Former All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential aspirant, Adamu Garba, has sparked controversy by describing Nigeria’s local government councils as mere “ATMs” for state governors, and calling for their outright scrapping.
In a post shared on his X (formerly Twitter) page, Garba criticised the structure of local governments in the country, claiming they serve no real purpose other than functioning as “paper-only, money-sharing third-tier government institutions” under the influence of state governors.
“One of the most inefficient, ineffective back pockets of some state governors is the local government councils,” Garba said.
“Autonomy or not, the LGs are still ATMs of some state governors.”
He argued that true autonomy for local governments is practically impossible to implement, despite a recent Supreme Court ruling affirming their constitutional independence.
READ ALSO: CBN’s new condition stalls LG Autonomy
“No country has a third tier like Nigeria”
Garba went further to claim that Nigeria is the only country in the world that operates a constitutionally mandated third tier of government in this manner, describing the model as non-functional and outdated.
“In reality, there is no country on earth that has a third tier of government except Nigeria. Since it proved to be non-workable, why not scrap it?” he questioned.
Traditional rulers should take over
In a radical alternative, the former presidential hopeful proposed that local government responsibilities should be handed over to traditional rulers, arguing they are better positioned to govern at the grassroots level using cultural and community-based systems.
“Instead of struggling to get constitutional authority to our traditional rulers, they should be handed over the local government councils and let them run it according to the local culture and tradition of the people within their domain,” he said.
Background: LG autonomy debate
Garba’s comments come amid ongoing debates about local government autonomy, especially after the Supreme Court ruled in favour of direct funding for LGs, bypassing state governments.
Many analysts have hailed the ruling as a breakthrough for grassroots governance, while critics argue that LGs remain structurally weak and under the thumb of state governors.
