For The Glory of Our Traditional Institutions

Being Text of the Speech by His Excellency, Dr. Abdullahi Adamu (Sarkin Yakin Keffi), Executive Governor of Nasarawa State at the Signing into Law of a Bill Titled the Nasarawa State Local Government (Amendment) Law, 2005, at Lafia, Wednesday, November 16, 2005

On January 21, 2002, we appointed a committee to advise the government “on the role of our traditional rulers in the security and relevant functions for effective administration of the local government system” in the state. The five-man committee with the Emir of Keffi, His Royal Highness, Alhaji Muhammadu Chindo Yamusa II, as chairman, had the late Emir of Nasarawa, His Royal Highness, Alhaji Ibrahim Ramalan Abubakar, His Royal Highness, Mr. Bala Angbazo, the Aren Eggon, His Royal Highness, Barrister J.S. Aninge, the Odyong Nyankpa and His Royal Highness, Mr. Ayuba Agwadu Audu, the Zhe Migili, as members.

The committee duly carried out its assignment and submitted its report to government in May that year. It did a very thorough job. We expected nothing less from such enlightened men steeped in our traditional mores and modern administration. Their report together with other efforts in the same direction culminated in the bill we are signing into law today. We sincerely thank their royal highnesses, the chairman and the members of the committee for doing a fine job.

The bill on the structure and functions of traditional rulers in Nasarawa State, which we are signing into law today was initiated by the executive arm of government. Our partners in this bold step are the honourable members of the state house of assembly. If they had disagreed with our objectives, the bill would not have become law today. They did not need to be persuaded that we have taken the right step to reconstruct the broken bridge between our past and the present. We acknowledge their co-operation. Mr. Speaker, Sir, honourable members, we hereby discharge our debt of gratitude by saying to you, thank you very much. We have always made the point, which bears repeating, that the secret of the success of our administration lies in the fact that the legislative and the executive arms of our government are in co-operative rather than competitive venture in the service of our state and its people. We are a lucky state.

Numerous other stake holders made their own invaluable inputs into the final shape of this very important law, which promises to be the harbinger of better things to come for our state and, by the grace of the almighty Allah, our country as a whole. We also thank all of them from the bottom of our hearts.

We warmly welcome all of you, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, to this historic ceremony whose towering importance dwarfs its modesty. We specially welcome their royal highnesses, the Gbong Gwom Jos; the Aku Uka of Wukari; Emir of Kanam; Emir of Wase; Ochi Idoma; Long Gomai of Shendam, Miskal Muaghavul, who are personally joining us for this ceremony. We also acknowledge the presence of the representatives of their royal highnesses, the sultan of sokoto; the emir of Kano; the emir zazzau and the emir of Ilorin. Their presence with us strengthens us in our determination to restore the best glory to our traditional institutions.

This is a modest ceremony in one small corner of our country but marks a historic turning point in our socio-political system. This law will have far-reaching consequences beyond the borders of our young state. It is a small step by one state to rebuild a broken bridge. It is also a wake up call to our nation to begin the process of reconstructing the traditional foundation of our social value system as well as the foundation of our political, economic and communal stability. This law is unique in the history of our post military democracy. It has no parallel in our contemporary politics. But it is consistent with our PDP administration’s vision and determination to give our traditional rulers their honoured place in our democratic dispensation.

Our traditional rulers have for long been isolated in the backwaters of our democratic dispensation. This law ends that isolation in our state. Their winter of irrelevance ends and their summer of relevance begins today. It closes one chapter of social instability and opens a new one in co-operative partnership between the custodians of our culture and tradition and our political administrators at the local government and state levels. The law marks the retracing of our steps into our immediate past and the laying of a new foundation for our social, political and economic system and a giant step forward in our quest for modern development. Today, the bridge is reconstructed, the missing link has been re-established and the foundation for our stability has been strengthened. We welcome our royal fathers back from the cold.

The traditional institution has a long and chequered history in our country. It bloomed as a venerable institution and wilted in the heat of inexplicable and almost criminal neglect. This institution has weathered the storm of misguided distrust and it has survived the ambivalence of the uncommitted. It is obvious from what the traditional institution has suffered and its remarkable resilience that this is one institution that has the survival capacity of the beetle. No one can kill it.
 
The traditional institution is the oldest politico-cultural institution in the country. It was the only form of administration our people knew long before the advent of colonial rule. Almost every ethnic group in the country had a well-developed kingship system, a remarkable set up which modern forms of administration only mimic. The paramount ruler known either as emir or chief had lesser chiefs, such as ward, village and district heads who served under him as grassroots administrators, very much like the state and local government set up today. We had traditional office holders that were the equivalent of prime ministers, ministers, judges and bureaucrats. Each kingdom had an impressive military set up complete with commanders, staff officers and foot soldiers. The chiefs and emirs had a well-defined system of selection and succession faithfully implemented by the king-makers who also acted as checks on the possible excesses of the emir or chief. Everyone knew the limits of their powers and the responsibilities they owed to the kingdom and the people. Our traditional rulers were not maximum rulers. They were democrats who ruled their people in accordance with elaborate traditional constitutions with defined penalties for those who breached the laws or the constitutions, unwritten though they were. Indeed, if a traditional ruler exceeded his powers or was tyrannical, he was deposed in accordance with the traditional constitution. This then was the foundation of our traditional development and progress.
The British colonialists met this well-developed system of political administration. It was immediately clear to them that it would be politically unwise and even impossible to impose their rule on our people outside our traditional set up. They accepted the system and introduced the indirect rule system that made the emirs and chiefs the pillars of the new colonial administration. The British colonialists used the traditional rulers to maintain law and order. They assisted in the assessment and collection of personal income and jangali taxes and mobilized labour for social and agricultural development as well schools, road and rail construction.
The wisdom of the colonial masters in electing to build their modern system of administration on the solid foundation of our traditional institutions remains unimpeachable. Why then do the sons of the soil choose not to recognise and utilize the unique place the traditional institution occupies in our lives?

Our post independence administration did not deviate very much from the colonial system of a seamless grafting of the modern to the traditional. Whatever changes were made in the system were only such as took into consideration certain exigencies of self-rule. It can be said, with some justification, that greater socio-political responsibilities were thrust upon the institution shortly after our independence from British colonial rule. Emirs and chiefs became the arrow head of the native authority administration as either chiefs-in-council or chiefs-and-council. In both cases, the emir or chief was the chairman of the native authority council. Where the chief-in-council was the preferred system, the decision of the emir or the chief was final in all matters considered by the native authority council. Where the chief-and-council system was in operation, the emir or chief was still chairman of the council except that the decisions of the council were arrived at by the vote of the majority. In a tie vote, the emir or chief had a casting vote to resolve the impasse.

Both the independence and the republican constitutions allowed the regional governments to involve traditional rulers in their administration. Subsection 2 (a) of section 42 of the 1963 constitution stipulated that two of the four senators representing the federal territory must be traditional rulers, one of whom was the Oba of Lagos as an ex-officio member. The other nominated senator was a traditional ruler selected by the white cap chiefs and the war chiefs of Lagos.

Section 75 of the constitution of Northern Nigeria established a council of chiefs for the region. This council, chaired by the premier of Northern Nigeria, acted as an advisory body to both the premier and the governor of the region on matters pertaining to the good administration of the region. The Eastern, Western and Mid-Western regional constitutions had similar provisions for their own councils of chiefs that performed roles similar to those of their counterparts in the Northern Region. Under the British colonialists and our first generation of political leaders, our traditional rulers were part and parcel of the central, regional and native authority administrations. The late Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardaunan Sokoto and premier of the then Northern Region, was an astute political administrator. We dare say that he owed his success to the traditional institution anchored on sound native authority. The institution was the cornerstone of his administration. His administration was able to respond to and meet the peculiar needs of the diverse tribes and cultures in the region because he fully involved the traditional rulers in both decision-making and the implementation of the decisions arrived at. The success of native administration was the foundation on which he laid his greatest legacy to the region and its people. How we wish we had preserved it.

The First Republic was terminated through a coup d’etat of January 15, 1966. Military rule was consequently imposed on the country and Nigeria went through a period of uncertainty and darkness. In those days when darkness hovered over the nation and all through the 30-month civil war to crush the rebellion by the former Eastern Region, our military rulers turned to our traditional rulers for advice, support and co-operation. We must acknowledge that these men did their duty to our country and helped in no small measure to save our country from the forces of disunity and disintegration. In all cases of civil strife or political difficulties, we still turn to our traditional rulers to date. When the southern senatorial district of our state was engulfed in an unfortunate ethnic strife in 2001 we turned to them. They rose up to the occasion. The collective determination of the many for peace and good neighbourliness smothered the violence of the misguided few. Peace returned to the warring communities. And peace has prevailed.

But we must not allow our traditional rulers, the custodians of our traditional mores, to be reduced to the status of fire fighters. This was never meant to be their role and it should never be their role. The 1976 local government reform appeared to have started the process of distancing our traditional rulers from local administration. Part of the reform was the insulation of our traditional rulers from partisan politics. This was intended to protect them from the so-called corrupting influence of partisan politics so they would have the integrity to play their part as non-partisan arbiters in disputes between and among their subjects. The exigencies of the times must have made this a wise course of action at the time. We need to re-examine it and see if, indeed, we have not thrown out the baby with the bath water. Traditional rulers hold political appointments as chairmen of government companies and parastatals and as pro-chancellors of our universities. This, clearly, is a negation of the reform if the idea was to keep them a respectable distance from politics. Our take on this is that it is possible to insulate traditional rulers from partisan politics and still involve them in state and local government administration. This cannot compromise their integrity.

The 1979 constitution mid-wifed by the military administration abolished the right of the states to have their own constitutions. The federation has only one constitution. This is neither the time nor the place to debate the merits and the demerits of this anomaly in a federal set up. The state governments could only set up state council of chiefs rather than houses of chiefs under that constitution. This is still the case. In a rather reluctant acknowledgement of the role of traditional rulers, section 140 of the 1979 constitution which set up the National Council of State, expressly provided for the inclusion of a traditional ruler from each state of the federation as a member. This provision is missing in the 1999 constitution which completely ignores the traditional institution in its entirety. It is difficult to say whether this was a revolutionary republican step or a grievous mistake by the authors of the constitution and the supreme military body that ratified it. Whichever it was, the situation cries out for redress.

We have gone to this extent to show you where the traditional institution was, where it is now and why we have enacted this law. We are, to say, the least, uncomfortable with the total constitutional isolation of the traditional institutions from our democratic dispensation. We believe something should be done and quickly too, - nationwide, to remedy this situation in the interest of political stability, social cohesion and a meaningful development of the country. We are happy to see that President Olusegun Obsasanjo is taking steps to bring our traditional rulers back from the cold through appropriate constitutional provisions being initiated that will give them specific roles at all levels of government.

Confining our traditional rulers to the popular side of our political administration as spectators must rank as one of the biggest ironies in the country. The traditional institution today, far from being a mothballed institution, has become more vibrant with the calibre of the present traditional rulers. Our own president, Chief Obasanjo, is a titled chief. He is the Balogun of Owu traditional council in Ogun State. Despite his exalted office as the nation’s number one citizen, he does not consider his place in the council beneath him. It is his root.

We have retired university professors, retired generals, inspector general of police and other senior ranks in the armed forces, former commissioners, former permanent secretaries and other top former civil servants, former ministers, former envoys as well as other professionals of every description and business magnates as traditional rulers in various parts of the country. With such highly educated men with varied and rich professional experiences sitting on the thrones of their fathers and forefathers, would it be fair to relegate the traditional institution to the background? To deny the nation of the invaluable contributions of these highly qualified and experienced men to our social, political and economic development is to do violence to our tradition and progress.

The traditional institution is not and has never been inconsistent with democracy. Britain, with its time-honoured constitutional monarchy, is a good example of what a country can achieve and become if it marries its traditional institution and culture with modern administration. Botswana, the only African country with the longest continuous multi-party democracy, built its stable constitutional democracy on its traditional institution. The 15-member house of chiefs established by the constitution is a powerful body. The constitution makes it mandatory for the government to consult it on all matters relating to chieftaincies, constitutional changes and other issues critical to good governance. We too have lessons to learn from the examples of these countries.

We are a nation caught up between two worlds with neither a solid traditional foundation nor a solid modern foundation. Our traditional respect for constituted authority is steadily eroded and our cherished social value system and social cohesion have been turned up side down because we have sidelined our traditional institution. Our traditional institution once effectively policed our culture and tradition. It instilled in us the virtues of honesty and hard work. The community ostracised those who offered no convincing proof of their wealth because our social value system did not tolerate anti-social behaviour and 419. Today, such people are feted as respectable men and women in the society, thus undermining all efforts to destroy the cankerworm of corruption and the get rich quick syndrome.

We need to go back to our roots to find the solution to our political instability and arrest the corrosion of our social value system. We must bring our traditional institution back to reckoning. Here in Nasarawa State, we have taken steps towards that end. We created new districts, new chiefdoms and the upgrading of some existing kingdoms. This step was in response to the yearnings of our people for the restoration and/or recognition of their traditional institution. It was also the first step in re-invigorating the local government system as a critical stabilising element in our democracy.

The state government has taken over the payment of the salaries and allowances of our recognized and graded traditional rulers because the local governments that shouldered this burden under the 1976 local government reform are in no financial position to properly take care of them. We have enhanced their emoluments and provided all of them with cars consistent with their grades. We are jointly undertaking with the local governments the massive renovation of existing palaces and the construction of new ones throughout the state. We have taken these steps because we believe that the institution is indispensable to our socio-political and economic development. Our traditional rulers deserve to be truly treated like royal fathers.

This new law takes our commitment to this vital institution to a new height. Under the law, our emirs and chiefs will advise the governor and our local government councils on all matters of public interest and good governance. The law does not conflict with any existing law. Its primary purpose is to strengthen the tiers of government we operate and make it more relevant to the social and other needs of our people. The law does not take away or impair the constitutional functions of the elected state or local government functionaries. It is, if you like, the marriage of youthful dynamism on the part of the politicians with the sober reflections of our royal fathers. However, under the law the state and local government councils are incomplete without the advisory involvement of the traditional rulers. In specific terms, the traditional councils shall be required under this law to advise on matters relating to:

customary law

cultural affairs

conflict resolution and management as it relates to inter and intra-communal conflicts

chieftaincy matters

security matters

community development programmes

collection of community taxes and development levies

education

agriculture and natural resources

general matters on traditions and customs

religious matters where appropriate

environmental sanitation

matters of public interest

and, such other functions as the state or local government council may from time to time refer to it.

This law is not just another piece of legislation but a bold attempt to take us back to our roots and the ground norm of our social value system, social cohesion and political stability. Our traditional institution must once again be made the pillar of our democracy. All of us must accept the challenge to make this law achieve its intended objectives. Our social and political stability depends on it. Our social cohesion and value system depend on it. Let us all join hands together as joint executors of this law.

In order to ensure the successful implementation of this law, we have directed the immediate commencement of in-service and refresher training programmes for all our traditional rulers. The schedule being worked will making provision for workshops and refresher courses involving traditional rulers from those of first class status down the ladder to village and ward heads. The purpose of the training is to update those of our traditional rulers who will be saddled with the responsibility of overseeing traditional matters at all the levels of local administration in the state and who would also be involved in the multifaceted relationship between a democratically elected local government administration and the traditional council.

Our traditional rulers themselves must reciprocate the revolutionary step this administration has taken to make them partners in the social and economic development of our state and the upliftment of the people. To whom much is given, much more is obviously expected. Our politicians, public servants and the members of the civil society must seize the golden opportunity offered by this law to begin the process of running public affairs in tune with our traditional value system and at the same time promote modern development.

One grave and historic mistake our country and other African states made was the misguided notion that western democracy and institutions could be grafted and superimposed on African societies in complete isolation of our traditional and cultural ways of life. Our failure to see democracy as an evolutionary process rather than an already-made solution to the problems of governance in all societies is partly responsible for the instability that has continued to dog the post colonial state in Nigeria.

Democracy is not values free, and even in the western world, it differs from one country to another as noted earlier in this address. While the French and Americans, for example, operate republican democracies, Britain, Spain, Sweden and lots of others operate democratic systems rooted in constitutional monarchies. What is paramount in every democracy is the involvement of the people, public order, due process, accountability and transparency in the running of public institutions.

African societies founded and ran kingdoms and empires with well-ordered public administrations long before many societies in Europe. Our pre-colonial societies and institutions had evolved core values of integrity, hard work, fear of God, communal bonds, respect for constituted authorities and institutions long before the advent of western administrative systems.

I believe Nigeria must lead the way in anchoring our democratic system on our traditional institutions and values. We must move beyond mere pronouncements to action in this regard. This bill is a step forward in our country’s desire to reshape the future of our democracy and public administration. We call on the federal government to expedite action in the proposed constitutional reforms towards the reintegration of our traditional institutions into our new democratic dispensation. We call on other state governments to follow suit by giving our traditional institutions the opportunity to make their contributions to public administration and social development.

May this bill be the beginning of a turning point in the transformation of our democracy and public administration in line with our people’s historic roots and way of life.

Thank you and may God continue to bless our efforts.