ADDRESSING THE KANO EMIRATES’ DEBACLE

The authorities must do more to resolve the conflict

Whatever may have been the outcome of last Thursday’s meeting between the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Olukayode Ariwoola and the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, and Chief Judge of Kano State High Court, Justice Dije Aboki, the damage to the judiciary is enormous. The duo of Tsoho and Aboki had given conflicting interim injunctions regarding the Kano emirate tussle between reinstated Muhammadu Sanusi II and the dethroned Aminu Ado Bayero. “There is strong indication that the National Judicial Council will conduct an emergency meeting where the subject Judges are likely to be invited and subjected to serious investigations,” according to a statement from the NJC director of information last week.

At a forum organised by the NJC in April, Senate President Godswill Akpabio spoke about ex parte orders, while advocating prompt and decisive punishment for erring judges found to be involved in this abuse. “These sanctions should be severe enough to deter people from future abuses,” Akpabio said. Unfortunately, nothing has been done to deal with an issue that undermines the credibility of the judiciary in Nigeria. While we hope that the NJC will work to put the judicial house in order, it is also important for the authorities in both Abuja and Kano to find a way to resolve the crisis before it degenerates into violence. Two emirs fighting for the same throne in a city like Kano is a recipe for anarchy.

Last Friday, both Sanusi and Bayero held separate Jumat prayers at two different locations amid tight security. The number of military and police personnel that has been deployed to tackle the power struggle at a time of national insecurity betrays a failure of leadership in several respects. Meanwhile, it is deeply troubling that the enthronement of traditional rulers has become a serious security problem in the country. That is because governors are now directly involved in the selection process. This, in turn, has led to the appointment and removal of these rulers, depending on the disposition of the government of the day. But to the extent that most of these whimsical appointments and dismissals often have far-reaching security implications for the communities concerned, it is important for governors to exhibit fairness and justice on the matter.

Even though the selection of traditional rulers in Nigeria is usually done by a council of kingmakers, such appointments have to be ratified by the concerned state governments. Therefore, not only have the almighty powers of state government over the appointment of traditional rulers greatly whittled down the role of the kingmakers in the selection process, but they have also helped to cause many of the crises in the country today. This, perhaps, prompted a former governor of the old Oyo State, Omololu Olunloyo, to warn on the dangers of politicising chieftaincy stools. Having served as governor, Olunloyo cannot be described as ignorant of the enormous powers state governments wield in the appointment and removal of traditional rulers, and the tendency to abuse such powers. “Our problem is the same with Nigeria. We put too much politics into everything, including chieftaincy matters. It is not the law but the complexity of politics that poisons the waters.”

No doubt, the interference by state governments in the appointment of traditional rulers has greatly undermined the prestige and honour associated with the stool. This is regrettable. Centuries before the advent of colonial masters, traditional rulers provided the much-needed cohesion. What is needed is the strengthening of traditional institutions in Nigeria, and a corresponding whittling down of government interference in the appointment of such rulers. On the current problem in Kano regarding the emirates, the authorities must find a resolution before it degenerates into violence.