In May of 2020, President Muhammadu Buhari signed Executive Order 10 into law.
However, the Supreme Court has now voided that order.
Executive Order 10 granted financial autonomy to the state legislatures and state judiciaries in compliance with section 121(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
All the 36 states of the federation were affected by this order.
For the purpose of this explainer, we shall refer to Executive Order 10 as EO10 subsequently.
E010 mandated the Accountant-General of the Federation to deduct the monthly allocation due to state legislatures and judiciaries from the federal allocation account–for states that refuse to grant such autonomy to their judiciaries and legislatures.
According to EO10, “Allocation of appropriated funds to the state legislature and state Judiciary in the state appropriation laws in the annual budget of the state, shall be a charge upon the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the state, as a First Line Charge.”
What did the President have in mind by signing EO10?
a) To make the judiciaries and legislatures in these states financially independent, in tandem with the principle of separation of powers.
The president wanted to stop the practice where state governors collect monthly allocations from the center, and then decide what to give to the judiciaries and legislatures in their respective states.
The president wanted the legislatures and judiciaries in states to be the custodians of their own destinies–expunged from the whims and caprices of powerful state governors.
b) EO10 would have reduced how state governors interfere with the judiciary or legislature in their own states.
Financially independent state legislatures and judiciaries would have meant that most state governors won’t be able to decide what is passed on the floor of the legislature or what judgments emanate from the courts within their jurisdictions.
Because sometimes, he who pays the piper, calls the tune, as the adage goes.
There have been instances where governors gift houses or cars to judges or lawmakers; just days before a case or piece of legislation in which they are an interested party, is decided.
Judges and lawmakers in most states are also subservient to powerful state governors because these governors pick their bills, pay their salaries or fund their institutions.
In Cross River State for instance, the governor withheld salaries and allowances due to lawmakers who didn’t defect with him to the governing All Progressives Congress (APC)
EO10 was going to cut out all of that–at least to some degree.
c) EO10 also provided for special allocation for the judiciary.
Here, the judiciary could build and maintain its own infrastructure or facilities without taking a begging bowl to governors or the presidency; or without waiting for the crumbs falling off the master’s table.
A section of the order reads as follows:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of this Executive Order, in the first three years of its implementation, there shall be special extraordinary capital allocations for the Judiciary to undertake capital development of State Judiciary Complexes, High Court Complexes, Sharia Court of Appeal, Customary Court of Appeal and Court Complexes of other Courts befitting the status of Courts.”
Why is the Supreme Court nullifying this order?
After the president issued the order, the governors of the 36 states didn’t like it one bit and rose up in arms.
On September 17, 2020, the Attorneys-General in each of the nation’s 36 states bonded and filed a suit at the Supreme Court against the federal government.
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Buhari fumes, says providers of substandard petrol must be held accountable
The plaintiffs held that with EO10, the federal government had pushed the responsibility of funding capital and recurrent expenditures of State High Courts, Sharia Court of Appeal and Customary Court of Appeal to the state governments.
The states also contended that EO10 was a clear violation of Sections 6 and 8(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The apex court has today agreed with the governors.
In its ruling of Friday, February 11, 2022, a seven-member panel of Supreme Court Justices, in a split-decision of six Justices to one(6-1), ruled that President Buhari went beyond his powers when he issued EO10.
According to the Justices, the constitution provides a “clear delineation between the state and federal government.”
Reading the majority judgment, Justice Mohammed Dattijo declared that EO10 violates the provisions of the 1999 constitution, which clearly stipulates the functions and powers of heads of each arm of the government.
“This country is still a federation and the 1999 constitution it operates is a federal one. The constitution provides a clear delineation of powers between the state and the federal government.
“The president has overstepped the limit of his constitutional powers by issuing the Executive Order 10.
“The country is run on the basis of the rule of law,” Dattijo bellowed.
What now?
Oh well, everything would go back to what it used to be among all parties concerned. They call it status quo in legal parlance.
The states want the federal government to continue funding the legislatures and judiciaries in the states and they’ve got their wish with this ruling.
State governors would also continue to call the shots at the legislature and judiciary in some way, even though all arms of government are supposed to be independent in accordance with the doctrine of separation of powers.
Financial autonomy from the center would have made lawmakers or Judges call the bluff of powerful state executives.
As it stands, the states will continue to decide what they hand to legislatures and judiciaries after they have received their allocations from the federal government.
Buhari didn’t want that to continue, hence the issuance of EO10.
The president had similarly granted autonomy to the local governments in 2019, due to a similar concern.
Join the Conversation