Osun drags FG to Supreme Court over withheld LG allocations

The Osun State Government has filed a suit at the Supreme Court against the Federal Government, accusing it of unlawfully and unconstitutionally withholding statutory allocations due to the state’s 30 local government councils since March 2025.

The legal action, instituted by a team led by Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome and Musibau Adetunbi, on behalf of the Osun State Attorney General, seeks an order compelling the immediate release of all withheld funds.

The state is also asking the court to declare that the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) has no constitutional authority to suspend, divert, or withhold local government allocations.

At the centre of the dispute is a March 26, 2025 letter issued by the AGF, advising the suspension of disbursement of local government funds on the grounds of an alleged crisis in Osun State.

The state, however, contends that the crisis claim is baseless, stressing that the legitimacy of the February 22, 2025 local government elections was already settled by a June 13, 2025 Court of Appeal ruling.

That judgment affirmed the election of the current chairmen and councillors, nullifying the October 15, 2022 polls conducted under the previous administration.

In its originating summons, supported by a 35-paragraph affidavit sworn by Commissioner for Finance, Ogungbile Adeola Olusola, Osun argued that the AGF’s directive and continued withholding of funds run contrary to subsisting judgments of the Federal High Court, Osogbo (November 30, 2022), and the Court of Appeal.

The state maintains that the actions violate Sections 7 and 287 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantee democratically elected local governments and the enforcement of valid court rulings.

Among the five constitutional issues raised is whether the AGF, as the nation’s chief law officer, can override or ignore binding judicial pronouncements under the pretext of resolving a “crisis.”

Citing an affidavit of urgency filed by the AGF on August 13, 2025—after more than 80 days of silence on the matter—Osun insists that the federal authorities cannot usurp the judiciary’s role of interpreting the law.

The state further described the AGF’s move as “self-induced urgency,” intended to tilt judicial proceedings in the government’s favour.

READ ALSO: Adeleke promises to restore functionality to Osun LGs

Simultaneously, the Osun government has filed a related case at the Federal High Court, Osogbo, challenging the transfer of an earlier suit on the same allocation dispute to Abuja by a vacation judge.

The state has asked the court to stay proceedings in the lower court until the Supreme Court makes a definitive pronouncement on the constitutional questions at stake.

In an affidavit supporting the motion, Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Olufemi Akande Ogundun, accused the Federal Government of mounting “an affront to the rule of law.”

He warned that allowing multiple courts to adjudicate on the same issue could trigger conflicting judgments and legal chaos.

Osun is also protesting a directive from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, conveyed in a letter dated August 21, 2025, which ordered the transfer of the case to Abuja.

The state argues that the move contravenes judicial protocols and undermines prior directives that Lagos should serve as the vacation venue for cases emanating from Osogbo.

Beyond securing the release of withheld funds, the state is seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the AGF from interfering in local government allocations in the future, provided democratically elected councils remain in place.

No hearing date has yet been fixed by the Supreme Court. However, legal experts and political watchers say the case could have far-reaching implications for fiscal federalism, intergovernmental relations, and the autonomy of local governments in Nigeria.

According to sources, the matter is being closely monitored nationwide as a potential landmark test of the limits of executive power in relation to judicial authority and constitutional guarantees.