A member, Edo Local Government Administrative Panel of Inquiry, Mr Kassim Afegbua, has faulted the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, over comments that the state assembly lacked powers to remove council chairmen from office.
It would be recalled that Fagbemi, had queried the suspension of the chairmen and the vice chairmen, saying that only the legislative arm of the local government could sack or suspend council chairmen.
Afegbua, in a statement on Saturday in Benin, asserted that the Edo State Local Government Law, 2000 allowed the state assembly to address misconduct.
He argued that the Supreme Court’s judgment on local government autonomy does not override the Assembly’s powers to regulate local government administration.
He clarified that the law, enacted by the State Assembly, empowered the governor and the Assembly to act against erring chairmen.
“The contention that it is only the Legislative arm of the LG that can check the council’s financial recklessness is nebulous and therefore unconvincing.
“Those who try to equate the relationship between the FG and a state government with that which exists between the state government and a Local government are merely engaging in mischief.
“Following concerns over their activities, the Assembly debated and voted to suspend the chairmen for two months to facilitate investigations, “he said.
Afegbua disagreed with the AGF for using the term “removal,” saying that the chairmen were only suspended to allow for an administrative inquiry.
“AGF sir, the chairmen have not been removed, but suspended. In line with the law, the suspension is to last for two months in the first instance.
“whilst the investigation into their financial activities by the administrative panel of Inquiry subsists.
“It is misleading, therefore, for the AGF to rush to town without taking a judicial notice of the rationale for this decision as well as the raison d’etre for the action, in the first place.
“What we have done in Edo state does not offend the verdict of the supreme court with respect to financial autonomy. The law is what it is; factual, evidential and instructive, ” Afegbua said.
He explained that the suspension allowed the speakers of the local government legislative arms to act in the interim.
He reiterated that the suspension was temporary and subject to the findings of the ongoing investigation.
“Depending on the outcome, some chairmen may return to office, while others could face removal if found culpable.
” It is injurious to our collective psyche for the AGF to hurriedly conclude that we removed the chairmen instead of stating the real status of what we have done, which is suspension.
“This clarity becomes instructive to correct the negative impression created by the Attorney General of the Federation,” Afegbua added.
Afegbua also emphasized that state laws governing local government administration remained valid unless they conflict with the constitution.
He argued that the supreme court judgment does not negate the Assembly’s oversight powers.
Afegbua challenged critics to seek redress in court rather than rely on the AGF’s interpretation.
According to him, the AGF’s opinion is not binding. The chairmen remain suspended until investigations are completed, and we will not be swayed by nebulous or invalid injunctions (NAN)