Supreme Court throws out Osun govt’s suit over LG allocations

The Supreme Court has dismissed a suit filed by the Attorney General of Osun State seeking to compel the Federal Government to release allocations owed to the state’s Local Governments.

In a six-to-one majority judgment, the apex court ruled that the Attorney General lacked the legal standing (locus standi) to file the suit on behalf of the Local Governments. The court emphasized that the Local Governments are legal entities with the capacity to pursue their claims independently.

The lead majority judgment was prepared and read on Friday Justice Mohammed Idris.

Justice Idris held that the plaintiff failed to establish that there was any cause of action capable of invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court as provided under Section 232(1) of Construction.

Justice Idris further held that from the facts of the case, the issue in dispute was about the alleged failure of the Federal Government to release funds standing to the credit of Osun State Local Governments in the Federation account, and as such, there is no dispute between Osun State and the FG to have allowed the state’s AG to approach the Supreme Court.

While distinguishing this Osun case from that of the AG, Abia and others v. AG of the Federation, in which the Supreme Court ordered the direct payment of allocations to Local Governments across the federation, Justice Idris held that such suit over withheld Local Government funds ought to have been filed by the affected Local Governments.

Justice Idris however frowned at the failure of the Federal Government to put in place all necessary measures to give effect to the Supreme Court ‘s judgment in AG, Abia and others v. AG of the Federation, mandating direct payment of allocations to Local Governments across the federation.

He held that by the judgment, the Federal Government was under obligation to ensure that all funds standing to the credit of Local Governments in the federation account are sent directly to them without being withheld under any excuse.

Justice Emmanuel Agim wrote the dissenting judgment in which he disagreed with the position of the six other Justices on the seven-member panel.