Last week, Governors and Governors-Elect from the All Progressive Congress (APC) visited President-Elect Muhammadu Buhari to make a request. They wanted the new Administration to provide additional funds to States so that they could pay salaries. The motive for the visit was questionable. If they were serving Governors, they have explanations to make on why they had not been paying salaries from their statutory allocations. If they were newly elected, it lacks elegance to start soliciting before they take over power and study the reality they are confronted with. Immediately after the visit, Governor Ibrahim Shema of Katsina State started running daily full-page adverts challenging his colleagues. His adverts starts with the news report that “State governments cannot pay salaries”. He then presents his own record – COUNT ME OUT (HE SCREAMS). “I have money to pay salaries, pensions, gratuities, contractors and scholarships. I have been doing that for eight years without fail. Plus I have not borrowed one kobo from any body. KATSINA NO PROBLEM!!!”
We need to think seriously about Shema’s argument, assuming it’s true. He is saying that the allocations States receive, (and Katsina is not a resource control State receiving extra allocations from the 13% derivation provision), are sufficient to meet all their obligations if properly utilized. Those States that are not meeting their obligations are by implication looting resources and diverting them to their personal use. The Minister of the Economy and Finance, Ngozi Okonjo Iweala has also come out to say Governors who are not paying salaries must bear direct responsibility for their action and not shift the blame or burden to the Federal Government. Over half the States in the country have taken massive loans, which they have not used for the development of their States and left a huge debt burden to future generations, it’s the height of irresponsibility. Indeed some Governors are still taking huge loans just a couple of months before leaving office with the clear intention of stealing the money. While there are a few good governors, most of our State governors are irresponsibly corrupt and reckless and govern without any due consideration to the public good. The consolidation of our democracy would require much more focus and accountability demands on State governors.
The reason why so many State governors behave in an irresponsible manner is that there are no checks on their powers at the State level. State Houses of Assembly are very weak and they operate at the beck and call of governors. Speakers and House Leaderships that try to challenge governors are impeached unceremoniously through the machinations of State governors. On two occasions, Constitutional provisions to strengthen the autonomy of State Houses of Assembly have been thrown out by the same organs acting on instructions from their governors that they must vote that they do not want autonomy. The fact that Sate Houses of Assembly have twice voted to say they do not want more autonomy to do their jobs better is the clearest sign to date that they are not functional entities but mere rubber stamps for their governors. The judiciary at the State level is also not as strong and independent as the Federal Judiciary and they too are unable to check the powers of their governors. State governors have therefore become tin gods who can do as they please. Above all, they believe they are not accountable before anybody, not even the citizens.
Since 1999, State governors have been even more powerful outside their States. Those from the ruling party have since 1999 obtained the right to be the sole appointees of ministers from their States. This is in complete contravention with the Constitution, which gives the powers to choose ministers to the President. State governors have used this power very irresponsibly. From day one, the strategic ambition of most governors is that no one should become as powerful as they are in their States. They have therefore deliberately chosen and imposed on successive presidents incompetent and weak ministers who cannot perform creditably. They want ministers who are servile to them and have no capacity to grow their political influence at the Federal and State levels and would therefore never be a future threat. That has been the main reason the successive Presidents are saddled with incompetent ministers. To have a few good hands on board, presidents have had to rely on their own tiny allocation of six ministers – one per zone, and states with opposition party governors where the president could dare pick his choice. The governors therefore bear significant responsibility for successive incompetent administrations that have ruled and ruined Nigeria.
Over the weekend, there are reports that the President-Elect has decided he will not have ministers imposed on him by governors from his party. That he has decided to appoint his ministers himself in conformity with the powers given to him by the Constitution. If this story were true, it would be his first correct step in moving towards good governance at the level of the Federal Government. Our Constitution gives presidents the powers to constitute their administrations and it is correct that they should use such powers to ensure that they have the best people who can deliver on their electoral promises to the people.
Of course the governors are powerful and will fight to retain their powers. They would like to continue to be able to play god. We cannot deepen our democracy if the governors continue their joint role of chief executive and party leaders in their States who can do anything they like. As citizens, civil society and political parties, we have to design mechanisms and processes to hold governors to be accountable for the public trust given to them. One important element in the elections we have just been through is that voters considered performance and non-performance in the electoral choices they made. It is important that we do not just wait until the next elections to sanction those that did not perform. We must put in place robust accountability mechanisms to monitor the performance of both the President and State governors.
