Nigeria was thoroughly re-organised in 1976 on a nation-wide basis. Hitherto, each Region or State as the case may be, had reformed or responded to identified setbacks to local government administration individual in line With the federal structure of the country. However, uniform re-organisation was made in 1976 allover the country. This was possible then because the country was still under military rule.

69

The 1976 reform had its root in the recommendations of the Public Service Review Commission of 1974 popularly known as the Udoji Commission. In 1974 when the commission reported there were two basic types of local administration being operated all over the country - the councilor system and the Divisional or Development Administration. The former in the form of representative councils which take decisions by majority vote and which have a defined range of functional responsibility had been adopted in the Eastern Region in 1950 with Western Region following suit in 1952. The Northern States embraced it following the reforms of local administration in these areas between 1968 and 1970. The Divisional Administration was then in operation in the Eastern States of the Country. It is a system of local administration through the decentralization or the machinery of the State Government.

The Udoji Commission however did not commend either as being more appropriate to the purposes and aspirations of the Government and country. This attitude of the Commission may be due to its broad terms of reference. Nevertheless, many of the commission's recommendation for improving the structure and performance of the conciliar type of local government administration found their way into the 1976 Guidelines for Local Government Reforms.

When General Murtala Mohammed came to power in July 1975 he committed his government to returning power to civilians within a short period of time. A programme of disengagement was announced of which the re-organization of local administration was an important feature of this programme for three reasons. Firstly, a strong, representative local government system was considered to be a pre-condition for the democratic system at the national level. The ultimate objectives of the reforms were stated to be to confer a reasonable measure of autonomy over local affairs on local - representatives, to encourage citizen participation in local administration, to make local institutions responsive to local needs and purposes, to mobilize local resources, and to share power between the state and the local communities.

Secondly, the new Government desired to decentralize power. The hazards of too much centralization of political power were very clear to the military. It was therefore important to institutionalize a system of power-sharing before handing over political power back to politicians.

70

Thirdly, there was also the desire to reap the benefits believed to be entailed by a decentralized system of administration like sensitive local administration keenly attuned to local needs and purposes, more effective local control, greater efficiency, and the lessening of the load of administration at the state level. The following are the main features of the reforms

Functions The reforms enabled the Federal Government to strengthen the local authorities’ vis-à-vis the state by assigning to them a realistic range of functions. In the 1950s, the local authorities were assigned a broad range of functions many of which were beyond their financial means. Consequently, the performance of these functions was neglected and this provoked resentment and anti-tax revolts. State Governments took over these functions from local authorities in the late 1960s.

In 1976, the strategy adopted was to examine critically the range of functions which might be assigned to local authorities and to divide it into two - the basic functions which all local authorities should perform and which should be assigned to them immediately. The items on this list were those considered not to require expertise and capital outlay for their performance which would be beyond the means of the local authorities. They include: markets and motor-parks; sanitary inspection; refuse and nights oil disposal; provision of public latrines, conveniences and burial grounds; control of vermin, registration of births, deaths and marriages; licensing of bake houses; parks and recreation, grounds; and the licensing and regulation of the sale of liquor.

The secondary list of functions included items which, it was believed, some local authorities might not be able to perform immediately. It was left to the State Government to determine when to devolve functions from this list to the local authorities. Such functions include the provision of: health, centres, maternity centres, dispensaries and health clinics; nursery, primary and adult education; public libraries, reading rooms and facilities for general public enlightenment fire services; water supplies; roads and street lighting; and abattoirs.

71

Structure The reform introduced all over the country a multi-purpose, single-tier local government institution. Each local government was to serve a population of between 150,000 and 800,000 with a provision that the upper limit could be exceeded in heavily urbanized areas to prevent splitting such urban areas into two of more local governments. In the same vein, allowance was made for the possible exceptional case of a sparsely populated rural community. In such situations a local government could conceivably be less than 150,000 in population. The reform however made it clear that in such situations, if the state government was convinced of the desirability of creating such a local government, it had to seek clearance from the federal government.

The 1976 reform also touched on the management organization of local authorities. The Northern States had until the reforms of the late 1960s and early 1970s, a tradition of strong executive leadership of the local authorities through the Portfolio Councilors. These constituted a kind of ministerial cabinet for the local authorities. The reforms that sought to democratize the local "administration of the Northern States between 1968 and 1971 did away with the Portfolio Councilor, system in the less centralized States such as Kwara and Benue-Plateau States. The opinion of the majority members of the Udoji Commission of 1974 was that the Portfolio Councilors interfered with day-to-day administration and therefore the system should be abolished. The minority opinion however held that the system had worked satisfactorily in some States where the traditional political structure provided legitimacy for the existence of such executive offices, and in such States the system should be allowed to continue.

In. Southern Nigeria, there was a long history of working the committee system which was equally controversial. In this arrangement, local authorities were required to establish only Committees for finance and for establishment matters. In practice, several committees, usually between 10 and 15, were established in every local authority. Proliferation of committees was encouraged because local councilors were only paid sitting allowance. Thus, the greater the number of committees the greater was the opportunities for multiplying sittings and claims. When the Council Manager System was introduced, a single Standing Committee was provided for. This however marginalized many councilors.

72

The Government tried to combine the benefits of both systems of the organization of the executive functions of local government in 1976. The Guidelines recommended that every local authority should have at least two committees - Finance and General Purposes Committee and an Education Committee. In practice, the number of committees varied from six to seven. It was also decided to pay a basic allowance of N100 monthly to local councilors in lieu of sitting allowance. This discouraged the tendency to proliferate committees.

Financial Resources Finance had always been the greatest problems of local authorities. It was not surprising therefore that this attracted f great deal of attention in the 1976 Reform. Since 1979: financial grants to local authorities by both the State and Federal Governments have become a constitutional requirement. At present, 20010 of the amount in the Federation Account goes to the local government directly and not through states.

Places of Traditional Rulers The 1976 reform described the local governments as 'primary authority' which implied that they alone were vested with the powers, both legislative and executive, of a local authority. This was intended to signal to the traditional authorities, as clear as possible, the precise location of secular authority at the local level.

This definition of ‘primary authority’ had greater significance in the Northern States, especially in the Emirate areas, than in the Southern States. Even though the local government reforms of the period 1968- 71 in the Northern States had drastically reduced the formal powers of the traditional rulers in local administration, they still exercised considerable influence. In Southern Nigeria, the power of chiefs in local administration had been neutralized effectively since the 1950s and the definition of primary authority did not materially affect their position. An advisory and consultative role was therefore defined for the traditional rulers.

Relationship with the State Government All states were required to establish Local Government Service Boards with functions and powers similar to that vested in the Civil Service Commission in relation to the civil service. Secondly, all local authority

73

posts were regarded to ensure that equivalent posts, in terms of responsibility and the requisite qualifications, in the State Civil Service and the service of the local authorities are equally compensated. Thirdly, the State Governments seconded some administrative staff of the civil service to the local authorities pending the time when the Local Government Service Boards would be able to recruit suitable staff for the local authorities.

Additionally, an attempt was made to redefine the role of the Ministry for Local Government. Historically, the Ministry had always played a negative, regulative role vis-à-vis the local authorities. In order to unify the variety of sources of the State Government's dealings with local authorities, it was decided that some matters which were then being handled by Ministries other than that for Local Government such as

i. community development:

ii. providing secretarial and other support facilities to Local Government Service Boards: and

iii. the administration of revolving Loan funds: should be transferred to the Ministry for Local Government.

The Guidelines stressed the role of the Ministry as being that of excessive control. whether in the issue of directives or in requesting marginally useful returns. Local governments are now to operate on their own without the superintendence of the District Officers. Perhaps before we bring a discussion of this section to an end, we should examine the benefits expected from the establishment of the Local Government Service Board (changed to commission in 1979). Firstly, as a quasigovernmental body, it was a more prestigious and more effective and favourable recruiter on the job market than individual local government councils. The commission is charged with laying down relevant minimum qualification standards for the positions concerned and to ensure fair consideration. of the claims of all applicants. Pay parity between the State Civil Service and the Local Government Service was established in 1975 and this has enhanced the morale of the Local Government Service thereby increasing awareness among job seekers in seeking employment in local government service. Secondly, the Commission is the bulwark of the senior staff against arbitrary dismissal and other forms of victimization which characterized local government council personnel administration in the past. It has appellate jurisdiction in respect of the junior staff of the local

74

authorities and thus ultimately exercising control over all disciplinary matters concerning all staff of the local authorities. The transfer of control over the discipline of council staff from the councils to the commission ensures job security in local Government service as well as provides a foundation for the promotion of professional standards of conduct in the council staff.

Thirdly, the commission is better placed to attract better qualified and ambitious job seekers because it promises wider opportunities for career advancement. In the past every council was a separate unit for employment purpose and a competent Deputy Secretary/Clerk of Council in one had a limited chance of promotion to the position of Secretary/Clerk in another. Most qualified and ambitious jobseekers therefore accepted local government employment only as a last resort. The commission provided reasonable assurance that competent subordinate officers could be promoted to positions of responsibility even if in the service of another council.

Considering the other side of the coin, however, the establishment of the commission for the personnel management functions of the councils severely undermined the authority of the councils in the control of their own staff. The institution of minimum qualification standards and the control of the commission in recruitment diminished the role of the councils, with a corresponding coolness in the relations between them and the staff employed for them by the commission.

Additionally, the controls exercised by the commission over local government staff and the impotence of the council over them ensured that the administrative leadership of the councils was more eager to respond to external, i.e. State, purpose and directives than to local initiatives. In short, the role of the commission in their recruitment and future career development created in them split loyalties which confused and discouraged local initiative and leadership.

Thirdly, the Commission failed to completely insulate local government 'Staff from political victimization. The commission was powerless against Commissioners of the State Government, especially, the Commissioner for Local Government. The latter freely interferes with postings, promotions and transfers, rewarding properly local government staff and punishing neutral staff by granting or withholding favours.

75

The commission has also not successfully combated the poor image of local government service, among job-seekers, arising from the history of subordination of local authorities to the State Civil Service. .

Nevertheless, the Local Government Service commission has provided the institutional framework for establishing a local government service subordinate, but parallel, to the State Civil Service and laid the foundation for professionalism in the execution of the functions of local authorities.

Law Enforcements Each local government was to have a unit of the Nigeria Police Force to cover its area of jurisdiction.

In this way, it was expected that there would be no need whatever for any form of local or state government police.

Summary a. The 1976 local government reforms had their roots in the Public

Service Review Commission of 1974 (Udoji Commission).

b. The objectives of the reforms were to confer autonomy over local affairs on local representatives, to decentralise power and for sensitivity and accountability.

c. Under the reforms, functions allotted to local governments were divided into two – primary and secondary. The local governments are single tiered and multipurpose. Also each local government was to have at least two committees - Finance and General Purposes as well as education committees.

d. The reforms also made it a constitutional matter for local governments to partake in the sharing of revenue in the Federation Account. The role of traditional rulers was also defined as being purely advisory.

Post-Test Do you agree with the assertion that 1976 was a watershed in the history of local government in Nigeria?

76

References Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press.

Robert. F. Ola (l984): Local Administration in Nigeria. London: Kegan Paul International.

77

LECTURE THIRTEEN

Local Government under the Second Republic Introduction This lecture looks at how local governments in Nigeria fared in the Second Republic. Like what happened at higher levels of government, local government system witnessed a lot of upheavals and circumventing of constitutional provisions. Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to expose the undemocratic disposition of a supposedly democratic government to an institution which is supposed to be bedrock of democracy. Pre-Test How democratic was the Nigerian local government system between 1979-83? CONTENT We can appropriately start our discussion here by noting the factual observation made by Alex Gboyega. According to him, "the irony embedded in the history of the development of local government in Nigeria is that the military governments have been more committed to a liberal system of local government than the civilian governments have been". The military government has been more determined to encourage meaningful participation of the locality in local government, to support local government financially as well as to inculcate accountability at the local level. An examination of local government administration in the Second Republic will support this position.

78

The Second Republic (Oct. 1979-Dec. 1983) did not make improvements to the system of local government which it inherited from the military. Rather, it exploited, compounded and dramatized the shortcomings and loopholes in the system. The military had anticipated that the politicians would upturn the reform; and therefore enshrine the highlights in the constitution. However, the politicians blatantly abused the constitution.

Two aspects of the 1976 reforms were given constitutional guarantee. Firstly, the Constitution guaranteed a democratic system of local government. Section 7(1) of the 1979 Nigerian Constitution states that "the system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this constitution guaranteed, and accordingly the Government of every State shall ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils". The Constitution therefore sought to preserve the political character of the local government councils as representative bodies. It further left no room for nominated members.

Despite this provision, local government councils between 1979 and 1983 were far from being democratic. Within weeks on assumption of office, all Governors dissolved their elected local government councils and replaced them with appointed Management committees. That the Governors had such a power was not the problem. The question centred on non-compliance with relevant statutory provisions. The conditions to be met were that it had to be shown that the councils had not discharged their functions in a manner conducive to the welfare of the inhabitants of their areas of authority; holding of an inquiry into the affairs of the councils and' consultation with the Executive Council. All these conditions were unfulfilled.

One reason often, advanced for the dissolution of the local government councils was the need to comply with constitutional provisions. For instance the constitution guarantees a system of local government by democratically elected local government councils". It was therefore considered unconstitutional to keep the councils inherited from the military era which contained some nominated ' members. However, it should be pointed out that it would have been more in conformity with the constitution to keep the entire council (elected and nominated councilors alike) than throwing away a predominantly elected council only to replace it with a wholly-nominated one as it happened.

79

If the Governors had not acted in haste and had allowed the councils to complete their tenure, a problem that would have arisen was whether or not to prolong their stay in office. This was because the constitutional requirement for the conduct of local government election was a bit complicated. The powers to make laws for the registration of voters are vested in the National Assembly by the constitution. The constitution also empowered the National Assembly to make laws to regulate the procedure for local government elections. On the other band the states are empowered to make laws “with respect to elections to a local government council in addition to, but not inconsistent with, any law made by the National Assembly". The Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) was empowered "to ensure that the register of voters prepared and maintained in such form as to facilitate its use for the purpose of elections to local government councils, "while the State Electoral Commission had the power to "organize, undertake and supervise all elections to local government councils Within the State".

Under this arrangement, there would have quite substantial input by the Federal authorities if local government elections were to hold. As a first step, the National Assembly would have had to pass an electoral-law to authorize the revision of the register of .voters or the preparation of a new one. Secondly, the FEDECO should have prepared the voters register in such a way as to make it adaptable for local government elections. The Electoral Act was not passed until August 1982. Compilation of register of voters was not completed until just before the 1983 elections. No register of voters suitable for local government elections was prepared until the collapse of the Second Republic.

Thus both the Federal and State Governments should be held responsible for the inability to conduct local government elections throughout the Second Republic. The failure of the National Assembly to act quickly to pass the necessary electoral law which prevented FEDECO from performing its function in respect of local government elections was a major obstacle in the way of maintaining the existence of democratically elected local government councils. While it is true that generally the States did not are much enthusiasm for holding local government elections, it is equally true that any of them that wanted to do so would have been frustrated by the absence of a valid electoral register.

80

Thus, Nwabueze has argued that since it was obvious that elections could not be held for a long time, the councils should not have been dissolved and the management committees appointed. However, if the councils had been allowed to complete their terms, two options would have been open. These were:

i. an extension of the terms of office of the councilors by the House of Assembly through the amendment of the local government law; or

ii. the selection of a management committee by the Governor following the amendment of the local government law.

Of course, either line of action would still have been a contravention of the constitution. Given these circumstances, the second line of action might have been preferable as the Governors and members of the Houses were elected three years after the elections of the councilors in virtue of which it can be said that they had a newer mandate and represented a more accurate reflection of political preferences within the State.

The States performed even worse in the area of creation of new local government councils. Local government councils were proliferated with reckless abandon. By November 1982, only Rivers and Ondo States had maintained the number they inherited from the military. The original number 301 had increased by more than 250%. To make matters worse, the growth was achieved without compliance with the necessary legal requirements. The Constitution provided that: The person authorized by law to prescribe the area over which a local government council may exercise authority shall

a. define such areas as clearly as practicable; and

b. ensure, to the extent to which it may be reasonably justifiable, that in defining such area regard is paid to.

i. the common interest of the community in the area;

ii. traditional association of the community; and

iii. administrative convenience.

The local government laws of the States also had common provisions for regulating the creation of new local government councils. To effect any of the following changes:

81

a. an alteration of the boundaries of the area of authority of the Local Government;

b. the division of the area of the authority of the Local Government;

c. the transfer of any part of the area of the Local Government to another Local Government;

d. the merger of the area of authority of the Local Government with the area of authority of another Local Government; and

e. the formation of a new Local Government in the area of authority of an existing Local Government.

The Executive should have received specific proposals from the affected local government of sufficient number of persons in its area of authority. If the Executive considered that the proposals deserved to be entertained, then a Commission of Inquiry headed by a High Court Judge should be appointed to examine the proposals by holding sittings and hearing witnesses in the locality affected and to advice the Executive on what to do. The Executive was not obliged to accept the advice of the Commission of Inquiry but it was obligatory to appoint one.

By its own initiative, the Executive itself may:

a. change the name of the Local Government;

b. add to, take away from, or impose any conditions of the councils of the Local Government; or

c. alter the composition of the council of the Local Government.

d. site the location of the headquarters of the Local Government.

By giving at least 30 days notice of its intention by publication in the State Gazette, provides opportunity for the affected local government to express its opinion and ascertain the wishes of the citizens in the locality.

The essence of the constitutional and statutory provisions quoted extensively above is that in creating local government areas and making changes in their boundaries, the Executive has to consult local opinion. For some reasons which were not clear, the Governors were reluctant to follow the procedure in creating new local government areas.

On disbursement of local government funds, the picture was in no way different. The State Governments took liberties with the funds of the local government councils. The Revenue Allocation Act of 1981

82

prescribed that the local government councils should be granted 10% of the amount standing to the credit of the Federation Account annually. Additionally, the States were asked to make available to their local government councils 10% of their revenues. This demand on the States was more controversial because the total revenue of the States comprised;

a. their share of the Federation Account; and

b. internally-generated revenue.

Asking the States to give 10% of their total revenue to the local government councils meant making them benefit twice from the Federation Account at the expense of the States. A similar burden was no however placed on the Federal Government that actually received a greater proportion (58.5%) of the Federation Account. This made States to be hesitant in making their contributions to their local governments.

The 10% allocation from the Federation Account to the States for the benefit of their local government councils was made regularly every month at the meetings of the Finance Minister and Finance Commissioners. However, this fact was invariably hidden from the local government councils. Many States kept their councils in the dark of the exact size of the allocation in order to make it easier for the Government to divert some of the money for its own use. Many States did not establish the State Joint Local Government Account and also did not make the allocation to the local government councils from their total revenue. That is not all. Most of the States also made deductions from their local government councils' share of the Federation Account for services which had been transferred to the local governments unconstitutionally. All these practices clearly violated the constitution and the Revenue Allocation Act, 1981. Unfortunately, since there were no elected councils but Management Committees that depended on the State Governments for their existence, meaning that, the Governors could not be challenged on these abuses in the courts.

83

Summary a. Despite constitutional provisions, local government systems 'in

Nigeria between 1979-83 were not democratic. All Governors dissolved the elected local government councils and replaced them with nominated Management Committees. There were many problems' associated with the conduct of fresh elections into local governments.

b. Local governments were also proliferated without due regard to constitutional provisions. State also defaulted in the area of disbursement of revenue to local governments.

Post-Test “…. during the Second Republic, as far as local government is concerned… the constitution and laws were made to be ignored" Discuss.

Reference Alex Gboyega (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press.

84

LECTURE FOURTEEN

Local Government System under the Babangida Regime

Introduction Another history of local governments in Nigeria was opened under the Babangida regime. This lecture looks at the innovations to the local government system under the regime.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to highlight improvement measures which were introduced to local government administration under the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida. The period is another golden age as far as local government is concerned in Nigeria.

Pre-Test What innovations were introduced to the Nigerian local government system under the Babangida regime?

CONTENT When the Military again seized power in December 1983, many measures were taken to rectify all the ills perpetrated by the civilian regime. Among these measures as related to local government administration were dissolution of all Management Committees of the Second Republic with their replacement with appointed Senior Civil servants as Sole Administrators; and abolition of all the new local governments created between 1979 and 1983. The Federal Military Government also appointed

85

a 71-member committee headed by Alhaji Ibrahim Dasuki (one time Sultan of Sokoto) to look into issues relating to local government administration in May 1984.

The Dasuki committee submitted its report in September 1984. In its report, the committee pronounced it satisfied with the structure of local government introduced in 1976 and reasoned that the problems of the system were "operational". It endorsed the action of the Federal Military Government in reverting the number of local government councils to that which existed in 1976. It further recommended that a management committee be appointed to administer each council. The committee would want the question of new local governments examined every ten years.

The Buhari regime had not yet made up its mind on the recommendations of the Dasuki committee when it was overthrown in a coup that brought in General Ibrahim Babangida.

The Political Bureau in its own Report recommended among other things, the establishment of a National Local Government Commission without assigning any specific functions to such a body. The majority opinion also was that the then existing 301 local government areas should be retained while the minority view was that each Federal Constituency should be converted into a local government area. This minority position got the blessing of the Constituent Assembly and was subsequently adopted by the Federal Military Government.

Local Government administration in Nigeria was further liberalized under the Babangida regime. The regime had made its stand to return the country to civil rule known since its early days. It therefore came up with a Transition Time table. In the course of the transition period, elections into local government councils, in 1987 and 1989 were slated. These were implemented. The 1981 local government elections were held on a non-party basis. Political parties had not been formed then. However, the second elections were shifted to 1990 because of the complications that followed registration of political parties.

Innovations to local government administration under Babangida regime however began in October 1988. In his Independence Day broadcast, President Babangida announced measures which were designed to strengthen Local Government and make them fulfill their potentials as agencies of development. Local Governments were then to receive their revenue allocation directly from the federation account. Ministries of

86

Local Government in all the States of the federation were also scrapped. Local Government Inspectorate Departments were created in the offices of Governors in their stead. The regime also increased the number of local governments in the country. However, we should also point out that the regime promulgated Decree 15 of 1989 which empowered the President to dissolve any elected Local government that he is not dissatisfied with its management. Consequently some Local Governments were dissolved in Enugu, Kano and Kaduna States. President Babangida in his 1991 Budget speech confirmed the intention of his government to give autonomy to Local Governments. Local Governments were also to be more involved in provision of social services especially primary education. Consequently, Decree No.2 of 1991 transferred the responsibility for paying the salaries of Primary School teachers and management of primary education to Local Governments. In order to enhance the performance of this function, the share of the Local Governments from the federation account was increased from 15% to 20% from 1992 fiscal year while the share of the States was reduced by 5% from 30%. Also in the 1992 Budget speech, the President announced the abolition of the Local Government Service Commission. This step was however reversed in June of the same year. In 1988, the Federal Government came up with some measures to reform the civil service. These were mainly adopted at the Federal and State levels. On August 1st, 1988, the then Chief of general Staff, Vice Admiral Augustus Aikhomu inaugurated an eleven-member Technical Committee headed by Professor Humphrey Nwosu on the application of the reforms to the Local Government Service. The Committee recommended a selective application of the reforms measure to that level of government because of the peculiarities of Local Government. The highlights of the recommendations accepted by the government were:

1. that the Chairman should be the Chief Executive and Accounting Officer of his Council. He is accountable both when in and out of office like Minister and Commissioner in Federal and State governments.

2. the Vice-Chairman and Supervisory Councilors became political heads of their respective Departments, members of the Finance and General Purposes Committee and in that position constitute the local government cabinet.

87

3. the Secretary to the Council remains a career officer with tenure of office, working conditions and functions as provided in the local government employees service scheme; he remains also the Head of Service of the Council and Chief Administrative Adviser to the Local Government and to the Finance and General Purpose Committee. He is also a signatory to the Council cheques.

4. the appointment of a qualified Accountant as Council's Internal Auditor with functions similar to the Auditor-General's in the Federal and State Governments.

On 24 May, 1991, guidelines for introducing presidentialism to the local government level were published. The idea was to bring this tier of government in line with others. The guidelines were backed up by Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provisions (Amendment) Decrees No. 10 and 23 of 1991. The new arrangements are as follows,

i. The Executive arm of the local Government (which will now be, referred to as the Local Government) shall consist of the Chairman. Vice Chairman and Supervisors who shall be distinct from the Local Government Council (Legislature).

ii. the Executive powers were vested in the Chairman and such powers can be exercised directly by, him or on his behalf through the Vice Chairman. Supervisors or other officers of local government.

iii. The Chairman appoints the Secretary to the Local Government who performs duties assigned to him by the Chairman in addition to being the Chief Administrative Adviser to the executive arm.

iv. The Chairman also appoints the supervisors after consulting the legislative arm.

The functions of the executive arm are: a. preparation of Local Government annual budget which are then

debated, approved and possibly amended by the Local Government Council.

b. formulation of projects and programmes in the Local Government annual budget.

c. preparation of monthly statements of income and expenditure which must be presented to the legislative arm for examination and scrutiny.

88

d. implementation of the Local Government Annual Budget through faithfully executing projects and programmes approved in the budget.

2. The term Local Government Council now refers to the Legislative arm of the local government. Hitherto, the description referred to the entire geo-political area which will not be known as Local Government Area.

i. the Local Government Council is to be presided over by the "Leader" and "Deputy Leader" who will be' selected from among the councilors themselves and will have the same powers as the "Speaker" and "Deputy Speaker" of the States Houses of Assembly,

ii. The Leader or his Deputy vacates office.

a. if he ceases to be a councilor or by the dissolution of the Council.

b. if he is removed from office by a resolution of the council.

The functions of the Local Government Council are

i. Law-making, debating and passing Local Government legislation.

ii. debating, approving and possibly a mending Local Government annual budget, subject to the chairman's veto which could be overridden by a two-third majority of the council.

iii. vetting and monitoring the implementation of projects and programmes in the Local Government annual budget.

iv. examining and debating monthly statements of income expenditure rendered to it by executive arm of the Local Government.

v. impeaching the Loca1 Government chairman who has committed an impeachable offence in accordance with the constitution.

vi. advising, consulting and liaising with the Loca1 Government chairman who is the head of the executive arm of the Local Government and

vii. performing such other functions as may be assigned to it, from time to time, by the House of Assembly of the State in which it is situated.

89

The supervisors are the equivalents of commissioners at the local government level. They discharge specific functions under the portfolios assigned to them. They are appointed from without the council. However, if a councilor is appointed a supervisor, he has to relinquish his seat in the Council. The Chairman also appoints the Secretary to the Local Government and the latter holds office at his pleasure. He vacates office with the chairman.

Summary a. The Babangida regime introduced many innovations to local

government system in Nigeria. One of these innovations is that local governments will now be receiving their allocations directly from the, Federal Account. Ministries of Local Government have also been abolished.

b. Local Government has responsibilities for management of primary education transferred to them.

c. Presidentialism has been introduced at the local-government level. We now have the executive separate from the legislature. The term Local Government Council now refers to the legislative arm while the whole geographic area is now described as Local Government Area,

Post-Test Examine the recent developments in the Nigerian local government system.

References Ayoade J.A.A. et al. (eds): Grassroots Democracy and the New

Local Government System in Nigeria. Abuja Centre for Democratic Studies.

Federal Republic of Nigeria (1988): The Implementation Guidelines on the Application of Civil Service Reforms in the Local Government Service.

Local Government (Basic Constitutional and Transitional Provisions). Decree 10 of 1991.

At the end of this lecture, you should be able to The Local Government Education Authority Etc. Decree No.3 of 1991.

90

LECTURE FIFTEEN

Local Administration in France

Introduction There is the need for us to know the practice in other countries. Some parts of our previous discussions have however given us insights into practice in some countries. For instance, we said earlier that the tiered structure of local government that operated in Eastern and Western Regions in the 1950s were borrowed from the United Kingdom. Similarly, the Council Manager System operated between 1973 and 1976 in Western State originated in the United States of America.

This in part, justifies our discussion of local administration in France in this lecture.

Objective At the end of this lecture, you should be able to provide a comparative perspective to local government.

Pre- Test What are the main features of local administration in France?

CONTENT There is no local government in the strict sense of the word in France. Rather, what we have is a system of local administration. An author captures the situation in France in the following words:

91

“... in France, local government forms a more integral part of the administrative system than it does in Britain. A marked characteristic of the French system... is the close link between the organs of central and local government, and the subordination of the latter to the former.”

This relationship has always been there in France. However, local administration as it exists today had its origin in the Napoleonic era. In 1799 when Napoleon organized his government, he established a centralized administrative state. He tried hard to prevent the emergence of independent sources of local power which might challenge his authority. However, since some local administration was necessary as a matter of convenience, he ensured that it was closely linked to the government in Paris. His primary objective was to install subordinates throughout the provinces on whom he could count to secure his political power and to implement his plans for economic development. He therefore substituted administrative decentralization of government services for the representative bodies of local government which had been between 1789 and 1799.

The prefectoral system (French local administration) was set up by loi du 28 pluviose an 8 (17 February 1800). This law spelt out the basic structures and offices of the system. Before we examine the main features of this law however, we shall consider the main principles upon which the system rests.

These features as Ridley and Blondel have pointed out are

1. France is strictly a unitary state. The state is composed of organs (i.e. branches of government) which are found in Paris and in the provinces. However they are all parts of a unity. The officials of the various organs formed the administration of the country. The local branches of the administration consequently are outposts of the central government, both in a legal sense and in terms of practical politics.

2. The relationship between the different branches is the same as the relationship between different officials: it is one of a hierarchy. The local branches are the subordinates of the central branches in the administrative hierarchy of the state. A clear chain of command

92

links the minister in Paris with his lowest subordinate in the remotest village.

3. The system of government is administrative rather than representative in character. Therefore, the stress is on executive action and efficiency rather than on deliberation. Local agents are entrusted with the execution of decisions which, even if only in broad terms, are taken at the top of the chain. The emphasis therefore is placed on individual executives, responsible for the implementation of policy, rather than on councils which could make policy.

4. Since all services are state services, there is no need for a rigid distinction between those which are central and those which-are local in character. Some matters are decided locally, others centrally, but this is an administrative arrangement which does not need to be denied by law. Thus central or local character of any particular service is a question of emphasis rather than of precise definition.

The broad framework created by Napoleon has survived subsequent changes of regime and underlies the present system of local government in France. We now consider the main features of the system.

The first is that, the law established the geographical units to be used for all local administrative purposes. Two territorial divisions which had been created after the French Revolution, the department and the commune, together with an intermediate division, the arrondissement" were adopted as the basic units of the prefectoral system. France is divided into 90 departments, subdivided into over 450 arrondissements, and about 38,000 communes.

Secondly, an official appointed by and responsible to the central government should direct all administration within each unit: the prefect, a representative of the Government, responsible for the department: the sub-prefects are to carry out the instructions of the Prefect in the arrondisements; or have the orders passed on to the Mayors who are the subordinates in the communes. All of them are agents of the central government. At the apex of this hierarchy, is the Minister of the Interior who directed all members on behalf of the whole government. The whole process is appropriately described by Chapter in the following words:

93

“The Prefect... transmits orders to the sub-prefect; this latter, to the Mayors, of towns, boroughs and villages... in such a way that the chain of command descends without interruption from the Minister to the subject and transmits the law and orders of the Government... with the rapidity of electric fluid. “

The prefect has a key role in this chain. Article 3 of the law stated categorically that ‘The Prefect alone is responsible for the administration of the department’. Indeed, initially the Prefect appointed the Mayors. In 1882 Mayors began to be elected by the councils of the commune. Each of the Prefect, Sub-prefects and Mayors are assisted by an elected advisory council. The Prefect performs four categories of functions. They are stated below:

1. He is the representative of the state. This confers on him the right to exercise considerable powers on his own initiative in emergencies. He also wears a uniform on ceremonial occasions and takes precedence over all other persons in the department.

2. He is the representative of not merely his own ministry, but of the whole government. Officially, he heads all government services in the department and coordinates them. His functions are both political and administrative.

3. He is the representative of the Ministry of the Interior, the ministry directly responsible for the supervision of local authorities. He is the middle link of the chain stretching from the central administration to the commune. He supervises the activities of mayors and municipal councils.

4. He is the chief executive of local government at the level of department. His position is independent of the departmental council of which he is an agent since he is appointed by and responsible to the central government.

The government exerts a lot of influence over local affairs through the prefects. Government has complete discretion in appointing prefects; they may even be chosen from outside the civil service. They can be dismissed at discretion. Normally however, the prefectoral career is a regular civil service career. It is open to graduates of the Ecole Nationale d' Administration. A member of the corps starts as a sub-prefect in a minor sub-prefecture and gradually moves up to more important sub-prefectures

94

before becoming a prefect. They are frequently transferred to prevent them from forming too close ties with a particular area.

The French Mayors are strong executives. To some extent, they are "little prefects". Like the prefect, the Mayor is a representative of the state as well as the head of his local community. While exercising his powers (which include enforcement of law and order, registration of births and deaths and conducting marriage ceremonies and electoral registration), he is in administrative subordination to the prefect who can suspend him if he refuses to carry out his duties or if he acts improperly.

The Mayor is in a strong position vis-à-vis his council. Even though he is elected by the council from its own members, he is elected for the duration of the council (normally six years) and cannot be dismissed by it. In the day-to-day administration of the commune, he has independent powers in certain matters in which the council has no voice. He is the originator of most proposals and schemes and is responsible for carrying them out.

All officers in the departments are members of the national civil service. Like the prefect, they act in dual capacity as agents of the central government and as agents of the department. There are two categories of such. The first consists of officials directly subordinate to the prefect and working in the prefecture. They are recruited locally and although members of a national service, they remain in the same department unless they themselves' wish to move. The second group of officials comprises members of the technical services. They are formally subordinate to the prefect, but in practice they enjoy a considerable degree of independence and tend to remain under the control of their own ministries Paris. They move from one department to another and also spend part of their career in Paris.

The council of the department is elected by universal suffrage for a period of six years. It is a weak body whose power consists in voting the budget prepared by the prefect and the officials of the external services even though the law states that 'it decides upon the affairs of the department'. The council meets for only two sessions a year lasting altogether not more that six weeks. There is a standing committee of four to seven members which meets once a month and supervises the execution of the budget and can call emergency meetings of the council if it thinks this necessary.

95

The council of the commune, mostly known as the municipal council is also elected by universal suffrage. Elections are held every six years. It is stronger than the departmental council even though it is equally weak vis-à-vis the Mayor and central administration. Like the departmental council, it can be dissolved by the government. It can decide on general matters of policy but is has no right to interfere in the running of the communal administration. The latter is reserved for the municipalite i.e. the Mayor, his assistants and officials. The municipal council also meets periodically - four times in a year: February, May, August and November: each of these sessions last about a fortnight. In the area of functions, French departments and communes have by law been given the general powers to 'deal with the affairs' of their community. They can provide and service which they deem necessary or useful for the welfare of the community, under their general powers without waiting for an act of parliament. The power to administer local areas means not merely running existing services but providing for changing services as well including the right to establish new services as new needs arise. It is however compulsory to provide some services. On the one hand there are national services which are administered by local authorities e.g. communes have to organise the registration of births, deaths and marriages and electoral registration. On the other hand, there are local services which are legally binding on local authorities to provide e.g. all communes must provide funds for police services and minor roads: large communes must also provide funds for housing departments must provide funds for roads and public assistance. Local authorities may also provide other services of a permissive character. For instance, depending on needs and size, communes may have' parks, baths, libraries or municipal slaughter houses: they provide child care services and hospitals: they run transport services and other public utilities etc. It would however be misleading to think that local authorities can in fact establish any service which they think to be in the local interest. The right to establish new services is limited by the general framework of central government. Local authorities rely mainly on taxation and on grants to finance their expenditure. The central government gives a relatively small general grant and a considerable number of specific percentage grants. Local authorities can tax real estates and some relative luxuries (e.g. dogs and

96

pianos) but their main source of income is the turnover tax, a small-percentage (1 or 2%) levied on commercial transactions taking place in the locality. Councils do not collect taxes but they decide the level of taxation. This is because all taxes, whether central or local, are collected by central government officials. The consequence of this arrangement is that government representatives have a direct opportunity of checking the accounts of the communes which increases their dependence on central authorities.

Summary a. Local Administration system in France is known as prefecture. The

system forms an integral part of central government. b. The prefect is the local authority and is appointed by the central

government. He is assisted by sub-Prefects in the arrondisements and Mayors in the communes.

c. All officers in the departments are employees of the central government.

d. There are representative bodies in each tier of the local government who however provide mainly advisory services.

Post-Test How would you describe grassroots administration in France - local government or local administration? References

Ridley F. and Blondel J. (1969): Public Administration in France. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Howard Maclin (1977): The Prefect in French Public Administration. London: Croom Helm.

97

Bibliography Adamolekun, Ladipo (1983): Public Administration: A Nigerian

and Comparative perspective. London: Longman. Barber, M.P. (1972): Local Government. London: MacDonald & Evans Ltd. Federal Republic of Nigeria (1987): Report of the political Bureau. Gboyega, Alex (1987): Political Values and Local Government in

Nigeria. Lagos: Malthouse Press. Hill, Dilys M. (1974): Democratic Theory and Local Government.

London: George Allen &.Unwin Ltd. Jones, George (1988): New Approaches to the Study of Central

Local Government Relationships Aldershot: Averbury Dower Publishing Company Ltd.

Machin, Howard (1977): The Prefect in French Public Administration. London: Groom Helm.

Nigerian Political Science Association (1987): Alternative political Futures for Nigeria.

Ola, Robert F. (1984): Local Administration in Nigeria. London: Kegan Paul International.

Orewa.. G.O. and Adewumi, J.B. (1983): Local Government in Nigeria. The Changing Scene. Benin City: Ethiope Publishing Corporation.

Oyediran, Oyeleye (1988): Essay on Local Government and Administration in Nigeria. Lagos. Project Publications Ltd.

Ridley. F. and Blondel, J. B. (1969): Public Administration in France. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Riggs Fred. W. (1964): Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Rondinelli, Dennis et al. (1984): Decentralization in Developing Countries. Washington D.C: World Bank.

Seley, Ivor, H. (1978): Local Government Explained. London: Macmillan.

Wraith, Ronald (1964): Local Government in West Africa, London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.