All over the world, the legislature, particularly in a democracy, has the responsibility of making laws for peace, order, and good governance of the society. This time-honoured mandate of the lawmakers is geared towards achieving the desired unity, peace, progress, justice, and sense of belonging to all and sundry in the society.
There is no gainsaying the fact that the legislature whether at state or at the national level is saddled with law- making function to promote, peace, order and progress for the benefit of the citizens and the society at large. It is in exercise of this function that the National Assembly recently came up with a bill seeking to make the Sultan of Sokoto and the Ooni of Ife permanent co-chairmen of the National Council of Traditional Rulers Council of Nigeria.
Expectedly, this bill has since generated debates among citizens not on the basis of the need or usefulness of the forum but on the leadership structure.
While some believe that entrusting the chairmanship role to the two first class traditional rulers drawn from the North-west and south-west regions, respectively, would serve the best interest of the nation, others vehemently object to the idea of permanent nature of the chairmanship, preferring rather a flexible template of rotational chairmanship.
We commend the National Assembly for deeming it fit to beam its legislative searchlight on the traditional institution in Nigeria whose advisory role to government cannot be overemphasized.
As custodians of culture, customs, and traditions of the various communities in the country, traditional rulers need a well-organized and recognized platform to perform their advisory role and promotion of our norms and values in the society. With a well-thought-out legal framework anchored on the virtues of peace, unity, mutual respect, equality and sense of belonging, the council has the capacity to serve as a feedback mechanism between the people and the government in customary matters and facilitate necessary advice for the promotion of customs and traditions, especially those aspects that are not repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience.
To begin with, such restriction, for whatever reasons, fails to fully appreciate and factor in the historical configuration, influence, and status of other traditional institutions across our country prior to the advent of the British colonialism in the entity now known as Nigeria.
Granted that the proposed permanent co-chairmen are first class traditional rulers in Nigeria, but theyare not the only first class traditional rulers in the country. There are others, such as the Oba of Benin, the Aalafin of Oyo, Tor Tiv, and the Attah of Igala, to name but a few.
As such, wisdom, equity, justice and fair play, sincerity of purpose, undiluted sense of belonging as well as our drive for inexorable need for unity in diversity definitely dictate that other first-class traditional rulers should be considered instead of being shut out from occupying the leadership of the council.
Moreover, we do not agree that the Sultan is a traditional ruler, as the extant definition of his status revolves around leadership of the Muslims in Nigeria. Without equivocation, he is not in the strictest sense a traditional ruler like the Ooni of Ife and the aforementioned royal fathers whose stools are not only indigenous but also rooted in the historical evolution of their ethnicities centuries ago.
As a country that lays claim to democratic norms and values, we cannot but demonstrate our belief in such concept in all we do, including drafting a legal framework for the leadership of the traditional rulers’ council that will provide equal opportunities for all the members to excel. Indeed, rotational chairmanship of the council will provide the needed opportunity for the various traditional rulers to showcase their ingenuity, administrative acumen, and experience leading to a robust expansion of the frontiers of promoting Nigeria’s unity in diversity.
Rotational or flexible chairmanship of the council will also inspire confidence, unity of purpose, inclusivity and mutual respect not only among members of the council but also the various domains that they represent.
It is, however, not too late for the proponents of the bill to rejig it with a view to providing for rotational chairmanship of the council which is more acceptable, democratic, inclusive, purposeful, and beneficial to all.
We cannot but heed the advice of the sages that a good tree has many branches and no branch has superiority over others.
