Opinion: Doctrine of Necessity, Due Process, and Evolving Jurisprudence of Local Government Autonomy in Cross River State
By Chief Okoi Obono-Obla
Removal of Yakurr chairman in 2001
The removal of the Chairman of Yakurr Local Government Area in 2001 by the Cross River State House of Assembly occurred under exceptional circumstances. At the time, violent rioting had broken out in Yakurr, and Governor Donald Duke found himself in a constitutional and administrative quagmire because no law existed to address the peculiar situation confronting the Local Government Council. Consequently, the Cross River State House of Assembly invoked the doctrine of necessity to restore order and preserve governance.
In response to the crisis, Governor Duke constituted a Judicial Commission of Inquiry headed by Honourable Justice Ekeng Effiong to investigate the remote and immediate causes of the conflict between the Yakurr Local Government Council and the youth of Ugep. I was accused of being the mastermind of the unrest and was duly summoned to appear before the Commission to answer the allegations.
The Commission of Inquiry commended me in its report for championing transparency, accountability, and good governance in the Yakurr Local Government Area. The findings of the Commission, together with the Government White Paper, directly informed the reform of the Cross River State Local Government Law, which was eventually enacted in 2004.
For this reason, I do not accept the argument that the removal of the Yakurr Chairman in 2001 was illegal. Rather, the exigencies of the moment, coupled with the absence of a governing legal framework, justified the Assembly’s reliance on the doctrine of necessity.
However, the legal and political circumstances in Yakurr in 2001 differ fundamentally and materially from the present situation in Bekwarra.
Bekwarra scenario and requirements of Cross River State Local Government Law
Unlike in 2001, the Cross River State Local Government Law now provides clear and detailed procedures for the removal of a Local Government chairman for misconduct. The law outlines two distinct pathways:
1. Removal by Councillors of the Local Government Area
Councillors may initiate removal proceedings by:
- Presenting a formal notice of allegations of misconduct;
- Securing the support of the required statutory majority;
- Forwarding the allegations to the Chief Judge of Cross River State, who must appoint a Panel of Seven persons to investigate the allegations;
- Acting on the findings of the Panel, which determine whether the chairman is guilty or not.
2. Removal by the Cross River State House of Assembly
The Assembly may also initiate removal, but only by following the same due‑process safeguards, including:
- A formal notice of allegations;
- Transmission of the allegations to the Chief Judge;
- Appointment of a Seven‑man Investigative Panel;
- Consideration of the Panel’s findings before any resolution is passed.
These procedural safeguards are designed to prevent political abuse and ensure fairness, transparency, and constitutional compliance.
Why the Bekwarra Removal Was Legally Flawed:
In the Bekwarra case, the Cross River State House of Assembly failed to comply with the mandatory statutory procedure. As reported in public sources, the Assembly removed Mrs. Theresa Akwaji Ushie without involving the Chief Judge to constitute the required Investigative Panel.
This omission rendered the process procedurally defective and legally unsustainable, particularly because the Assembly also interfered with the powers vested in the Bekwarra Legislative Council, thereby hijacking a process that the law expressly assigns to the Councillors.
This is materially different from the Yakurr situation in 2001, where no law existed, and the doctrine of necessity was the only available constitutional tool.
Recent Supreme Court Jurisprudence on Local Government Autonomy:
The Supreme Court of Nigeria has, in its landmark decisions of 24 July 2024 and 5 November 2025, reaffirmed that:
- Local Governments are constitutionally recognised third‑tier governments;
- Their autonomy and independence must be protected;
- State Governments and State Assemblies cannot arbitrarily dissolve or remove elected Local Government officials;
- Any removal must strictly comply with due process, statutory safeguards, and constitutional guarantees.
These decisions significantly strengthen the legal framework governing Local Government administration and underscore the illegality of any removal that does not follow the prescribed procedure.
Conclusion
The comparison between Yakurr in 2001 and Bekwarra today is fundamentally misplaced. In 2001, the doctrine of necessity filled a legal vacuum. In 2025, however, a comprehensive legal framework exists, and the Supreme Court has fortified local government autonomy.
Therefore, the Bekwarra remova, carried out without recourse to the Chief Judge and without the mandatory Investigative Panel, was not only procedurally defective but also contrary to the spirit of recent Supreme Court jurisprudence on Local Government independence.
Okoi Obono-obla is an APC Chieftain and was a former Presidential Aide
