The brewing constitutional crisis in Edo State over the suspension of all the 18 local government area chairmen won’t end any time soon.

This is as officials of the state government have declared that the chairmen remain suspended.

The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, has warned of an imminent break down of law and order should the state government refuse to back down.

The PDP spoke on Monday through its chieftain, Hon. Ose Anenih described the unfolding events as “a shocking rebellion against the rule of law and the President’s authority.”

The government’s stand comes despite the declaration of the suspension as illegal by both the Attorney General of the Federation, Mr Lateef Fagbemi, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, and a High Court sitting in Edo State.

The AGF recently reaffirmed that only local councillors, not governors or state assemblies hold the constitutional authority to suspend or remove elected local government officials.

Similarly, Justice Efe Ikponmwonba of the Edo High Court issued a mandatory injunction on Friday, declaring the suspension null and void and restraining the state government and other parties from meddling in local government operations until the substantive case is heard.

However, state officials have disregarded this ruling, signaling what appears a direct challenge to law officer of federation and disobedience to court order.

Barrister Andrew Emwanta, a member of the governor’s administrative panel, while appearing on national television, declared that “the Constitution has placed local governments under state control, and that remains the law.”

He added that, “Financial autonomy is about giving them access; but that does not mean state governments do not have control over how they use that money.

“The Supreme Court cannot amend the constitution.”

In a similar vein, Kassim Afegbua, another panel member, also countered the AGF.

He had this to say when he appeared on Arise TV: “Lateef Fagbemi might be the law officer of the federation, but he does not represent the constitution of the country and he does not represent other laws made validly under the provisions of the constitution by the Edo House of Assembly.”

The governor’s spokesperson, Fred Itua, was also quoted to have said that “The decisions by the Edo State House of Assembly, vis-a-vis, the Governor of the State, Senator Monday Okpebholo, are entirely justified.

“It is essential to note that the apex Court is both a court of law and a policy court, and while it has the power to make policy decisions, it cannot exercise this power when the Constitution is clear on a matter.

“The House of Assembly has the powers to oversight the activities of the Governor, and similarly, the Governor has the right to exercise oversight over local government chairmen.

“The current constitutional construct recognizes a two-tier federal design. It is clearly stipulated in the Constitution.”

Reacting to the government’s stand, Anenih described the unfolding events as “a shocking rebellion against the rule of law and the President’s authority.”

The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the 2023 election, Atiku Abubakar, has stated that the 2025 budget proposal lacks the structural and fiscal discipline needed to address Nigeria’s multifaceted economic challenges.

The former vice president made this disclosure in a statement on Sunday, reacting to the 2025 budget proposal.

Recall that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu last week presented a N49.7 trillion 2025 budget to the National Assembly. The President had based the budget on key economic assumptions, including a N36.36 trillion revenue target, inflation reduction to 15.75 per cent, an exchange rate of N1,500 per dollar, oil production at 2.06 million barrels per day, a crude oil price of $70 per barrel, and a N13.39 trillion budget deficit.

Reacting to the budget, Atiku stated that it reflects a continuation of business-as-usual fiscal practices where budgets fail to impact the lives of citizens.

According to him, the 2025 budget’s ability to foster sustainable economic growth and tackle Nigeria’s deep-rooted challenges is questionable.

Atiku also criticised the budget’s reliance on N13 trillion in borrowing to fund the deficit.

“Weak Budgetary Foundations: The 2024 budget’s underperformance signals poor budget execution. By Q3 of the fiscal year, less than 35 per cent of the allocated capital expenditure for MDAs had been disbursed, despite claims of 85 per cent budget execution. This underperformance in capital spending, crucial for fostering economic transformation, raises concerns about the execution of the 2025 budget.

“Disproportionate Debt Servicing: Debt servicing, which accounts for N15.8 trillion (33 per cent of the total expenditure), is nearly equal to the planned capital expenditure (N16 trillion, or 34 per cent). Moreover, debt servicing surpasses spending on key priority sectors such as defence (N4.91 trillion), infrastructure (N4.06 trillion), education (N3.52 trillion), and health (N2.4 trillion). This imbalance will likely crowd out essential investments and perpetuate a cycle of increasing borrowing and debt accumulation, undermining fiscal stability.

“Unsustainable Government Expenditure: The government’s recurrent expenditure remains disproportionately high, with over N14 trillion (30 per cent of the budget) allocated to operating an oversized bureaucracy and supporting inefficient public enterprises. The lack of concrete steps to curb wastage and enhance the efficiency of public spending exacerbates fiscal challenges, leaving limited resources for development.

“Insufficient Capital Investment: After accounting for debt servicing and recurrent expenditure, the remaining allocation for capital spending—ranging from 25 per cent to 34 per cent of the total budget—is insufficient to address Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit and stimulate growth. This amounts to an average capital allocation of approximately N80,000 (US$45) per capita, which is insufficient to meet the demands of a nation grappling with slow growth and infrastructural underdevelopment.

“Regressive Taxation and Economic Strain: The administration’s decision to increase the VAT rate from 7.5 per cent to 10 per cent is a retrogressive measure that will exacerbate the cost-of-living crisis and impede economic growth. By imposing additional tax burdens on an already struggling populace while failing to address governance inefficiencies, the government risks stifling domestic consumption and further deepening economic hardship.

“The 2025 budget lacks the structural reforms and fiscal discipline required to address Nigeria’s multifaceted economic challenges. To enhance the budget’s credibility, the administration must prioritise the reduction of inefficiencies in government operations, tackle contract inflation, and focus on long-term fiscal sustainability rather than perpetuating unsustainable borrowing and recurrent spending patterns. A shift toward a more disciplined and growth-oriented fiscal policy is essential for the nation’s economic recovery,” he stated.

The election petition tribunal sitting in Benin City has disclosed that Asue Ighodalo, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, the All Progressives Congress, APC, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, and Governor Monday Okpebholo will be calling 290 witnesses during the hearing of their petition.

According to reports, the tribunal is adjudicating on the declaration of Monday Okpebholo, the candidate of APC winner of the last September 21, 2024 governorship election in Edo State by Asue Ighodalo, the PDP candidate.

Asue Ighodalo and his party, PDP are challenging the declaration of Monday Okpebholo and his party winner of the election by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

According to reports, the chairman of the three-man tribunal, Justice Wilfred Ikpochi disclosed this at the weekend during the presentation of the pre-hearing reports and scheduling to parties in the petition.

Ikpochi did not, however, give the breakdown of the number of witnesses that each of the petitioners and respondents would call during the trial.

He said the 290 witnesses were proposed by the parties in the harmonized proposal for the pre-hearing conference.

He said the parties will only call witnesses whose statements on oath have been frontloaded and subpoenaed witnesses where necessary.

The court added that the petitioners shall call their witnesses within 21 days or less while each of the respondents shall be allowed 10 days or less to call their witnesses.

“The parties may call expert witnesses as indicated in their pre-hearing answers.

“All pleading documents shall be rendered and admitted by the tribunal while objections thereto shall be filled separately during final addresses. Objections to such documents during trial shall be noted and rulings reserved appropriately, “he said.

He also added that all frivolous and unnecessary applications for adjournments shall not be granted by the tribunal as the election petitions are time-bound.

According to him, whenever, it becomes very expedient to fast-track the proceedings, the tribunal shall bridge the time for doing anything in accordance with the rules as prescribed by the Electoral Act 2022.

Justice Kpochi, further added that on no account should any written address filed by counsel be more than 40 pages.

He said the address should be of double spacing format with 14 font size.

He, however, advised all counsel to imbibe the spirit of good brief writing in compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022.

Others presented in the reports by the tribunal are that there shall be no consolidation of the petition with any other petition as there was no application in respect thereof and there shall be no amendment of amendment as none is required.

“There shall be no further particulars or admissions save the application by the petitioners for interrogatories directed to the INEC, Monday Okpebholo as first and second respondents requesting for particulars articulated in the copies of the proposed interrogatories that have been filed along with the application in motion No-EPT/ED/GOV/02/M10/2024 filed on December 6, 2024, that has been granted.

The tribunal chairman, who adjourned to January 13, 2025, for hearing, said the court shall be sitting from day to day from 10am except on Sundays and other public holidays gazetted by law.

He, however, stated that the sitting period is subject to reviews as the exigencies of the workload permit.

DAILYPOST