Former President of the Nigerian Bar Association and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olisa Agbakoba, has raised fresh concerns over the state of Nigeria’s democracy and governance, warning that weak leadership, institutional lawlessness and poor fiscal management continue to undermine national development and public accountability.
Agbakoba made the remarks on Monday, during an extensive interview on Frontline, a public affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese Ijebu, Ogun Statewhere he addressed issues ranging from Nigeria’s growing debt profile and revenue leakages to local government autonomy, constitutional reforms, rule of law, voter behaviour and political accountability.
The senior lawyer argued that Nigeria’s biggest challenge is no longer merely constitutional deficiency, but the failure of political actors and public office holders to obey the law, implement governance structures responsibly and manage public resources transparently. According to him, institutional decay has become so deep that even well-crafted legal frameworks are routinely ignored by those entrusted with implementing them.
He warned that governance in Nigeria has gradually shifted away from service delivery and constitutional responsibility toward electoral survival, money politics and elite power retention, adding that the consequences are now visible in rising poverty, insecurity, weak public institutions and worsening economic hardship across the country.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AUTONOMY “BEING DELIBERATELY FRUSTRATED”
Speaking on the Supreme Court judgment granting financial autonomy to local governments, Agbakoba described President Bola Tinubu’s decision to pursue direct allocation for local governments as “brilliant,” but argued that many state governments have since devised methods to frustrate the implementation process.
According to him, local governments remain the most critical level of governance because they are closest to ordinary Nigerians and responsible for delivering basic public services such as sanitation, primary healthcare, welfare and grassroots development.
He said many state governments have instead centralized powers and resources that constitutionally belong to local councils, thereby weakening governance at the grassroots and making service delivery ineffective.
Agbakoba said, “Yeah, I’m not even sure what’s happening because that was a great decision you know and moved by the president to free up the local government, because local government is at the end of the day the base of Nigerian governments, if you have the look, and I have not understood why people will give themselves responsibilities that are not assigned to them, why do you want more work when you have enough? Take Lagos State, why would the central government of Lagos State want to disrupt the functions of refuse collection and the road signage and all the things that local government should be doing, and then pass a law to say the local government funds that come will be retained at the federal, at the Lagos State level, and then shared, it makes it inefficient, it makes it inefficient.”
The senior advocate further lamented that most local governments across Nigeria have become financially and administratively paralysed, arguing that many councils now exist mainly as political structures for gubernatorial and presidential mobilization rather than institutions of development.
According to him, local councils no longer provide meaningful public services despite receiving constitutional allocations, while state governments continue to interfere in their operations and financial independence.
He stated, “So in my place in where I live I have never seen any service offered to me, water, electricity, nothing, so why don’t you simply allow local governments to be strong so that you can focus on the bigger issues? So, President Tinubu’s decision to go to court was brilliant, problem is that many states have found clearer ways to actually block the process, so I don’t know to what extent the decision of the Supreme Court authorizing President Tinubu to pay directly to the local government has been impactful, I don’t know, I don’t have any evidence, I wish somebody would look at it, it’s something that it was, you know, interrogating.”
Agbakoba argued that empowering local governments would significantly reduce pressure on state administrations while improving public welfare at community levels, particularly in areas such as schools, healthcare and local infrastructure.
He said, “Because the local governments are stifled, and the local governments are the backbone of at least 170 million Nigerians, if those guys are looked after at the local governments by provision of schools, welfare, education, medicals, it would be a different story, so the state governments will now focus on what it ought to focus, things that, macro-economic development that concerns all local governments in the area, that’s the function of the states, not to get into things like signage, how can that be?”
“CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS MEAN NOTHING WITHOUT PEOPLE WHO WILL OBEY THE LAW”
On the ongoing debate around constitutional amendment and restructuring, Agbakoba maintained that Nigeria’s central problem is not necessarily the absence of laws but the refusal of leaders to respect and implement them.
He argued that constitutional amendments alone cannot transform governance unless political actors themselves are committed to the rule of law and constitutional limitations.
According to him, impunity has become deeply entrenched in Nigeria’s governance structure, making legal reforms ineffective in practice.
He said, “Look, all these amendments, structural adjustments, give it whatever name. It’s meaningless if you do not have people who are willing to govern Nigeria. That’s the point. So, don’t expect magic from the constitution. I believe less in the constitutional framework and more in governance people. Because, we see here, what professor, late professor Madu Eze, calls impunity. Impunity simply means nobody obeys the law.”
The senior lawyer cited examples from the United States and the United Kingdom, arguing that functional democracies succeed largely because institutions and leaders respect judicial authority and constitutional limits.
He referenced U.S. President Donald Trump and argued that despite Trump’s controversial political style, American institutions still compelled compliance with judicial rulings.
Agbakoba said, “Even President Trump, with all his attitude to government and the way he personalizes it, when he was overruled by the Supreme Court on tariffs, he obeyed it. But, you think that would happen here? He obeyed it. A case came before a judge concerning an undocumented immigrant. On the first day of hearing, the prosecution put his case, why the guy should be deported. On the second day of hearing, the undocumented person did not appear, and the judge said, where is the defendant? He said, they have deported him to Nicaragua. He said, in my court? He said, if you do not bring him back now, all of you will lose your jobs.”
He argued that Nigerian political culture lacks that same institutional discipline, adding that court judgments are frequently ignored when they affect government interests.
According to him, constitutional debates often fail because the real issue is not legal drafting but enforcement and leadership character.
He stated, “What we need, I must say, is people who are in government committed to obey the rule of law. If a court gives a decision, how many decisions of the courts are obeyed? How many? The courts are there to stress bulldog. They are there, unless it is, if it’s between me and you, and you defeat me, there the court decisions are obeyed. But when government is involved, it’s not as easy.”
“CONVICTS ARE RUNNING FOR OFFICE”
Agbakoba also expressed concern over the quality of Nigeria’s political class and electoral process, arguing that political recruitment has become dangerously weak and largely driven by money rather than competence.
He lamented that individuals facing criminal allegations or lacking governance capacity are still able to contest for office without meaningful scrutiny from political institutions or voters.
Responding to questions on how Nigeria can attract better leaders, he said the current system rewards lawlessness, financial influence and political manipulation rather than competence and public service.
He said, “No, no, answer it yourself. You have raised the issue, for what you’re asking me. You have raised the issue yourself. You’ve just said that convicts are also vying. So what do you want me to say? That’s it.”
The constitutional lawyer maintained that Nigeria’s governance crisis will persist unless political actors begin to understand the constitutional limits of public office and the obligations attached to leadership.
According to him, separation of powers exists only on paper because many office holders do not believe they are bound by constitutional restraints.
Agbakoba stated, “The rule of law is not followed. Trust me, that is the absolute gospel truth. The rule of law is not followed. And that is why I reverse the process by saying, it’s more important to have people that understand the constitution, mean well for Nigerians, understand the purpose of being in office is limited to their function as either judicial executive or legislator, and that they will obey it.”
“99 PERCENT OF THOSE HOLDING VOTERS’ CARDS HAVE NO CLUE”
In one of the most controversial moments of the interview, Agbakoba questioned the level of political awareness among Nigerian voters and suggested that the country may eventually need to consider stricter voter eligibility standards.
He argued that widespread vote-buying and low political education have weakened democratic accountability and allowed poor leadership choices to thrive.
According to him, many politicians intentionally avoid educating voters because politically informed citizens are more likely to challenge bad governance and reject inducement politics.
He said, “If we continue with, because the honest truth is this, 99% of those who hold the voter’s card have no clue what they are doing. They have no clue. With all those my old aunties in my village in Onitsha, they have no idea what’s happening. Yet they all carry voter’s cards and you give them two thousand naira and they vote anyhow they like.”
Agbakoba admitted that his proposal could be controversial and constitutionally difficult, but insisted that Nigeria may need “radical solutions” if the country hopes to reverse its democratic decline.
He further argued that politicians deliberately avoid civic education because an informed electorate would become harder to manipulate during elections.
According to him, “Wait, so you think that if I were running for state governor of my state, it would be in my interest to educate the citizens. For what? Why would I want to do that? I want to just give them money. Why should I want to educate people who may vote me out? Let’s be practical and honest. Why would I want to do that?”
CALLERS REACT TO AGBAKOBA’S POSITION
The programme also featured reactions from callers who largely agreed with Agbakoba’s concerns about borrowing, governance and fiscal management.
One caller, identified as Omooba, described Nigeria’s debt profile as dangerous and warned against continuous borrowing without productive investment.
The caller said, “As a retired accountant, I can never advise my enemy to go and borrow. You people said America was borrowing. Yes, you could borrow if you are borrowing to finance a cash project. You can see what SAN said now. You borrow 100 naira, you pay back interest of 70 naira.”
Another caller, Titilope from Lagos, disagreed with aspects of Agbakoba’s comments on subsidy but still blamed Nigeria’s economic failures on poor leadership and the collapse of domestic refining capacity.
She argued that Nigeria should not be importing refined petroleum products despite being one of the world’s major oil-producing nations.
According to her, “Nigeria, for God’s sake, is among the fifth largest oil producing countries in the world. Why should Nigeria be importing petrol? Why should Nigeria refinery not work? Why are we allowing a system whereby we lose opportunities of all the benefits that come with having a refinery here?”
A third caller, Emmanuel from Epe, questioned conflicting government positions on borrowing and raised concerns about the management of constituency project funds by lawmakers.
He also asked whether Nigeria’s political leadership possesses the foresight required to manage the country’s economic future responsibly.
“BORROWING IS NOT BAD — RECKLESS BORROWING IS THE PROBLEM”
Responding to the callers, Agbakoba clarified that borrowing itself is not inherently wrong, but insisted that Nigeria’s current borrowing pattern lacks transparency, discipline and developmental focus.
He argued that the country needs a clear public sector borrowing framework tied to measurable economic outcomes and stronger fiscal oversight.
He said, “Borrowing is not bad, let me make that clear. But we must see what we are borrowing the money for. Number two is that there is a lot of fiscal recklessness and leakage, which needs to be plugged. Number three is that the president needs to take a very strong position on this excessive borrowing.”
The senior advocate maintained that borrowing should only occur within a disciplined fiscal framework capable of ensuring repayment and productive investment.
He referenced billionaire businessman Aliko Dangote as an example of borrowing tied to productive industrial investment.
Agbakoba stated, “There’s nothing wrong in borrowing, if you can pay back. I mean, Dangote has borrowed. Look at what he has got in his refinery. But there’s nothing ab-initial, ipso facto wrong in borrowing. It is when the borrowing is reckless, there’s leakage, it benefits a few, rather than the state that there’s a problem.”
He further called on President Tinubu to take stronger personal control of Nigeria’s fiscal reform agenda and enforce accountability across revenue management institutions.
According to him, Nigeria’s economic future now depends heavily on whether political leadership can impose transparency and discipline on public finance administration.
He said, “The president is the only one who can lead this conversation. So when the president stands in front like a general and leads it, I think there will be discipline. What’s lacking is the discipline. So all the agencies around the fiscal management process, Office of Budget, Accountant General, Office of the Auditor General, CBN and the like, will know that we have a new sheriff in town who is not going to stand for reckless borrowing.”
