By Ikechukwu Nnochiri, ABUJA

The Supreme Court, on Friday, struck out a suit that sought to compel the Federal Government to release all the allocations belonging to Local Government Councils, LGCs, in Osun State, which it withheld.

A seven-member panel of the apex court, in a split decision of six to one, held that the legal action which was brought before it by the Attorney General of Osun State lacked competence.

In the lead judgement that was delivered by Justice Mohammed Idris, the court held that the LG of Osun state lacked the locus standi (legal right) to activate the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on behalf of the 30 LGCs in the state.

Stressing that the Supreme Court could only be invited as a court of first instance to settle disputes between any state of the federation and the FG, the panel held that the Osun LGCs are legally recognised autonomous entities that could sue or be sued.

Justice Idris held that the LGCs were the proper parties to challenge FG’s action, adding that the apex court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the case.

He dismissed Osun AG’s argument that the suit was a public interest litigation.

Though the Supreme Court upheld a preliminary objection the Attorney General of the Federation filed to challenge the competence of the suit, it however admonished FG to give full effect to its judgement that granted fiscal autonomy to all the 774 Local Government Areas in the country.

Osun State, in the suit marked SC/CV/775/2025, sought 10 reliefs from the court, among which included a declaration that the AGF, who was cited as the sole defendant, is constitutionally obligated to enforce and comply with court decisions that affirmed the existence of democratically elected LGCs in Osun, following an election that was conducted in the state on February 22, 2025.

The state prayed the court to declare that the AGF cannot act arbitrarily and contrary to the subsisting and binding decisions of both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, delivered on November 30, 2022 in Suit No. FHC/OS/CS/103/2022 and on June 13, 2025, in Appeal No. CA/AK/15/2025, respectively, “by unlawfully and unilaterally bequeathing the statutory allocations accruing to the benefit of the 30 LGCs of the plaintiff to its own choice candidates, in total contravention of the extant decisions of the courts aforementioned.”

It further sought a declaration that the AGF had no right to withhold, suspend and/or seize the monthly allocations, revenues and/or other funds standing to the credit of the LGCs without lawful justification, especially in view of the fact that the state already had in place democratically elected LGCs.

“An order restraining the defendant from paying and/or causing to be paid the statutory allocations standing to the credit of the 30 local governments in the plaintiff state to the sacked All Progressive Congress (APC) local government chairmen and councillors pursuant to the nullified local government election of 15th October, 2022, whose election and subsistence in office had been annulled by valid, extant, unchallenged and subsisting decisions of the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/OS/CS/103/2022 and that of the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/AK/15/2025, delivered on 30th November, 2022 and 13th June, 2025, respectively.”

“An order directing the defendant to forthwith release the monthly allocations and revenues due to and standing to the credit of the constituent Local Government Councils of Osun State for all the months they have been unlawfully and unjustifiably withheld by the defendant and pay same directly into the Local Government allocation accounts to be opened in favour of the validly elected Local Government Council officials elected pursuant to the election conducted in the plaintiff state on 22 February, 2025 and sworn in on 23 February, 2025.

“An order directing the defendant to forthwith pay the allocation, revenues and other funds accruing and due to the Local Government Councils of the plaintiff state to the validly elected Local Government Council officials elected pursuant to the election conducted in the plaintiff state on 22nd February, 2025 and sworn in on 23rd February, 2025.

As well as: “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from further withholding, suspending and/or seizing the monthly allocations, revenues and/or funds standing to the credit of the constituent Local Government Councils of the plaintiff state for as long as the plaintiff state has in place democratically elected Local Government Councils in its state.”

While adopting his processes on Tuesday, counsel to the state told the Supreme Court that the AGF had, in a letter dated March 26, directed that the withheld allocations should be released to APC chairmen and councillors that were already sacked from office by a court judgement.

He said, “My Lords, even while this matter was pending before this court, the defendant attempted to destroy the res (subject matter) by attempting to pay the money to one of the contending parties.

“They actually paid through the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, but we were lucky to get an order that stopped the release of the money,” Osun state’s lawyer, Musibau Adetunbi, SAN, added as he urged the court to grant all the reliefs.

While adopting its processes on October 7, the state told the Supreme Court that the AGF had, in a letter dated March 26, directed that the withheld allocations should be released to All Progressives Congress (APC) chairmen and councillors that were already sacked from office by a court judgement.

On its part, FG, which argued that no cause of action was established against it in the suit, told the apex court that the Osun state government was only bent on frustrating the APC LG officials whose three-year term in office expired on October 22.

“The state has made it impossible for the officials to function, filing cases up and down to frustrate them from performing their duties.

“Our position is that this is not a matter for this court. This court can only be approached by activating its original jurisdiction as provided in the Constitution.

“We also contend that the plaintiff not only lacked the locus standi but was also involved in an abuse of the judicial process,” counsel to the AGF, Chief Akin Olujimi, SAN, added.

Source; Vanguard News