The Legal Battle Over Osun State’s Local Government Funds
A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court of Nigeria recently reserved judgment in a legal case concerning the release of withheld local government funds in Osun State. The case centers on a suit that urges the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) to comply with court decisions and pay the funds to the democratically elected local government chairmen, who were chosen under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC). The panel, presided over by Justice Uwani Aba’aji, heard arguments from both sides before deciding to reserve its judgment.
The suit, numbered SC/CV/773/2025, was brought by Osun State, with the AGF as the sole defendant. The state sought ten specific reliefs, including declarations that the AGF is constitutionally obligated to follow court rulings and that the withholding of funds is unlawful. These claims are based on previous judgments from the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the legitimacy of the locally elected councils.
Key Reliefs Sought by Osun State
One of the primary requests from Osun State is a declaration that the AGF cannot act arbitrarily by directing funds to candidates who have been removed from office. The state argues that this action violates the binding decisions of the courts, particularly those delivered on November 30, 2022, and June 13, 2025. The state also seeks to ensure that the AGF does not interfere with the lawful operations of the local government councils, which were democratically elected.
Another critical relief involves an order to restrain the AGF from paying funds to the APC chairmen and councillors who were previously removed from office. This request is based on the annulment of their election by valid court decisions. Osun State also asks for an order compelling the AGF to release all withheld funds directly into the accounts of the newly elected officials.
Additionally, the state requested a perpetual injunction to prevent further withholding of funds while the democratic councils remain in place. This would ensure that the local governments can function without financial obstruction.
Arguments Presented by Both Sides
Osun State’s counsel, Musbau Adetumbi (SAN), emphasized that the AGF had already issued a directive to release the funds to the APC officials, despite court orders that had invalidated their positions. He stated that the AGF attempted to bypass the court’s authority by making payments through the Central Bank of Nigeria. However, the court intervened and stopped the transaction.
On the other hand, the AGF’s counsel, Chief Akin Olujimi (SAN), argued that the suit was an abuse of court process. He raised several preliminary objections, including the lack of jurisdiction and the fact that the dispute is politically motivated. Olujimi claimed that the case involves a conflict between the APC and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) over control of local government positions.
He also pointed out that the dispute has already been addressed in multiple lower courts, and that the suit fails to establish a valid cause of action. Olujimi urged the court to dismiss the case, stating that it lacks merit and is an attempt to circumvent existing legal processes.
Previous Rulings and Ongoing Disputes
The court also struck down another suit, marked SC/379/2025, which Osun State had filed prior to the AGF’s directive to release funds to the APC officials. This decision highlights the complexity of the legal landscape surrounding the issue.
As the Supreme Court deliberates on the current case, the outcome could have significant implications for the functioning of local governments in Osun State. The resolution of this matter may set a precedent for how similar disputes are handled in the future.
Conclusion
The case underscores the importance of judicial oversight in ensuring that constitutional and legal principles are upheld. It also highlights the challenges faced by local governments in maintaining financial independence and operational autonomy. As the court continues to review the arguments, the final judgment will be closely watched by stakeholders across the country.
