Local Government Autonomy in Nigeria: Empowerment or Entrenchment of Corruption?

In Nigeria, local governments are often seen as the closest tier of governance to the people, responsible for implementing grassroots development initiatives and delivering essential services. Recently, there has been a growing call for granting absolute autonomy to local councils across the country, with advocates arguing that this would enable them to respond directly to local needs without interference from state governments. However, autonomy, if unaccompanied by structural reforms and accountability mechanisms, may lead to a deepening of the corruption issues that already plague these councils. A recent analysis of corruption in Nigerian local governments from multiple sources by our analyst reveals a range of exploitative practices that could potentially worsen under autonomy. 

The Perils of Absolute Autonomy

When autonomy is discussed in Nigeria, it’s often positioned as a solution to political interference and inefficiency. Yet, autonomy in itself is not a panacea. It must be supported by institutional frameworks that mitigate corruption and enable public oversight. The types of corruption documented in Nigerian local governments reflect structural issues that require more than independence from state oversight to resolve.

Take contract fraud as an example. Contract fraud involves manipulating or inflating the costs of local projects or even awarding contracts to fictitious companies to siphon funds. While greater autonomy would allow councils to award contracts without needing approval from state authorities, it could also open the door for more unchecked abuses. When local officials have full control over procurement without sufficient transparency or auditing, they may be more inclined to exploit contracts for personal gain. To prevent this, it’s vital to implement independent monitoring mechanisms that evaluate contract awards and ensure fair procurement processes.

Bribery and kickbacks present another significant risk. In an autonomous setup, local officials might receive increased discretionary funding and control over approvals, which could attract offers of bribes from contractors seeking favours. This could turn autonomy into a “market” for unethical contractors and officials, leading to decisions driven by personal profit rather than community welfare. Transparency and citizen involvement in project planning and execution are essential to mitigate these risks.

Ghost workers—fictitious employees included on payrolls to divert public funds—are also a common issue in Nigerian local councils. Under autonomy, payroll management would rest solely within the council, potentially enabling officials to introduce ghost workers with even less scrutiny from external bodies. To counter this, local councils should adopt digital payroll systems and periodic verification audits to ensure that every paycheck goes to a real, contributing employee.

Source: Multiple academic and non-academic sources; Infoprations Analysis, 2024

Security Votes Misuse and the Autonomy Dilemma

One of the more controversial corruption practices is the misuse of security votes—discretionary funds allocated for security purposes. While intended for protecting communities, these funds are often unaccounted for, leaving room for officials to divert them for personal use. With absolute autonomy, local councils would control these security funds without needing to report expenditures to state authorities. This raises the question: Can local councils be trusted with such discretion without meaningful oversight?

To address this, standardized reporting requirements should accompany autonomy. Local councils should document every expenditure under security votes and make these reports available to both state governments and citizens. This transparency would deter misuse and ensure that security funds serve their intended purpose of safeguarding the community.

Political Interference, Nepotism, and Cronyism

One argument for local government autonomy is that it would reduce political interference from state governments, allowing councils to address local needs without undue influence. However, autonomy may create new opportunities for corruption within the councils themselves. Without external checks, powerful figures within local governments could exert control over hiring and decision-making, favouring friends and family—a practice known as nepotism and cronyism.

To combat this, autonomy must include policies enforcing merit-based recruitment and transparent hiring processes. Recruitment committees that include independent stakeholders could help curb favouritism and ensure that positions are awarded based on qualifications and experience rather than personal connections.

The Need for Transparency and Accountability

One of the most critical issues in local councils is the lack of transparency. Opaque financial processes mean that community members are often unaware of how funds are allocated and spent. In an autonomous system, councils might operate even more secretively, feeling less compelled to disclose budget information and spending practices. This secrecy weakens accountability, as citizens and civil society cannot hold officials responsible if they don’t have access to critical financial data.

To prevent this, transparency must be the cornerstone of autonomy. Local councils should be legally obligated to publish budgets, expenditures, and contract awards in accessible formats for the public. Additionally, citizen involvement should be encouraged, allowing residents to participate in planning and decision-making. This approach not only improves transparency but also fosters a culture of accountability where officials feel answerable to the communities they serve.

Protecting Democratic Governance

 Autonomy must safeguard democratic governance within local councils. One of the dangers of autonomy is that it could enable councils to entrench power by manipulating local elections or circumventing democratic processes. There is a real risk that powerful local figures could rig elections, undermining fair representation and consolidating their control over council activities. To counter this, independent electoral bodies should oversee local elections to ensure they are free and fair. Term limits for council members should also be enforced to prevent long-term entrenchment of power and encourage fresh ideas in leadership.

A Balanced Path Forward

While local government autonomy promises a shift in decision-making power to the grassroots level, the documented corruption types suggest that, without proper safeguards, autonomy could lead to deeper issues. For autonomy to truly benefit Nigerians, it must be accompanied by accountability frameworks that mitigate corruption risks. Independent audit bodies, transparency requirements, citizen engagement, and regular oversight from both state and federal levels are essential to ensure that autonomy drives positive outcomes rather than entrenching corruption. Moreover, empowering citizens with mechanisms to report and challenge corruption would enhance the effectiveness of autonomous councils.