The recent decision by the Lagos State House of Assembly to indefinitely suspend Jelili Sulaimon, the Chairman of Alimosho Local Government Area, has ignited a heated debate about the limits of legislative power, the sanctity of the democratic process, and the autonomy of local governments. The suspension, which took effect immediately following a plenary session on Monday, was unanimously approved by lawmakers who accused Jelili of non-compliance, financial mismanagement, and a defiant attitude towards the legislative body. As Mr. Akinpelu Johnson, the vice chairman, steps in to take over the council's leadership, questions loom over whether the State Assembly's action represents an appropriate measure of accountability or a troubling case of democratic overreach.
Background to the Suspension
The motion to suspend Jelili Sulaimon was introduced by Hon. Sanni Okanlawon, Chairman of the House Committee on Local Government Administration and Chieftaincy Affairs. According to Okanlawon, Jelili was linked to a chaotic incident in April 2024 at the Iyana-Ipaja area of Alimosho, which led to the death of a citizen, Mr. Michael Ajayi. Following an investigation, the committee found the council chairman culpable for allegedly masterminding the chaos. This, coupled with repeated instances of financial irregularities and failure to comply with directives, prompted the Assembly to impose an indefinite suspension.
The move was strongly supported by other lawmakers, including Majority Leader Noheem Adams, who emphasized that Jelili’s suspension would send a stern message to other council chairmen to adhere strictly to governance protocols. Hon. Nureni Akinsanya referenced a report from the State Auditor-General which cited significant discrepancies in Jelili’s financial records, while Hon. Ladi Ajomale and Hon. Sa'ad Olumoh raised concerns about the general disregard for regulations among local government heads.
A Question of Democratic Legitimacy
While the allegations against Jelili are indeed serious, the manner in which the Lagos State House of Assembly wielded its power raises concerns about the erosion of democratic norms and principles. The local government chairman was elected by the people of Alimosho, and his indefinite suspension by the Assembly, without a recall process initiated by the electorate, undermines the principle that elected officials should primarily be accountable to their constituents.
The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria establishes local governments as the third tier of government, granting them a degree of autonomy. By exercising its power to suspend an elected official, the State Assembly could be seen as encroaching on this autonomy. The question then arises: if the National Assembly attempted to exercise similar powers over state governors, would it not provoke widespread outrage and chaos? Suspending a governor without adherence to constitutional impeachment procedures would be condemned as unconstitutional and an abuse of power. Why, then, should a different standard apply to local government officials?
Local Government Autonomy Versus State Control
The debate over local government autonomy versus state control is not a new one in Nigeria's political landscape. The Constitution grants the State House of Assembly the power to make laws concerning the administration of local governments, but this does not necessarily extend to an unchecked ability to suspend elected officials. If the Assembly can so easily suspend a local government chairman, it sets a dangerous precedent where local governance becomes subject to the whims of state legislators. This could lead to an abuse of power, where local government officials are punished for political differences or failings in loyalty rather than actual misconduct.
While state laws governing local administration may provide a legal basis for the suspension, the moral and democratic implications cannot be ignored. The people of Alimosho elected Jelili with a mandate to govern, and any action to remove him from office should be transparent, procedurally sound, and ideally involve some form of direct consent from the electorate, such as a recall process. Otherwise, the principle of local government as a government "closest to the people" loses its meaning, as local leaders are beholden more to the state legislature than to the voters who put them in office.
The Dangers of Politicizing Accountability
Another concern is the potential politicization of accountability mechanisms. The Assembly’s decision to suspend Jelili indefinitely—without a clear timeline or process for reinstatement or a thorough independent investigation—raises the possibility that this could be a politically motivated move rather than an impartial exercise of legislative oversight. With other lawmakers pointing to general issues of misconduct among local council heads, it begs the question of whether Jelili is being singled out to set an example or if there is a broader agenda at play.
Furthermore, the call to invite the heads of Conference 57, a coalition of local council chairmen in Lagos, to explain the widespread disregard for governance protocols could be interpreted as a signal of broader political maneuvering. It is critical that any actions taken to discipline local government officials are not only legally justified but are also perceived as fair and objective, lest they exacerbate political divisions and weaken public trust in the democratic process.
Lessons from the National Context
Drawing a parallel to the national level, one can imagine the outrage that would ensue if the National Assembly enacted laws allowing it to suspend state governors for perceived misconduct. Such a move would likely be deemed unconstitutional and an affront to the principles of federalism. The procedures for disciplining state governors are clearly laid out in the Constitution, which includes impeachment processes involving the State House of Assembly and the judiciary. The same standard of procedural rigor and respect for democratic norms should be applied at the local government level.
If the Lagos State Assembly wishes to hold local government officials accountable, it must ensure that its actions are not perceived as overreach. Accountability is essential, but it should be balanced with respect for democratic principles. Any disciplinary measures should involve transparent procedures, independent investigations, and safeguards against political interference.
The indefinite suspension of Jelili Sulaimon raises critical issues about democratic accountability, the autonomy of local governments, and the proper limits of legislative power. While the allegations against him warrant investigation, the method of suspension calls for a reevaluation of the balance between state oversight and local autonomy. There must be a clear distinction between holding elected officials accountable and undermining the democratic process.
The Lagos State House of Assembly's action, though legally grounded in state law, sets a precedent that could weaken the independence of local governments. Moving forward, lawmakers should consider reforming the process for disciplining local government officials to include more robust mechanisms that respect the mandate given by the people, ensure procedural fairness, and prevent potential abuses of power. After all, democracy thrives not only on accountability but also on the respect for the will of the people.