To be clear……i do not support the Federal Government of Nigeria FGN borrowing at 15% to advance to States to pay salaries.
That said, if the Federal Government seeks to bailout states, then it cant pick and choose and should remove petty politics from the management of the economy. The economic assets of Nigeria are not owned by the Federal Government or the States but by the Federation which includes The FGN and the States, its a small but important distinction.
The Federal Government of Nigeria can decide to bailout states and also has the executive prerogative to refuse to bailout states. However once a bailout is agreed, the FGN cannot choose to withhold funds earmarked for a States(s) that makes up the Federation over political differences….No. that is unconstitutional. The implication is that the Federal Government is not running its affairs in a manner that reflects the Federal Character of the nation, in clear variance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic.
Ekiti is a tiny state, by population, land-size and even contributions to the Federation purse…but its still a State….with 3 Senators, same as Kano with the largest population and Akwa Ibom which significantly funds the Federation purse, my point? Ekiti has a right…. note a right to whatever benefit is “shared” to other members of the Federation. You cannot bailout Katsina and Kwara and leave out Ekiti.
The administration may view this in political lens but this is constitutional. This is akin to denying Ekiti a Ministerial seat because Ekiti did not meet “conditions”. A long time ago, another Army General turned politician took away funds from a State because of political differences……the courts stepped in and returned the seized funds back to the State….
It seems that lesson was not learned.