Importaciones del Ecuador

government administrative system not to bring governance closer to the people but to meet the selfish desires of themselves. The politicians were also using the system to oppress their political opponents.

3.3

LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN NORTHERN NIGERIA

As noted earlier, Lord Lugard first introduced Indirect Rule in Northern Nigeria on January 1, 1900. By this means, the British Government was using the administrative structures already in existence in the emirates in Northern Nigeria to reach the natives. As this system of administration progressed, the educated class amongst the natives noted that the emirs were becoming too powerful and uncontrollable. This prompted the Northern Region Government to enact the Native Authority Law in 1954. By virtue of the provisions of section 6 of this law, five types of Native Authorities were created as follows:

(i) a chief or other person in council appointed by the Premier;

(ii) a chief or other person and council appointed by the Premier;

(iii) a council appointed by the Minister for Local Government;

(iv) a group of persons appointed by the Minister for Local Government; and (v) a chief or other person appointed by the Premier.

The Minister for Local Government was empowered under the new law to determine the

composition of the above councils and to make standing orders for the regulation of their

meetings. This was done to dilute the powers of the Emirs in the administration of the emirates.

  Also, in 1956, the Northern Regional Government enacted the Kaduna capital Territory Law which empowered the Premier to appoint an Administrator for the Kaduna capital Territory. The Administrator was to be responsible directly to the Governor-in-Council.

While commenting on this development in Northern Nigeria, Dr T.O. Elias said:

“By middle of 1962, there were 39 Native Authorities constituted as Chiefs-in-Council and 11 as Chiefs-and-Council. By 1955, some 120 Native Authorities and about half that number of Treasuries had been established in Northern Nigeria”

.

This was done not for the overall benefit of the ordinary man but to satisfy the political aspirations of the politicians. The people became disenchanted and craved for a better system of local administration. This led to allegations and counter allegations prompting the setting up of various commissions of enquiry to probe the finances of the local governments.

Reason for the failure of indirect rule

1. It has been contended that there was nothing wrong with the use of indigenous institutions, chiefs and rulers in the then newly established local administration, for the was the existing governing structure before the advent of colonialism; but there was there was certainly something wrong with the quality of these people expected to run these traditional institutions in ‘modern governance’- Indirect rule system. Very few of the traditional rulers or chiefs, if any at all, had western education and exposure in modern governance to be able to run this newly introduced local administration. Ayoade expressed this better when he said that ‘The policies were transmitted to the traditional rulers who hardly understood the logic and rationale of the policies. Nevertheless, they transmitted those policies to their people and expected compliance”

.

5   Ibid Page 110 

6   Ayoade John A.A. “The Development of Democratic Local Government in Nigeria”. Aborisade and Mundi   (Ed.) Local Government in Nigeria and the United States: Learning from comparison, Ife: Local 

Government Publication series, 1995, P. 19 

  ^2. Besides lack of western education necessary for these indigenous rulers to understand their ‘superintendents’, some roles expected of them to perform by the new system were also repugnant to the tradition of the people. For instance, the Native Authorities were expected “to be able to levy and collect taxes for the salaries of the chiefs and other officials and services of the authorities”

. But while communities were already accustomed to this, others were not; though they also had their own traditional ways of carrying out such services. In brief, their lack of exposure to Western education and modern governance hampered their administrative and service delivery capacity in the Native Authority System.

3.4 Local Government system in Lagos

Lagos was a colony of the British and it was treated separately from its adjoining regional government of Western Nigeria. It was initially administered by a Health Board which was established in 1869. In 1919, the Health Board was replaced with a Town Council consisting of elected members. The Lagos Township ordinance was enacted in 1941 and this was amended in 1948 to give Lagos a first class township, status with a Council consisting of the commissioner of the Colony as President, five elected members representing the five recognized wards. The Council also had eight nominated members of whom three were Nigerians. One woman represented the interest of women in the Council and another was a white cap chief representing the Oba of Lagos. The two remaining were government officials. Lagos attained the status of a municipal under the Lagos Local Government Law of 1950 but the day to day administration of the council was supervised by the Treasurer and the Town Clerk.

As can be deduced from the discussion of local government administration in various regions of the country up to and including the termination of the first republic, there was no uniform system of local government administration in Nigeria. Each regional government adopted the system

best suited for its purpose. The regional governments had financial, legislative, executive and judicial control over the local governments. This was so to the extent that the Premiers were dethroning Obas who were not ready to do the will of the regional governments. A case in point is that of Ekundare vs. Governor in Council & another

Governor in Council dissolved the Ilesha Urban District Council on the mere allegation that it passed a resolution calling on the Owa of Ijesha to abdicate. The Plaintiff’s counsel, Sir Frank Soskice contended:

(1) That the Ilesha Urban District Council had a right to pass the resolution which was only an invitation to the Owa of Ijesha to abdicate.

(2) That if it was held that the Council had no power to pass the resolution, as long as the Council had properly discharged its functions laid down by law, the Governor-in-Council had no right to dissolve the Council.

(3) That the Governor-in-Council was satisfied on the facts before deciding to dissolve the Council and that therefore the Governor-in-Council did not act in accordance with Section 87 subsection (1) (b) of the Local Government Law, Cap. 68, in dissolving the Council.

Chief Rotimi Williams for the Defendant contended:

(1) That no power was vested in the Ilesha Urban District Council to pass a resolution urging the abdication of the Oba as the Owa of Ijeshaland, who can only be removed in accordance with Native Law and Custom and subject to the provisions of the Chiefs Cap.

19 and that the resolution passed by the Council was ultra vires and therefore unlawful.

(2) That as the Plaintiff has led no evidence to support the allegation of bias against the

in-Council, the presumption is in favour of the Defendants that the

Governor-in-Council was satisfied that the council was not discharging its duties under the law

before it decided to dissolve the Council.

(3) That as the decision to dissolve the Council was an executive as distinct from a judicial action, the question whether there were grounds upon which the Governor-in-Council was so satisfied or whether the Governor-in-Council ought to have been satisfied is not one which can be subject of litigation in Court.

(4) That the Plaintiff has no locus standi to institute the proceedings.

It was held that in law, the action of the Governor-in-Council in dissolving the Ilesha Urban District Council was an executive function and could not be questioned in Court. The case was therefore dismissed.

This, again demonstrated the political intrigues between and amongst the various political parties contending for power in Lagos State.

4.0 Conclusion

We have been examining the place of local governments in colonial Nigeria. We have also examined the dynamics of the structure in the different regions, and in Lagos as well as a historical review of the development of local government system in Nigeria. What can be deduced from the discussion and in the light of the Local governance in Nigeria has

undergone several changes from the beginning of colonial rule up until the Nigeria civil war. These changes have changed the perception and style of governance by a great deal

5.0 Summary

Local government has taken different forms from one period to the other in Nigeria. We have pre-colonial experience culminating in different traditional systems; from the Yoruba, Igbo, and Hausa systems.

6.0Tutor Marked Assignment

1. Critically evaluate the system of local government administration in pre-colonial Nigeria.

7.0Further Reading/References

1. Alex Gboyega. “Democracy and Development: The Imperative of Local Good Governance”. An Inaugural lecture, 2003;

Ibadan: The Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ibadan, 2003, 2 Administrative Law in Nigeria, Iluyomade & Eka

3. Ayoade John A.A. “The Development of Democratic Local Government in Nigeria”.

Aborisade and Mundi (Ed.) Local Government in Nigeria and the United States: Learning from comparison, Ife: Local Government Publication series, 1995,

MODULE 4

UNIT 1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT

UNIT 2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORMS IN NIGERIA

UNIT 3 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION IN THE REGIONS