Local government elections in Nigeria: History, dynamics and challenges

By Anjolaoluwa Ogunpitan

Upon closely observing the recently concluded Lagos State local government elections, I have come to a sobering realization: this is not the best path forward for our local democracy. Local government elections, which should be the most competitive and attract the highest levels of voter participation, have become mere shadows of their intended purpose due to the undemocratic practices employed by our governors. Local government is meant to be the tier closest to the people; however, these elections are frequently decided by a mere minority of voters, highlighting a profound lack of political will to strengthen grassroots democracy.

This is not a new problem. More than 25 years after Nigeria’s landmark 1998 local government elections—held to restore democracy following military rule—the promise of authentic grassroots democracy remains largely unfulfilled. Despite clear constitutional guarantees, local elections have devolved into rituals manipulated by state-level political interests, serving to entrench power, reward loyalists, and deny citizens meaningful choice.

The Constitutional Framework and Its Systematic Breach

Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution is clear: Nigeria must implement “a system of local government by democratically elected local government councils.” State Houses of Assembly are mandated to enact laws that establish and regulate these councils based on the political and economic differences between their respective states, ensuring the conduct of regular elections. Local governments are responsible for providing essential services—such as roads, markets, sanitation, waste management, primary healthcare, and education—to bring government closer to the people.

According to the 1999 Constitution, local government elections must be conducted by State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), established in each state to ensure local accountability. In theory, this decentralization was intended to make the electoral process more responsive to the needs of the states. However, in practice, SIECs have often functioned as extensions of the state executive, controlled by governors who appoint their members and finance their operations.

In contrast, the 1998 transitional local government elections were conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and are widely regarded as the most credible local elections Nigeria has ever held. This disparity highlights how the partisan capture of SIECs has undermined local democracy since 1999.

Local government elections are mandated to be held every three years, which is a shorter cycle compared to the four-year terms for other offices. This was designed to ensure that council officials are held more accountable and responsive to local needs. However, in practice, governors frequently postpone these elections indefinitely—citing reasons such as security concerns, litigation, or budgetary constraints—only to appoint caretaker committees or sole administrators instead.

Despite numerous court rulings declaring these caretaker arrangements unconstitutional, they have persisted for years in many states. According to Yiaga Africa’s 2024 assessment, fewer than 60% of Nigeria’s 774 local government areas (LGAs) had elected officials by the end of 2023.

Governors’ Control Over Scheduling, Candidates, and Outcomes

Even when elections do take place, governors retain near-total control over their timing and the candidates permitted to run. In the absence of a national timetable or enforceable standards, elections are frequently scheduled at the governor’s political convenience—often just before leaving office—to fulfill a constitutional requirement without facilitating meaningful competition.

Even Nigeria’s most esteemed politicians have participated in these practices. Peter Obi organized Anambra State’s local government elections just two months before the end of his tenure in 2014, following nearly eight years of appointed transition committees.

Seyi Makinde, the Governor of Oyo State, has conducted two cycles of local elections, achieving sweeping victories for the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) that approach near-total dominance.

Abiola Ajimobi, Makinde’s predecessor from the APC, did much the same by ensuring that the APC secured all 33 local government seats in 2018.

Nasir El-Rufai, renowned for implementing electronic voting in Kaduna, oversaw elections in which the APC secured victories in nearly every local government, leading to allegations of a meticulously orchestrated and uncompetitive process.

This is not a partisan issue. Across political parties and states, governors have utilized local elections as instruments of patronage rather than mechanisms of democracy.

Elections as Incentives for Political Foot Soldiers

Local government positions have increasingly become compensation packages for the governor’s loyal supporters, party operatives, and political affiliates who helped secure their power. Elections are often meticulously orchestrated to ensure that these loyalists take office, thereby guaranteeing control over local structures, employment opportunities, and revenue streams.

Yiaga Africa’s report characterizes these elections as “selection, not election,” in which governors appoint their preferred candidates and subsequently conduct a poll to legitimize those choices. This process effectively transforms local councils into extensions of the ruling party, thereby excluding meaningful opposition and undermining citizen choice.

Weak Accountability and Ineffective Service Delivery

Because local government chairmen often owe their positions to the governor rather than to the electorate, they see themselves as political appointees rather than independent leaders accountable to the public.

A particularly revealing incident occurred in Ogun State in 2023, when local government chairmen were filmed prostrating before Governor Dapo Abiodun. Governor Abiodun was democratically elected, just like these chairmen, yet these supposedly local leaders treated him as their political master. This episode starkly illustrates the culture of subservience that undermines genuine democratic partnership in local governance.

That is why many local governments engage in minimal visible project development. There is a lack of electoral pressure to provide essential services such as roads, markets, sanitation, schools, and health centers. Instead, local councils often operate as instruments for distributing patronage, sustaining party networks, and rewarding loyalty.

Financial Control: Governors Seizing Local Government Allocations

Beyond influencing electoral outcomes, governors also exert significant control over local government finances, often in clear violation of constitutional principles of autonomy.

The Constitution requires that local government revenue be deposited into State Joint Local Government Accounts. However, governors frequently exploit this system by withholding or unilaterally reallocating these funds.

A striking and candid example occurred in Oyo State in 2023, when Governor Seyi Makinde admitted on Fresh FM radio that he had withheld federal allocations intended for local governments. He justified this by accusing the local governments of lacking accountability and revealed that he was providing them with only ₦10 million monthly, regardless of their statutory entitlements.

Such admissions reveal a stark reality: many governors view local governments not as constitutionally guaranteed partners in development, but as subordinate administrative units to be controlled, rewarded, or punished at their discretion. Without predictable and adequate funding, local governments cannot effectively plan, deliver services, or operate independently—even if they are nominally “elected.”

The Result: A Crisis of Legitimacy

This toxic combination of manipulated elections, imposed candidates, caretaker committees, and seized allocations has led to a legitimacy crisis.

Voter turnout in local elections is alarmingly low. Many citizens view the electoral process as meaningless—a mere ritual with predetermined outcomes. Afrobarometer surveys indicate that over 40% of Nigerians lack trust in their local government councils, with fewer than 7% expressing strong confidence in them.

This public distrust is understandable. Local councils frequently fail to deliver the services that citizens rely on daily. Instead of functioning as engines of grassroots development, they often become mere vessels for distributing patronage and salaries, contributing little to the community’s quality of life.

Another reason citizens have lost faith in local government elections is the lack of job security for elected chairmen and councilors. Even when councils are democratically elected, a new governor can easily dissolve them and appoint caretaker committees loyal to their party. For instance, Governor Seyi Makinde dissolved elected local government chairmen across the state on his inauguration day in May 29, 2023, while Governor Adeleke took similar action in Osun State. Court rulings merely mandated the payment of salaries for the time they did not serve—forcing citizens to pay officials who were denied the opportunity to fulfill their duties. This constitutes both an abuse of power and a reckless waste of public funds.

Reclaiming Grassroots Democracy

Nigeria’s 1998 local government elections marked the beginning of a new era of citizen choice and local development. However, more than 25 years later, many local governments remain ensnared by state-level political manipulation, deprived of autonomy, lacking sufficient funding, and reduced to instruments of patronage.

Real reform necessitates not only new legislation but also renewed political will. Local government should not operate as the personal fiefdom of governors or as a reward for political allies. Instead, it must fulfill the purpose envisioned by the Constitution: to serve as the democratic foundation for development, service, and accountability to the Nigerian people.