The Osun State Government has dragged the Federal Government to the Supreme Court.
The state filed a fresh suit at the Supreme Court against the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), accusing the Federal Government of unlawfully withholding statutory allocations meant for its 30 local government councils since March 2025.
The suit, filed on Monday, follows an earlier one withdrawn by the state but reintroduced amid claims that the AGF ignored valid court rulings affirming the legitimacy of the elected council officials.
Represented by its Attorney-General and a legal team led by Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), Osun is seeking an order compelling the Federal Government to release the withheld funds and halt what it described as “an unconstitutional and arbitrary seizure” of local government revenues.
The state argued that the AGF’s directive contained in a March 26, 2025 letter citing a “local government crisis” was baseless, given that judgments from the Federal High Court (November 30, 2022) and Court of Appeal (June 13, 2025) had already settled the dispute, nullifying the 2022 polls conducted by the previous administration.
Among its reliefs, Osun is asking the apex court to declare that the AGF lacks constitutional powers to withhold local government funds, that his actions violate Section 287 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and to grant a perpetual injunction against further seizures.
In an affidavit, the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Olufemi Akande Ogundun, described the Federal Government’s actions as “an affront to the rule of law.” He argued that only the Supreme Court can conclusively resolve the constitutional issues, citing legal precedents including A.G. Kano State v. A.G. Federation (2007) and RMAFC v. A.G. Rivers State (2023).
Osun also raised concerns over the Chief Judge’s decision to transfer a related case from the Federal High Court, Osogbo, to Abuja for hearing by a vacation judge, warning that conflicting judgments could arise.
