ABUJA
African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has pledged to fully enforce the Supreme Court’s July 2024 judgment on local government financial autonomy if elected president in 2027, promising that allocations from the Federation Account would go directly to Nigeria’s 774 local government areas rather than passing through state governments first.
Atiku, a former vice president, faces no legal dispute connected to this pledge; his position was conveyed as a campaign policy commitment through his spokesperson, Kenneth Okonkwo, in a statement issued Tuesday.
What the Supreme Court actually ruled
Findings by ValidViewNetwork show the judgment at the centre of Atiku’s pledge dates back to 11 July 2024, when the Supreme Court ruled, in a suit brought by the Federal Government against Nigeria’s 36 state governors, that Federation Account allocations meant for local government councils must be paid directly to them rather than routed through state coffers.
More than two years later, checks by ValidViewNetwork confirm several states have yet to fully comply with the directive.
Atiku’s pledge and his sharper accusation
According to Okonkwo’s statement, Atiku would ensure strict compliance with the ruling if elected, framing local government autonomy as central to grassroots development.
“My administration will respect court judgments, protect local government autonomy, ensure that public funds reach the people for whom they are meant, and restore true federalism,” the statement quoted him as saying.
He argued that direct access to funds would let councils deliver development projects and public services more effectively, while also strengthening their capacity to tackle local security challenges, including crime and terrorism, and to reduce poverty at the grassroots level.
Atiku did not stop at a policy pledge, however.
He directly accused the Tinubu administration of deliberately failing to enforce the ruling, alleging the funds were being withheld as leverage over state governors ahead of 2027.
“The current administration of President Tinubu has failed to enforce this judgment, seemingly to avoid confronting the gluttonous APC State Governors who previously controlled these funds, as an enticement to them to use the Local Government funds to buy votes for Tinubu in 2027 presidential election,” the statement said.
The government’s own stated position
Checks by ValidViewNetwork show the Tinubu administration has not been entirely silent on the matter: President Tinubu warned state governors in December that he could issue an executive order to force direct allocation of funds to local governments if compliance with the Supreme Court ruling continued to lag, a warning that, by Atiku’s account, has yet to translate into enforcement action.
Why this fight matters beyond Abuja
The dispute over local government funding touches a structural fault line in Nigerian federalism that predates both Atiku’s campaign and Tinubu’s presidency, with state governors long accused of treating local councils as extensions of state government rather than autonomous tiers with their own constitutional funding rights.
Whether Atiku’s pledge translates into a concrete first-term priority, or simply joins a long list of unfulfilled promises on local government reform made by successive administrations, will likely become a recurring question as Nigeria’s 2027 campaign season builds momentum.
Our conclusion
Promises to enforce court judgments are cheap in Nigerian politics; enforcement is not.
Do you want to advertise with us?
Do you need publicity for a product, service, or event?
Contact us on WhatsApp +2348033617468, +234 816 612 1513, +234 703 010 7174
or Email: validviewnetwork@gmail.com
CLICK TO JOIN OUR WHATSAPP GROUP
Every administration since 1999 has found a reason to let governors keep a hand on local government purses, and campaign pledges to change that have a habit of quietly disappearing once the pledger is the one holding power.
Nigerians would do well to ask Atiku, and indeed any candidate making similar promises, for a concrete first hundred-days timeline on this specific judgment, not just another restatement of what the courts already said in 2024.


