The suspended 17 local government Chairmen in Plateau State have said they remain chairmen and councillors of their respective areas and until the court determines otherwise.
The 17 suspended local government chairmen made their position known during a press briefing on Friday at the Nigeria Union of Journalists NUJ state Secretariat in Jos, the state capital.
State Chairman of the Association of Local Government of Nigeria, ALGON and Chairman of Shendam local government area, Alexander Naantuam who read the text of the association, described their suspension by the Plateau State governor, Caleb Mutfwang as brazen affront to the law.
“Our attention was drawn to a press release issued by Gyang Berry, Special Assistant Media, to the Governor, conveying the purported decision of the Governor of Plateau State, approving with immediate effect the suspension of the 17 Local Government Area Structures to pave the way for the investigation being carried out by the Government.
“Having painstakingly gone through the said press release, we make the following preliminary observations:
“The Governor did not cite any constitutional or statutory support, enabling him to suspend what they described as ‘17 local government area structures,” a phrase which does not lend itself to easy comprehension.
“If we do indeed understand the actions contemplated by the state Assembly, it was a mere resolution, which is advisory to the Governor. In any case, such advise will not override existing legislations establishing the Local Government councils, as enshrined in the constitution, which is domesticated by relevant laws on the same subject matter in Plateau state.
“We have no force of brute power, but we believe in the force of the law, and we believe that the force of the law will prevail.
“We will report this brazen affront to the law to the court, to which we had run for protection. We have abiding faith in the judiciary to invoke its disciplinary powers to overturn this unconstitutional behaviour. In the eyes of the law, we remain chairmen and councillors, respectively, until the court determines otherwise.
“That democratically elected local government council does not exist at the pleasure, whims, or caprice of either the governor or the House of Assembly.
“The local government is not a mere parastatal of the state. Section 7(1) of the Constitution guarantees the autonomy of local government councils. So, on our mandate, we stand.
“The resolution of the House upon which the Governor allegedly acted is said to be rooted in a petition by an unknown and unascertainable person alleging undisclosed financial improprieties or malfeasance against the 17 Chairmen and members of the Legislative Councils of the 17 Local Government Councils.
“The petition was not served on any of us. This is nothing but a Machiavellian ambush to achieve a premeditated goal. In the light of the foregoing:
In any event, the power to remove the chairmen for any gross misconduct does not reside with the House of Assembly or the Governor.
“The procedure for removing a local government chairman is explicitly set out in Section 37 of the local government council law. Just like the Governor, who cannot be suspended from office because he is the chief executive of the state, so it is with the chairmen of local government councils.
“Before the purported suspension, the 17 local government chairmen and the legislative councils had approached the court, invoking its interpretative jurisdiction to determine, among others, whether the governor has the power to terminate, suspend, truncate, or disturb their tenure in light of Section 7 of the constitution, which states that “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed.”
“Pursuant to the said suit, we filed a motion for interlocutory injunction seeking the court’s order of interlocutory injunction restraining the governor, either by himself or his privies, from disturbing, disputing, terminating, suspending, or truncating the tenure of the local government chairmen and the legislative council. The said motion was served on the Governor on June 1, 2023, at 12:43 p.m.
“The manifest implication of the above is that, having had notice of the said motion, the Governor was under an obligation by law to await the decision of the court on the said motion on notice for interlocutory injunction. Instead, the Governor poked his hand into the eye of the law. He resorted to self-help. He treated the court process with disdain and went ahead to act in spite of it”. Parts of the statement read.