How democratic are state governments?

The doctrine of separation of powers was entrenched in the constitution to ensure that no organ of the government encroaches on the powers of others. But, since the return to civil rule in 1999, the situation in various states leaves much to be desired. Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN, who has been monitoring the situation, looks at how the states have fared in this regard.

DESPITE the constitutional provisions to ensure that there is separation of powers at the state level, the general perception is that governors run their states as fiefdoms. The flagrant disobedience of constitutional provisions, with regards to the relationship between the executive and the legislature, is very pronounced in states where the same political party controls both the executive and the legislature. In most cases, the governor interferes in the selection of the Speaker and other principal officers of the House of Assembly.

A Speaker who fails to do the bidding of the executive stands the risk of being removed from office. The legislature hardly rejects executive bills and the governor’s nominees for political appointment. To do otherwise will amount to anti-party activity and disloyalty to the party leadership. This situation has reduced many legislative assemblies to mere talking shops that do little more than rubber-stamp decisions of the executive.

The executive controls the allocation from the Federation Account. The budget for the legislature and the judiciary are prepared by the executive. Both of them lack financial autonomy. They operate at the mercy of the executive. A situation where one branch controls the finances of the other branches is manifestly subversive of the doctrine of separation of powers and patently unconstitutional.

Besides, the executive hires and fires the personnel, procure the goods and services for the legislature and the judiciary. The chief judge of a state is appointed by the governor, and other judges subject to the approval of the Nigerian Judicial Council (NJC). The administrative staff of the judiciary operates under the rule and regulations of the state civil service commission controlled by the executive.

Similarly, the Clerk of the House is a civil servant seconded to the legislature. Both the legislature and the judiciary require autonomy for effective functioning without interference from any other branch. This is important in preserving and safeguarding constitutional democracy and freedom.

The 1999 Constitution delineates powers among the three branches of government as follows: The legislative branch is responsible for enacting the laws of the state and appropriating the money necessary to operate the government. The executive arm is responsible for implementing and administering the public policy enacted and funded by the legislative branch. The judicial branch is responsible for interpreting the constitution and laws and applying their interpretations to controversies brought before it.

For any democracy to grow, the legislature not only makes laws for the good of the society, but must as well ensure that such laws are not violated by other arms like the executive. The legislature does this by acting as watch-dog over their policies through its oversight functions. The financial function of the legislature involves an authorization of expenditure for government. The essence of the involvement of the legislature in the control of public expenditure, taxation and fund management is to ensure judicious use of public fund in the interest of the citizens.

Having elected executives and lawmakers at the local government level has been an issue. Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution states that: ”The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this constitution guaranteed. But the state governments so often violate this provision to hand-picking the chairmen and councillors and even determine the tenure of local government. Many occasions, Edo, Imo, Ondo and Rivers truncated the tenure of the democratically-elected councils and replaced them with members of the ruling political party as caretaker committees. In most cases, the state governments do not conduct elections for the local councils, as in the case of Anambra, which ran a caretaker system for over six years. Analysts say this practice is an assault on the principle of popular participation in grassroots democracy.

Lack of autonomy by these key institutions at the state levels has been the bane of the country’s democracy. It is the main reason why there are no effective checks on governors, most of whom run the states as personal estates. As long as one branch of government possesses the power to act in the absence of explicit legislative authorisation, so long Nigerians will continue to endure a dysfunctional democracy.

The state legislature hardly performs the oversight functions on the activities of the executive, as stipulated in the constitution. The oversight function is a major component of the activities of the modern legislature. The legislature oversees government affairs and holds the person responsible for any actions and omissions.

The state legislature is not independent of the executive. It is therefore often incapacitated from acting as the watchdog of executive activities. Thus, the inordinate ambition of members and leadership of the House often see them hobnobbing with the executive such that valuable time for lawmaking is lost in the process of lobbying for juicy leadership positions and House committees.

It is common knowledge that corruption and nepotism have been the bane of public life in Nigeria. It is common knowledge too that bills, especially those sponsored by the executive, hardly sail through the legislature, unless members were bribed. The implication of this is that debates on such bills either at the plenary or committee levels cannot be subjected to thorough scrutiny in the best interest of the people who are the objects of such bills eventually when they become law.

Another primordial issue is that many legislators purse pure selfish interests that often inhibit them from combating the challenges of lawmaking. Members pursue contracts from the executive such that they easily compromise when it comes to contributing meaningfully to debates on the floor of the House. At times, some members resort to absenteeism from the floor of the House and do not participate at all in the proceedings.

Former Vice President, Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Monday Ubani, expressed displeasure over what he described as excess power wielded by governors. He said some governors behave like emperors in their states, with no regards for the principle of separation of powers. He said they are so powerful that the legislature and the judiciary are nothing, but appendages of the executive arm.

Ubani said: “This is not good for our democracy. One of the basic tenets of democracy is checks and balances mechanism put in place to checkmate the excesses of each organ of government to ensure transparency and good governance. But what we have in the states is that the executive have pocketed the legislature and the judiciary. What we have at the state level is autocracy and not democracy.

“The legislature can’t perform their oversight functions such as scrutinising the budget before approval;  the executive spends money without approval. The Speakers are governors’ errand boys, because they were installed by the executive. Whenever the governor’s interest is threatened, he would use executive powers to manipulate members of the State House of Assembly to impeach the Speaker. That explains why we have high turn-over of speakers in the country.

“The judiciary is also a victim of the governors that are power intoxicated. The chief judge of a state lamented recently that the state judiciary is being controlled by the state executive, because of lack of financial autonomy. The aphorism of whoever pays the piper dictates the tune is at play. You can see what is happening in a case involving the Cross River Governor, Prof. Ben Ayade, where the judge of the state High Court handling a case involving the governor ruled that the governor’s witnesses will not give evidence in the open court.

“If we don’t guarantee the independence of the three arms of government, we can never enjoy dividends of democracy. One analyst said it will take us 200 years to catch up with the United States democratic standard. The unfortunate thing is that we have not started. We are not copying the right things from advanced democracies and that is why we are not getting it right in our politics and other sectors.”

Civil rights activist Comrade Moshood Erubami said the relationship between the executive and legislators, especially at the state level, have not been operationally separable, because the legislative assemblies have compromised their independence for monetary gains. He said most legislators patronise the executive for contracts or seek financial compensation in order to meet their constituency obligations. “It is so bad that many legislators cannot challenge the governor’s proposals without incurring their wraths,” he added.

Erubami said this explains the incidence of regular impeachments that are witnessed in  state houses of assemblies. He said: “The relationship of most legislators to their executives is that of master-servant, contrary to the stipulations in the constitution which expect them to be independent of each other in the course of performance of their functions.”

The civil rights activist said the relationship between the state executives and local government councils is even worse, because what operates at this level contradicts the constitutional provisions. He said: “The 1999 Constitution defines Nigeria states as federal entities to be administered on a tripod, federal, state and local government levels with each having a well-defined list of functions at executive and legislative levels.

“The constitution states that the system of local government should be run by democratically elected government, and accordingly, the government of every state shall, subject to Section 8 of this constitution, ensure their existence under a law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils. This same constitution stipulates conditions for periodic elections into the 774 local government councils.

“In most states, given the evolutionary character of the council chairmen, who are mostly selected instead of being ‘democratically elected’, the voice of independence has been lost in the process, thereby making them subservient to the executive. In all these, the local government cannot be said to be independent of the state executives who after selecting the chairmen, also determine the resources that will accrue to them and decide what the funds allocated will be spent on and how.

“It is not, therefore, by accident that the first assignment of most governors after assuming office is to dissolve the local government executives to pave the way for appointment of their cronies that will do their biddings.”

Erubami was delighted with the new efforts of the Federal Government to guarantee the independence of local government through direct payment of funds into their accounts and dissolution of the joint account operation with the states, through which governors gain unrestricted access to divert local government funds.

A political scientist, Dr Okey Nwachukwu, said the unholy relationship between the executive and the legislature is aimed at perpetuating the executive in power. He noted that the legislature is empowered to remove the governor and the deputy governor through impeachment procedure provided for in the Constitution.

Nwachukwu added: “It is however disgusting that that this function which meant to ensure good governance and for the benefit of all and sundry is often interfered with and hampered by the executive. This is done, first and foremost, by the executive ensuring that their cronies are elected as the leaders of the House through excessive politicking orchestrated and funded by the executive. Again where the legislature musters enough courage and venture to carry out any of the oversight functions, the executive often resorts to the use of money to pursue a ‘divide and rule’ agenda to break the rank and file of the legislators.

“The effect of the game is that good governance is denied to Nigerians who are entitled to have same. The forgoing challenges, among others, have robbed Nigerians the opportunity of enjoying good governance through forensic and good laws aimed at transforming the political and economic landscape of Nigeria.”

To bail this democracy from the doldrums and put it on the glorious path, he recommends that the state legislators should be insulated from the influence of the executive. This influence, he said, is counter-productive in most cases, as it is meant to sway the minds of the legislators from the serious business of lawmaking.

Nwachukwu said the lawmakers should be more responsible and responsive to the demands of their office. He said: “The excuse that bills take time to go through the legislature, because of lack of quorum, is not tenable anywhere in the world. A solution to this ugly trend may be to pay the legislators based on the number of times they participate in the proceedings at the floor of the House.

“It is obvious that some legislators display ignorance of the legislative process to make one to wonder if such lawmakers could contribute meaningful to the process on the floor of the House. There is, therefore, the need to organise training and re-training programme for the lawmakers on the business of lawmaking in the best interest of Nigerians that have elected them.”