My recent column calling for a truce in the altercation between the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo and the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona as regards the ranking of Yoruba Obas received mixed reactions. A respected, cerebral and highly principled trade unionist argued that my piece should have been more aptly titled ‘Needless institution’ rather than ‘Needless controversy’. He pointed out that the traditional institutions not only collaborated with our colonial conquerors but still constitute veritable parasites on society today. A highly respected elder statesman cautioned me against ‘intellectualizing’ an outmoded and irrelevant institution at a time when most parts of the world have moved from monarchical rule to democratic forms of governance.
I too strongly held to this perception of traditional institutions many years ago. It is a position that in my view can no longer be credibly sustained. Did traditional rulers in pre-colonial Nigeria readily collude with the colonial intruders? The evidence does not support that position. As Dr Patrick Heinecke, formerly of the Ahmadu Bello University (ABU) notes of the North, for instance, “Transition to colonial rule was a prolonged and bloody struggle which lasted in some areas until the mid-1920s. The Hausa-Fulani violently resisted invasion by the British, and several Emirs were killed or exiled before their emirates were finally forced into submission”. We are aware of the complete and ruthless razing of the capital of the almost 500-year old Benin Kingdom in 1887 and the banishing of the reigning Oba Ewuare into exile. The same fate of forced exile befell Oba Kosoko of Lagos. The situation was similar across pre-colonial Nigeria. The colonial conquest was thus more a function of a confrontation with a superior technological military civilisation rather than the complicity of traditional rulers.
And those countries that transited either through evolution or revolution from absolute monarchies to democracies at least did so organically within the context of the internal dynamics of their respective societies. In Africa, the modern Nation-State is an alien imposition. That is why the late historian, Basil Davidson, described the Nation-State as a curse and ‘the black man’s burden’.
In recent times we have had the installation of new monarchs in various parts of the country including Ile-Ife, Ibadan, Warri, Iwo, Kano and Borgu to name a few. The contestation for the positions among qualified ruling houses has often been fierce and intense but once a choice is made by the king makers, the community rallies behind him. Of course, modern political science teaches us that the legitimacy and authority of government is a function largely of regular, free and fair elections. But the reality is that most monarchs across the country enjoy greater legitimacy, commitment and loyalty from their people than their elected officials. And despite the undeniable greed and grovelling of many traditional rulers, there are those like the Awujale of Ijebuland, the late Olubadan, Oba Samuel OdulanaOdugade, the Alaafin of Oyo, Oba LamidiAdeyemi, the Oba of Benin, Omon’Oba n ‘Edo Uku Akpolokpolo Erediauwa and the Alake of Egbaland to name a few who have maintained the dignity and integrity of their offices. Equally noteworthy is the fact that no matter the partisan political leaning of a reigning monarch, he enjoys the respect and loyalty of his people across party lines.
It would amount to intellectual dishonesty not to recognize and admit the sheer resilience, durability and continuing influence of the country’s traditional authority institutions. As I said in my previous column, our forefathers must be credited for devising creative systems of governance to cope with the challenges of their peculiar political environments in the pre-colonial era. The tragedy is that the colonial intrusion interfered disastrously with the natural evolution of the pre-colonial traditional institutions into the modern era and replaced them with a strange post-colonial Nation-State contraption that remains a major obstacle on the path of Africa’s progress. Unfortunately, most of us behave as if there is no redeeming feature whatever in our political past that can add value to our current political development preferring to seek our political salvation solely in foreign models.
Even the highly enlightened and accomplished Chief ObafemiAwolowo wrote in 1947 that “only an insignificant minority of Nigerians have any political awareness”. Basil Davidson described this as an astonishing statement “given Yoruba political history over the previous several centuries”. In the 1969/70 session, Professor James O’Connell, Head of Department of Government and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at ABU delivered a public lecture in which he defined government as a small group of people who coordinate the affairs of the larger community with its members “usually divided into three branches: those who make rules (the legislature), adjudicate rules (judiciary) and implement rules (the executive)”.
In a trenchant review of the lecture, the late Dr BalaUsman described this definition as “insulting in its colossal arrogance”. According to him, “The division of government into legislature, judiciary and executive evolved in some states in the northern part of Western Europe from the 17th and 18th centuries. It cannot by any stretch of imagination be described as ‘usual’ for the overwhelming majority of the world’s political systems…The governments of Bornu, Benin, the Bachama or any other Nigerian peoples one cares to name, have never been divided in this way either in theory or in practice”. Whether one agrees with Dr Usman or not, the valid point he is making is that our theory and practice of politics and governance must be informed not just by received doctrines but also our own historical experience.
This is why it is commendable that in their 2005 edited book, ‘Beyond The State: Nigeria’s Search For Positive Leadership’, Professors Adebayo Olukoshi, Adigun Agbaje, Hussainah Abdullah and Cyril Obi, devote the first part to locating the country’s leadership challenges in historical perspective. The chapters in this section critically examine traditional leadership in the Sokoto caliphate as well as among the Idoma, Igbo and Yoruba in pre-colonial Nigeria. Contending that it has not always been the case that good leadership has eluded the country, the authors submit that “going by the rich pre-colonial experience of the various communities in Nigeria, there is every reason to find some encouragement in history and in contemporary reality for the identification and nurturing of a culture of positive leadership and the institutionalisation of such a cadre in the country”.
In a seminal essay in which he examines what he calls the co-existence of ‘dual authorities’ – republican and traditional – in African states, Professor Richard Sklar makes the same point: “The African national governments are fragile, and there is great need for authority based on consent of the governed. In this circumstance, a separate source of authority, embedded in tradition, could powerfully reinforce social discipline without abandonment of democratic forms of government. The rejuvenation of traditional authority would not, then, imply a resurgence of either “feudalism” or political oligarchy”. The simple point is that we can tap into the strong legitimacy, loyalty and commitment that the traditional institution enjoys among millions of our people to reinforce democracy and good governance.This would, however, be a function of ensuring that only men of the highest character and integrity ascend to these traditional positions.
Development lessons from Cuba
The restoration of diplomatic ties with Cuba by the almighty United States under the Obama presidency represents a major triumph for the tiny Island. For over five decades, America had not only imposed an economic blockade on Cuba but several American Presidents had even tried to eliminate the iconic Fidel Castro. Cuba boasts no great wealth or mineral resources. She is not your model of global prosperity. Yet, she has achieved near 100% literacy for decades and its health statistics continue to marvel more developed countries. According to an analyst, “In Cuba, the extremes of opulence and misery are banished in favour of a generalized level of wealth, best described as “enough to get by”. Cuba has offered more than 460 doctors and nurses to help combat Ebola in West Africa and more than 50,000 Cuban health workers are working in 66 countries around the world. Former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti obviously had Cuba in mind when he said his country was not seeking grandeur but the more limited ambition of moving out of poverty with dignity. I have never really understood why Nigeria aims to be among the top 20 largest economies by 2020. Will that necessarily reduce poverty and inequality or promote general well being of the vast majority? I think we have a lot of developmental lessons to learn from Cuba.
NATION
END
Be the first to comment