Prof Peter Umeadi was All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) presidential candidate in the 2023 general election and former Chief Judge of Anambra State. In this interview, he speaks on the powers of governors in Nigeria and its implications on the country’s democratic development, among other issues, ANAYO EZUGWU writes
Governors seem to overbearing powers in the polity that they decide presidential election results as well as control the local governments. What are the implications of this to the nation’s democracy?
Yes, the governors of states of Nigeria wield and use incompatible powers in deciding the outcome of political exercises. They sponsor their cronies as delegates to elect candidates.
You may be nominated or elected by your ward as a delegate but on the D-day, you approach the accreditation table only to find a different passport photograph against your name. You are told that you have entered the wrong hall to vote for the candidate.
You protest that it is you standing before them and they signal law enforcement officers and bouncers to manhandle you and push you out of the line. You and those who selected you are disenfranchised.
That is coming from the governor who has sworn to uphold the constitution and work for a free and fair election. The governor holds on to state finances meant for the local government councils. All they do is pay salaries to staff and spend the rest without recourse to the councils.
They also collect and hold and spend monies from entities under the constitutional control of the local government councils, from abattoirs, markets, motor parks to public conveniences.
The body of administrative law developed around local authorities who control levies, rates, fees and permits, including who gets what grants, terms, duration, tenure, termination, period and processes.
The grouping of governors is so headstrong that the unreported judgement of the Supreme Court in Suit No. SC/CV/343/2024 delivered on July 11 on local government autonomy did not cage them. They bandied together and obtained a delay in the execution of the judgement. Thereafter, they took a group photograph with the President to show their strength.
Even you would have noticed the rash of local government elections hurriedly put together to continue receiving the revenue allocations which the local governments won. The sitting governors are winning all the local government seats, including councillorships wherever these questionable elections have been held.
Remember that the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) won their case filed on section 121 (3) of the Constitution and financial autonomy for the judiciary. The governors refused to implement it.
JUSUN went on strike. The mainstream media lost an opportunity there to prominently join the struggle against the governors. These are not democratic. We need to put a stop to them.
The governors should release their grip on the polity and allow the will of the people to be realised. It is time for them to cut their coats according to their clothes. For the press, I would say your questions are better late than never. I, however, warn that it would take many more hammering on the nail to drive it in.
Is this the norm in other democracies for sub-national entities to band together?
Assuming you are referring to governors of states in Nigeria bandying together, the answer is no. It is a characteristic found only in Nigeria and for all the wrong reasons.
There is nothing wrong with the governors of particular parties meeting in groups. Here, we have meetings of Northern Governors and Southern Governor, and the six geographical zones have their governors’ forums too.
Partisan politics are run based on political parties. Section 21 of the Electoral Act 2022 provides for every political party to submit a list of candidates to sponsor at the elections.
Case law says that party primaries and presentation of candidates are internal matters for the party, it does not say it should be hijacked or given to the highest bidder.
There is no need for the dichotomy. They are against the people. The governors come together to oppose issues, which are seen to alleviate the living conditions and standards of the people.
They oppose the minimum wage, judiciary, House of Assembly, local government and financial autonomy. Even within a political party, they create groups of governors. In other democracies, one gets elected and remains in power based on merit.
Experience indeed ranks high in qualification for political office. It is your performance and delivery of democracy dividends which recommend you for another term, not the company you keep.
We have seen Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak come and go as prime ministers of the United Kingdom. Kier Starmer is in now. Those movements are functions of democracy. The ballots are respected.
The results are transparent and embraced and the polity moves on. Here, more qualified competitors are eliminated only on the ground that they are not governors.
At one time, it became a fad for the retired governors to move on to the Senate. In other democracies, you are rewarded or rejected according to your previous performance.
The governors should release their grip on the polity and allow the will of the people to be realised. It is time for them to cut their coats according to their clothes
Does this phenomenon have any positive impact in terms of checks and balances on the executive at the centre or is it for selfish political interest?
The president, vice-president, Senate president and Secretary to Government of the Federation are all former governors.
A majority of the ministers are former governors yet you do not see them in front explaining the policies of their ministries to the angry public as their counterparts do the world over.
Here, all questions are directed to the president. The media anointed the frontline of the presidential campaign in 2023 and paraded former governors.
Peter Umeadi of APGA, Adewale Adebayo of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), Omoyele Sowore of African Action Congress (AAC) and Chris Imumolen of Accord were not governors but all had profound things to say about how to change our polity. We did not have the coercion that the governors deployed.
There are groups of governors’ wives, speakers of Houses of Assembly, Attorneys General of states, and secretaries to state governments, all working for the governors to stifle opposition and sink all persons who are not in government seeking political power.
All these are possible since our people are impoverished and bought over with funds, which are meant to take care of them in the first place.
And I will ask you: If the governors band together to assist the centre, where would the centre find the will to call the governors to order? I understand and believe in enlightened selfinterest. However, those are not what we see the governors pursuing, when they come together.
