Constitutional invalidity of purported removal of Bekwarra Local Government Chairman by Cross River House of Assembly

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

By Barrister Okoi Obono-Obla

There is a convoluted and twisted argument being advanced by some to justify the unconstitutional and illegal purported removal of the Chairman of Bekwarra Local Government Area of Cross River State by the Cross River State House of Assembly on 10 November 2025, on allegations of corruption and abuse of power. I am compelled to debunk this position so that the matter is not clustered and cloistered with legal cascades that amount to mere red herrings.

Section 7 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), vests in the Cross River State House of Assembly the power to make laws for the establishment, composition, and structure of local government councils in the State. However, this provision does not confer on the House a carte blanche to enact laws calculated to de‑legitimize local government councils, nor does it empower the House to remove a democratically elected Chairman under any guise. Section 7(1) guarantees the system of democratically elected local government councils, and Nigerian courts have consistently held that this constitutional guarantee implies autonomy and insulation from arbitrary state interference.

The pertinent question, therefore, is whether, under the 1999 Constitution, a State House of Assembly can remove elected officials of a local government council under the guise of Section 7(1). The answer is clearly in the negative. A State House of Assembly cannot unilaterally remove elected local government officials by relying on Section 7(1), as this section does not grant removal powers. Removal must follow due process as outlined in valid state laws, typically involving impeachment by local councillors or judicial intervention—not unilateral legislative action. Nigerian courts have repeatedly struck down attempts by State Assemblies and State Governors to bypass this process.

The Supreme Court has consistently reinforced that arbitrary dissolution or removal of elected local government councils undermines grassroots democracy and violates the Constitution. In Governor of Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2012) and A.G. Plateau State v. Goyol (2007), the Court condemned state interference with democratically elected councils. Similarly, in Eze v. Governor of Abia State (2010), the Court held that State Governments lack the power to dissolve elected councils, emphasizing that Section 7 protects their tenure.

On 11 July 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment affirming the financial autonomy of Nigeria’s 774 Local Government Councils. The Court held unequivocally that local governments are third tiers of government, autonomous and independent in the same constitutional sense as the Federal and State Governments. This decision further entrenched the principle that State Governments and State Assemblies cannot exercise supervisory or disciplinary powers that undermine local government autonomy.

Again, in a judgment delivered on 5 November 2025 in a suit instituted by the Government of Osun State against the Attorney‑General of the Federation concerning the withholding of revenue allocations to local government areas in Osun State, the Supreme Court reiterated that local government areas are constitutionally recognized tiers of government and therefore autonomous. The Court stressed that any action that undermines their autonomy—whether financial, administrative, or political—is unconstitutional.

Assuming, without conceding, that the Local Government Law of Cross River State, 2018 vests certain powers in the State House of Assembly to remove a Local Government Chairman, such power can only be activated strictly through the impeachment procedure prescribed under the Law. Section 37 of the Cross River State Local Government Law, 2018, for instance, requires that allegations of misconduct against a Chairman must be investigated by a panel constituted by the Chief Judge of Cross River State, upon a resolution of the House of Assembly. The House cannot hijack or unilaterally handle the entire process. The law does not give the Assembly absolute power to investigate, prosecute, and remove a Chairman in one breath. Any attempt to do so violates both the Constitution and the Law itself.

In light of the Supreme Court’s clear and consistent position in the cases earlier referenced, any purported removal of a democratically elected Local Government Chairman by the Cross River State House of Assembly—without strict compliance with constitutional and statutory procedures—is unconstitutional, null, void, and of no effect. The autonomy of local government councils is no longer a matter of debate; it is a settled principle of Nigerian constitutional law.

Barrister Okoi Obono-Obla writes from Abuja