By Dapo Akinrefon

AS President Bola Tinubu marks his third year in office today, the political landscape reflects a mix of sweeping reforms, deepening controversies and growing concerns over the health of Nigeria’s democracy.

From the beginning in May 2023, the Tinubu administration set out on an ambitious course, rolling out structural and economic reforms that have continued to draw both applause and criticism. While supporters hail his boldness in confronting entrenched systems, critics argue that the same administration is presiding over a shrinking democratic space.

LG autonomy

Landmark victory, troubled implementation One of the administration’s most celebrated milestones is the push for local government autonomy.

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court granted full financial and administrative independence to the 774 local government areas, effectively stripping state governors of their long-held control over council funds. For decades, governors operated the joint allocation system, a mechanism widely accused of stifling grassroots development.

The apex court’s ruling was, therefore, seen as a watershed moment. Tinubu’s supporters were quick to applaud the development, describing it as a decisive step towards deepening governance at the grassroots.

However, nearly a year after the ruling, implementation remains fraught with controversy. Critics accuse the Federal Government of failing to enforce compliance among state governors, many of whom are alleged to have continued indirect control of council finances.

The situation in Osun State has become a flashpoint. Since March 2025, statutory allocations to the state’s 30 local government areas have been withheld following a dispute over the legitimacy of council leadership after the February 2025 elections.

The Federal Government directed funds to previously elected APC chairmen, a move rejected by Governor Ademola Adeleke, whose administration challenged the decision in court. In December 2025, the Supreme Court struck out the suit filed by the Osun State Government, ruling that the Attorney General lacked the locus standi to sue on behalf of the councils.

Yet, in the same breath, the court held that the Federal Government’s withholding of funds violated constitutional provisions and earlier rulings affirming local government autonomy.