Since the advent of Nigeria’s Fourth Republic in 1999, the role and powers of state governors have undergone a significant transformation. In Nigeria’s federal system of government, governors occupy the second tier of government, but the enormous and overwhelming powers they wield make them have overbearing influence on who gets what, not only at the state level, which they statutorily control as governors, but also at the federal and local government levels. This piece critically analyses the powers amassed by governors and their implications for Nigeria’s democracy and good governance at the federal, state and local government levels.
What once began as a period of relative independence and vibrancy among federal lawmakers at the dawn of democracy in 1999 has evolved into an era where governors now wield considerable political influence, shaping not only the direction of their states but also impacting the quality of parliamentary representation at the federal level.
When Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999 after many years of military interregnum, the country produced a set of federal lawmakers who were generally considered vibrant, patriotic, independent-minded and dynamic and were able to assert their legislative independence at both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
The legislative independence and vibrancy of these crops of federal lawmakers, analysts believe, were due largely to the lesser political influence governors had on their selection and emergence as legislators.
These sets of federal lawmakers, along with their presiding officers, upheld the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances to a greater extent, ensuring that the executive arm of government was put on its toes to act within the ambit of constitutional provisions.
For asserting their legislative independence and scrutiny of the activities of the executive arm, these sets of federal lawmakers had frequent face-offs with the executive, especially with then President Olusegun Obasanjo.
At some point, members of the House of Representatives, led by the then Speaker, the late Umar Ghali Na’Abba, passed a resolution calling on Obasanjo to step down within two weeks or face impeachment over allegations of incompetence and corruption.
The parliament also had issues with Obasanjo over the non-implementation of federal budgets and his frequent trips abroad, among other issues. They also ensured they fought to a standstill, the infamous ‘third term agenda’ of former President Obasanjo.
However, observers believe the subsequent assemblies appeared to have lost such vibrancy and legislative independence in their quests to satisfy various political interests that brought them to power. For instance, the 9th Senate under Ahmad Lawan and even the current 10th Senate under Godswill Akpabio, are largely seen by pundits as a rubberstamp parliament doing the bidding of the executive rather than holding it to account.
Another factor that has also contributed to the dwindling fortunes and less vibrancy of the federal parliament, especially the Senate, is the growing trend of former governors pushing their ways into the Red Chamber as ‘retirement home.’
It has become the norm for many governors to bulldoze their way to the Senate at the end of their constitutionally allowed eight-year tenure in the state.
Many of these former governors only ‘retire’ to the parliament to enjoy allowances and perks of office with little or no contribution to deepening quality legislation through sponsorships of important bills and motions.
Oftentimes, these former governors use their powers to retire vocal and vibrant senators from the parliament in their quests to occupy such seats, even when they do not have the required legislative acumen, desire and experience as those they are pushing out.
In the current 10th Senate, there are no fewer than 13 former governors occupying ground at the Red Chamber, with a number of them yet to sponsor a single bill after 10 months.
A recent report by this newspaper revealed that four of the 13 former governors in the Senate and 21 other senators have not sponsored any bills since June 13, 2023 when the 10th National Assembly was inaugurated.
The ex-governors in the Senate are Senate President Godswill Akpabio (Akwa Ibom), Aliyu Wammako (Sokoto), Abdulaziz Yari (Zamfara), Aminu Tambuwal (Sokoto), Adams Oshiomhole (Edo), Ibrahim Dankwambo (Gombe), Abubakar Bello (Niger), Orji Kalu (Abia), Seriake Dickson (Bayelsa), Adamu Aliero (Kebbi), Danjuma Goje (Gombe), Gbenga Daniel (Ogun), and Simon Lalong (Plateau).
The former governors who were yet to table any bill to their names, according to the report, include Senators Seriake Dickson (PDP-Bayelsa West), Adams Oshiomhole (APC-Edo North), Abdulaziz Yari (APC-Zamfara West) and Simon Lalong (APC-Plateau South).
Besides their lacklustre performance at the Senate, it has been observed that governors also contribute to the dwindling fortunes of the federal parliament by supporting their loyalists, many of them incompetent, to find their way to the National Assembly at the detriment of more qualified candidates who could have performed better in the legislature. For instance, the high rate of legislative turnover experienced by the 10th National Assembly could be largely attributed to the roles played by governors in ensuring that many of the lawmakers in the 9th Assembly never get return tickets to the parliament, thus robbing the federal legislature of experienced lawmakers with institutional memories and legislative grasp.
How governors decide presidents, hold them to ransom
In Nigeria’s political arena, governors wield significant influence over the selection of presidents. Through their control of state resources, patronage networks, and party machinery, governors often play kingmaker roles during presidential elections by deciding who gets the ticket during primaries.
As political leaders in their states, governors exert enormous influence on the delegates to the national conventions where presidential flag bearers are chosen.
Besides, governors are also very influential in determining whether a presidential candidate will win or lose an election in a state where they hold sway.
They leverage their support to negotiate for favourable policies, appointments and resource allocations from the federal government. This power dynamic has oftentimes led to a situation where governors hold presidents to ransom, demanding concessions or threatening to withdraw support if their demands were not met.
Full control of state assemblies
Governors often exercise extensive control over their state assemblies, turning them into rubberstamps for their agendas. Through various means, such as party affiliation, patronage and coercion, governors ensure that state lawmakers align with their interests and directives, especially with the financial autonomy of the state assembly still a mirage in many states.
It is common knowledge that those who secure tickets during primaries to contest state assembly elections are loyalists of the governors in power. These governors also use their resources and powers to ensure that their loyalists emerge victorious at the main elections in their quest to exert full control over state parliaments. Besides, governors decide or play critical roles in determining those who emerge as speakers, as well as other principal officers in the state legislature to consolidate their stranglehold and firm control over the parliament. This enables governors to push through legislation and budgets without meaningful opposition, thus consolidating their powers and reducing checks and balances within the state governance structure.
The high-level cases of corruption and abuse of power among governors, which mostly come to the fore after they leave office, have largely been attributed to the lack of independence of the state assemblies, which have failed to hold them to account.
Local government system in the bag
The local government system in Nigeria, theoretically designed as the third tier of government to bring governance closer to the people at the grassroots, often operates in a state of dysfunction. Governors exert considerable influence over local government affairs, including the appointment of local government chairpersons and the allocation of funds.
Even when they hold local government elections, governors use state electoral bodies to announce their loyalists as winners, which are often described as a mere charade. This control allows governors to manipulate the local government system for their political advantage, stifling grassroots democracy and hindering development initiatives at the local level.
State judiciary
The independence of the judiciary at the state level in Nigeria is frequently compromised, with governors exerting undue influence over judicial appointments and decisions. Governors often appoint judges who are sympathetic to their interests, turning the state judiciary into puppets that serve the governors’ agenda rather than upholding the rule of law.
Examples abound where governors used justices in the state high courts to procure all manner of injunctions and judgements for their political interests. Such scenarios played out in Rivers, Kogi and Kano states recently.
Lack of financial autonomy major contributory factor – Dr Hayatu
Speaking on the matter, a political scientist and senior lecturer in the Department of Political Science, Bayero University, Kano (BUK), Dr Aminu Hayatu, attributed the overbearing influence of governors to their enormous control of financial resources.
“This issue of power play in the structure of governance in Nigeria is not strange anymore; it has been there for decades. Even a small boy understands that financial autonomy plays a great role in the way power structure plays out, especially in our country, which has a lot of issues with corruption,” he said.
“This is threatening the interest of our democracy because the more people become disenchanted, it gives room for coup d’etat as we have witnessed in some African countries,” he added, saying handpicking of candidates is in defiance of democracy.
Also commenting, a senior lecturer in the Department of Public Administration, Bayero University, Kano, Dr Saidu Dukkawa, said governors wielded overwhelming powers because of the dysfunctional power division of the presidential system.
On the way out, Dr Dukkawa said, “Two things need to be done to reduce the overbearing powers of the governors. The first is to free the party structure from the clutches of a governor. This will enable internal democracy to be obtained, which will in turn guarantee free and fair elections.
“Secondly, there is a need for relevant legislation that will make it mandatory for governors to move responsibilities to respective ministries, departments and agencies, in addition to granting financial autonomy to local government authorities.”
