Ex-Council Officials who served between December 2008 and October 2010 under former Governor Segun Oni are yet to get their full benefits despite the Supreme Court judgement of December 9, 2016 in their favour.
The Supreme Court had ordered the full payment of all the Ex- Officials of the 16 Council Areas sacked by the Government of Dr. Kayode Fayemi on October 29, 2010 in Ekiti State.
Despite theCourt ruling, the Ekiti State Government had only paid ex- Chairmen leaving other ex- Officials who had served along with them including ex- Vice-Chairmen, Councillors and supervisory Councillors among others.
The Ekiti State government under same Gov. Fayemi who sacked elected Council Officials and others in 2010 had claimed that, the Supreme Court ruling of 2016 which was also affirmed by same Court in 2019 only ordered it to pay ex-Chairmen in isolation, hence another judicial battles between other ex-Council Officials and the State government.
The Case was again came up on Monday 28, 2024 at the National Industrial Court of Nigeria Akure Division because of the failure of Ekiti State Government to comply with the Supreme Court judgement on two different Ocassions.
At the resume hearing, the presiding Judge, Justice Damulak ordered Ekiti State Government through its Counsel, Barr. James Olowoyo to make available the computation of all the benefits of Ex-Council Officials at the Court by the next sitting of the Court since it had agreed that, the Litigants had truly served at the Council Areas as claimed by them.
The Counsel to the Ex- Council Officials, Barr. Abiola Popoola had early tendered a copy of documents which contained full benefits of some of the Ex-Council Officials based on their last payment slips and it was accepted as exibit.
However, the Public Relations Officer of the Group of Ex- Local Government Officials( 2008-2010), Hon. Dayo Olofinniyi could not be reached to comment on the development while some Stakeholders in the State described as unacceptable, callous and wickedness, the action of the State government to pay only ex-Chairmen but refused to pay ex- Vice-Chairmen and Councillors among Others
*Supreme Court Ruling *
The Supreme Court had on Friday, 2016 voided laws enacted by the states’ Houses of Assembly which allow governors to sack elected chairmen of local governments and councillors and replace them with appointed administrators.
In a unanimous judgement of five Justices of the Supreme Court described the practice as “executive recklessness”, which must not be allowed to persist.
The judgment by the five-man panel, led by Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour was on the appeal in relation to the dissolution of the 16 Local Government Executives in Ekiti State, during Kayode Fayemi’s tenure.
The appeal marked: SC/120/2013 was filed by the Ekiti State Government.
It had Prince Sanmi Olubunmi (Chairman of Ido Osi LG and Chairman of Association of Local Governments of Nigeria – ALGON, Ekiti Chapter and 13 others as respondents.
Fayemi, (then) Governor of Ekiti State reportedly announced the dissolution of the councils in a radio announcement on October 29, 2010, when the elected council officials still had up till December 19, 2011, to end their three-year tenure.
The Supreme Court, in faulting the law purportedly relied on by Fayemi, held that Section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which empowered the governor to dissolve local government councils, whose tenure was yet to expire, violated section 7(1) of the Constitution from which the state House of Assembly derived the power to enact the local government law.
Justice Centus Nweze, in the lead judgment, said: “There can be no doubt, as argued by the appellants’ counsel, that the Ekiti State House of Assembly is empowered to make laws of Ekiti State.
“However, the snag here is that, in enacting section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which empowered the first appellant to bridge the tenure of office of the respondents, it overreached itself.
“In other words, section 23(b) (supra) is violative of, and in conflict with section 7(1) of the Constitution (supra). “Hence, it is bound to suffer the fate of ll laws which are in conflict with the Constitution, section 1(3) thereof.”
The judge said Section 7(1) of the Constitution seeks to guarantee “the system of local government by democratically elected local government councils and conferred “sacrosanctity on the elections of such officials whose electoral mandates derived from the will of the people freely exercised through the democratic process”.
“The implication, therefore, is that section 23(b) of the Ekiti State Local Government Administration (Amendment) Law, 2001, which was not intended to ‘ensure the existence of’ such democratically-elected councils, but to snap their continued existence by their substitution with caretaker councils, was enacted in clear breach of the supreme provisions of section 7(1) of the Constitution.
“To that extent, it (section 23(b) supra) cannot co-habit with section 7(1) of the Constitution (supra) and must, in consequence, be invalidated. The reason is simple. By his oath of office, the governor swore to protect and not to supplant the Constitution.
“Hence, any action of his which has the capacity of undermining the same Constitution (as in the instant case where the first appellant, ‘Governor of Ekiti State and others’ dissolved the tenure of the respondents and replaced them with caretaker committees) is tantamount to executive recklessness which would not be condoned,” the judge said.
Justice Nweze said the tenure of the local government councils could not be abridged without violating the supreme constitutional provisions.
“Simply put, therefore, the election of such officials into their offices and their tenure are clothed with constitutional force.
They cannot, therefore, be abridged without breaching the Constitution from which they derive their force.
“The only permissible exception, where a state governor could truncate the lifespan of a local government council which evolved through the democratic process of elections, is ‘for overriding public interest’ in a period of emergency.”
He upheld the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal on the issue and adopted the orders made by the Court of Appeal on the case in its judgment delivered on January 23, 2013.
The Appeal Court had among others, ordered the Ekiti State Government to compute and pay all the allowances and salaries accruable to members of the dissolved councils between October 29, 2010 and December 19, 2011, both dates inclusive.
Justice Nweze directed the Attorney- General of Ekiti State to ensure that the orders of the lower court (Appeal Court) affirmed in his judgment, are complied with.
