 |
| Sanusi Lamido Sanusi |
CC™ Viewpoint - By Benjamin Aduba
Nigeria has three different and often confusing
systems of government. One is Democracy brought into Nigeria by the British.
The democratic form of government is anchored by the federal government, state
governments, and local governments, i.e. president, governors’, and local
government chairmen.
The second system of parallel government is the
native laws which was in place before the British came in and messed everything
up. This second parallel of government is anchored by Emirs, Igwes/Obis, Obas,
etc., and town unions chairmen/women..
The third system of parallel government is
theocracy. This system is operated by Iman’s, sheiks, pastors, bishops, etc.
This system is mostly prevalent is Sharia states of Nigeria but the influence
of bishops in SE Nigeria, for example is profound.
Many Nigeria politicians have had occasions to
fight with some of the leaders of the parallel systems for example there is the
case of Premier Awolowo with some Obas and the current fight between the
governor of Kano State, Ganduje and Emir Sanusi. There are many local fights
between Town Union presidents and the local government chairmen.
Some of the causes of the conflict are: inherent
conflict between native tradition which has existed for centuries, and the
British traditions; conflict between democratic principles dealing with
elections and life tenure of emirs, igwe/obis, obas. Others include conflict
between newly introduced Islam/Christian versus traditional religious beliefs
of the millenniums of years in Africa.
To make matters worse the
political leaders (the adherents of democracy) appoint the traditional leaders.
And according to accepted phraseology: if you can
hire; then you can fire comes to play. Governor Ganduje thinks that he
can fire Emir Sanusi. The British allowed this
parallel system to exist because they found that they could use the traditional
rulers to quieten the natives while the traditional rulers were in no position
to challenge their authority. But things have changed since the British
left.
Traditional rulers are now as educated, as urbane, as knowledgeable as
the president, the governors, and the local government chairmen. Sanusi, a
world renowned economist and former governor of the Central Bank, is as savvy
(even more so) than Gaduje. The Igwe of Awka is a former Vice Chancellor of a
university and is as knowledgeable as the governor of Anambra state.
If the native ruler has a strong character, is
as popular as the governor, and has a following; political rivalry is bound to
erupt. If there are differences of opinion on how the community should develop,
the rivalry intensifies and is worsened when the territorial boundaries are
equal as in Kano where the emir and governor share almost the same geographical
authority.
The decision facing Nigeria is this: Which
system to retain and which to abolish for the three systems should not be
tolerated. Efforts to integrate the three has been made and it has not worked.
The British idea was merely to use the traditional rulers as surrogates. They even
created traditional rulers where there was none before as in parts of the
republics in Igbo land. Only Onitsha and Midwest Igbo had strong traditional
rulers in the early parts of the 19th and 20th centuries.
Left to me I will abolish the democratic practices of state
governors and local government chairmen and theocracy and let the emirs,
igwe/obis and Obas reign. These
leaders are integrated with the communities and understand every day folks. Governors
are far removed from the people and are exactly like the British governors
owing allegiance to foreign entity like political parties. The traditional ruler’s allegiance is only to their
community. Town Union leaders are elected by the town elders who know
them intimately.
The Federal Government would be the amalgam of
the emirs, igwe/obis and obas, something like Federal House of Chiefs who would
elect one of themselves as Igwe of the federation with very limited powers.
Posts
