Opinion
Igala Kingdom judgement: Why Bello, Sha’aba must be guided on historical facts

Quite well, one of the major triggers of intra and inter-ethnic and communal violent conflicts we have witnessed in Nigeria, Africa and elsewhere is attributed majorly to claims and counterclaims over land. Land is a free gift of nature but remains the commonest denominator of intermittent orgy of violence and wars. Whether you want to think of the Palestine-Israeli confrontations that have defy any meaningful solution from any quarter since the Balfour Declaration that created the State of Israel in 1948 has caused several wars between the Arab Palestinians and the Jews from that time till date, or the Kosovo War, or even the Korean Peninsula War of 1950-1953 that ended with armistice creating 38 parallel line along the DMZ thus, pitching Pyongyang against Seoul; or you talk of constant clashes between Nigeria and Cameroun over Bakassi Peninsula leading to the (in)famous ICJ judgment in October 2002, land remains a prominent factor in all of these and many crises humanity has faced. Or, is it possible to explain major immediate cause of the outbreak of World War II without mentioning territorial factor?

Coming back home, intra-ethnic clashes like that of Ife-Modakeke, Aguleri-Amuleri, as well as inter-communal violent crisis including but not limited to Berom/Anaguta/Afizere vs Hausa-Fulani crisis over indigenship on the Plateau in Jos, Tiv-Jukun in Wukari area of Taraba, Ebira Toto vs Bassa conflict in Nasarawa, Zango-Kartaf vs Hausa-Fulani in Kaduna and so on and so forth, are all driven basically as a result of land contestation. Why is this so? The answer is simple, quid protanto solo solo cedit – a Latin (and by implication, legal) maxim which means, “whoever owns the land, owns anything on and beneath it”. Economists have also told us that LAND is the first factor of production without which no other factor can gain any trapping of relevance. Political scientists time without number have claimed l that there is a correlating strong nexus between land and state power. This means that whichever group has land, and if I may add, population, obviously has direct access to state power especially in electorally competitive democracy centris paribus.

Therefore, land across all ages and civilizations played and will continue to determine peace or war! It is this in mind that I approach the recent judgment of the Federal High Court in Lokoja that awarded the custody of land spanning from Ajaokuta (“The Steel City” housing the popular yet moribund Ajaokuta Iron and Steel Complex) through Lokoja (The Confluence Capital City of Kogi State) to Koton Karfe (the boundary Local Government between Kogi and Abuja, FCT).
Let me say this, from little I’ve read about the history of people of the Middle Belt of Nigeria in particular as it is with others, there are convincing historical links that bind them together and ordinarily, they ought to treat each other with brotherly and sisterly love and respect. Nonetheless, being who they are, humans will always be humans and peace and violence will continue to feature their relationship. Let me first congratulate the paramount ruler of the Igalas, His Imperial Majesty Dr. Michael Ameh-Oboni II, Chairman, Kogi State Council of Traditional Chiefs and his subjects, for their recourse to legal jurisprudence rather than resorting to self-help in resolving this controversy. As it is, the Federal Government who is a party to this case, has right of appeal. I don’t know because I’m not a lawyer but I feel that apart from the FGN, any individual or group that is not happy with the judgment might seek to be added as interested party or parties if it’s not too late. This is how civilized people conduct or should conduct their affairs in a constitutional democracy or supposed ones instead of taking laws into one’s hand resulting to anarchy.
While congratulating the Igalas (without having the faintest mind of being an ethnic bigot and irredentist) over the judgment against their fellow Kogites whom they have had and been having mutual relationship that transcends many centuries past, we should approach the judgment with historical facts that the judge in question relies on before giving the judgment. But before then, what do historians who never had these days in mind say about the Igala and the area in contention that has only for now been settled via court judgment?
According to Ade Obayemi (see Obayemi, 1980, p. 149), “The Igala, before the 19th century inhabited the entire triangular tract of territory on the left bank of the Benue and Niger about 100 kilometers above and below their confluence. Settlements of the Igala speaking-peoples were also located on the right bank of the Niger below the confluence, opposite Etobe. Thus, the history of the Igala (and indirectly of Kwararafa, Jukun) provide a general framework for the history of the peoples of the Niger-Benue confluence area”. During his visit, [Samuel Ajayi] “Crowther was informed in 1854 at Idah that the reigning Atta was the twentieth, implying that the present (1970)Atta should be thirty-first and not the twenty-fifth or even the twenty-eight on the stretched list” (see also, Crowther, 1854, p. 173). The question is, what did Ajayi Crowther went to Idah to do? Of course, to ask Atta for Land where he could build a missionary church in Lokoja, one of the evidences tendered by the present Atta of Igala in Court.
In his own account, Boston (1969, pp. 29-43), revealed that “the foundation of the Alago (Arago) kingdom of Doma on the right bank of the Benue above the territory of the Igala is attributed to migration from Igala territory about A.D. 1232. All these suggestions point to one sinister truth, that the oral traditions seem to cover only a fraction of the total span of Igala territory”. Hence, Obayemi (op. cit, p. 150) declares, “what is clear is that the history of Igala state is longer than the one presented by the existing dynastic record. If we place Ayegba in the 17th century, we have a minimum of two earlier centuries and a maximum of four (if we accept the Doma account as at present stated”.
Adding to this, renowned historians J. F. Ade Ajayi and E. J. Alagoa (1980, p. 229) said and I quote: “The Igala kingdom controlled areas around the confluence of the Niger and Benue, and traded below the confluence as far South as Aboh and Onya at the head of the Niger Delta”.
Finally on this, on his meeting with the European explorers in 1840s, G. M. Clifford in his book, Igala Chiefdom (quoted in Abdullahi, 2006, p. 1), Attah Ameh Ocheje was reported to have said: “The rivers [Niger and Benue] belong to me along way up and down on both sides and I am a king. The Queen of white men have (sic) sent a friend to see me. I have also seen, just now a present that is not worthy to be offered to me – it is fit for a servant. God made me after his image; I am all the same as God and he has appointed me a king”. All of these go to tell about which group control the areas in contention today before this latest judgment came to the rescue.
For many people, the politics of claim over these areas is as a result of ongoing efforts to revive the Ajaokuta Iron and Steel Complex and accrued benefits to ‘sons and daughters’ of the area, the popular Omonile Syndrome in Nigeria in the face of the seeming irrelevance of oil in global market and geopolitics. Whether that is true or not, history should not be rewritten. That is a contempt of it and those who fail to learn from history are bound to repeat the mistake of it. When it is obvious that history was terribly dealt with for whatever reason, as human, we owes it to rectify it. After all, even if Ajaokuta comes alive, which we all pray it should, its benefits should transcend beyond the Igalas, Ebiras, Bassa, Okuns, Oworos etc. to all Nigerians, Africans and humanity as a whole. A hunter must learn not to, no matte how good he is at his game, not to over priced the lap o an antelope he has not yet kill. That will br sheer overconfidence!
Conclusively, our elders say, face-tight of a he-goat will not deter its owner from selling it. Truth be told, facts are sacred, opinions are free.
REFERENCES
1. Obayemi, A. (1980). “States and Peoples of the Niger-Benue Confluence Area” in Obaro Ikime (ed.); Groundwork of Nigerian History (Historical Society of Nigeria), Ibadan: HEBN Publishers Plc
2. Crowther, S. A. (1855). A Journal of An Expedition Up the Niger and Tshadda, London: n. p.
3. Boston, J (1969). “Oral Tradition and the History of Igala” in Journal of African History Vol. X, No. 1.
4. Ajayi, J. F. A and E. J. Alagoa (1980). Nigeria Before 1800: Aspects of Economic Developments and Inter-Group Relations” in Obaro Ikime (ed.), op.cit.
4. Abdullahi, J. (2006). The First Nigerian People,Anyigba: Winners Nigeria (Press) Limited
SEE ALSO
(a. ) Usman, S. A. and Egwemi Victor (2015). “”Between the ‘Cores’ and the ‘Peripheries’ and Possibility of Minority Middle Belt Presidency in Democratic Nigeria: Revisiting 1914 Amalgamation” in Lapai Journal of International Politics (LIJOPOL), Vol. 3, Nos. 1&2
(b.) Egwemi, V., Terhemba Wham and Chris Orngu (eds.); Federalism, Politics and Minorities in Nigeria, Lagos: Bahiti and Dalila Publishers
(c.) Itodo, M. A. (2019). The Igala Nation and Nigeria’s Sociopolitical Realities: A Saga of Missed Opportunities, Ibadan: University Press Plc
Please report any fake news or defamatory statements to feedback-newshub@operanewshub.com

Opinion
Power, privilege and governance

By Abiodun KOMOLAFE

The concepts of power, privilege and governance are complex and multifaceted. Power refers to the ability to influence others, while privilege denotes unearned advantages.

Governance encompasses institutions, structures and processes that regulate these dynamics. Together, these concepts raise fundamental questions about justice, equality and resource distribution.
It emphasizes the importance of considering marginalized groups’ experiences and perspectives. The main problem in Nigeria today is its political economy, which is rooted in rent-seeking and fosters a mindset that prioritizes patronage over production.
The country’s politics are characterized by a patron-client relationship, where everything revolves around government handouts rather than effective governance. This has led to a situation where “politics” in Nigeria is essentially a scramble for resources in a country with severely limited opportunities for self-improvement.
When French agronomist René Dumont wrote ‘False Starts in Africa’ in 1962, he inadvertently described Nigeria’s current state in 2025. Nigeria’s missteps have magnified themselves in the theatre of the absurd, such as the construction of a new vice presidential residence and Governor Chukwuemeka Soludo’s boasts about the lavish official residence for the governor of Anambra State, currently under construction.
It is to be noted in contradistinction that the newly sworn-in Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney, is looking for somewhere to live. The official residence of the prime minister, 24 Sussex Drive, the Canadian equivalent of 10 Downing Street, is in disrepair and uninhabitable. No Canadian government can dare ask the parliament to appropriate the $40m needed to refurbish the residence.
Canada’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) exceeds $2 trillion, while Nigeria’s GDP is less than $400 billion. Still, Nigeria claims to be a giant! With an electricity generation capacity of less than 6,000 megawatts, Nigeria’s proclamation seems absurd, especially when compared to cities like Johannesburg, Singapore, Hong Kong and Mumbai. Even Lagos State alone should be generating, transmitting and distributing at least 15,000 megawatts, which would be a basic expectation rather than an achievement.
Nigeria today needs a comprehensive overhaul of its governance crisis to build a new political economy and social services that are fit for purpose. Although the government is on the right path in some ways, a root-and-branch transformation is still necessary.
A notable breakthrough is the decision to recapitalize development finance institutions, such as the Bank of Industry and, crucially, the Bank of Agriculture. This move is significant in a rent-seeking state, as it addresses the need for long-term capital – a prerequisite for achieving meaningful progress.
The development finance institutions require annual recapitalization of at least N500 billion, ideally N1 trillion. Achieving this necessitates a thorough cost evaluation of the government’s machinery, starting with the full implementation of the Oronsaye Committee’s recommendations.
The resulting cost savings can then be redirected to development finance institutions and essential social services like primary healthcare. Furthermore, the government should be bolder, if it can afford to be so, especially since there’s no discernible opposition on offer At the moment, the Nigerian political establishment across the board appears to be enamored by the position put forward by the leader of the Russian revolution, Vladimir Lenin, after the failed putsch. Lenin wrote the classic, ‘What is to be done?’
His observation is that revolutions do not take place at times of grinding poverty. They do so during periods of relatively rising prosperity. Significant sections of the Nigerian establishment believe that relatively rising prosperity could trigger off social discontent.
In their own interest, they had better be right. The caveat is that Lenin wrote ‘What’s to be Done’ in 1905. The world has moved on and changed since the conditions that led to the failure of the attempted takeover of government in Russia in 1905. Therefore, the Nigerian political establishment, for reasons of self-preservation, had better put on its thinking cap. Addressing power and privilege in governance requires collective action, institutional reforms and a commitment to promoting social justice. Nigeria currently lacks a leadership recruitment process, which can only be established if political parties are willing to develop a cadre. Unfortunately, the country is dealing with Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) instead. It’s rare to find leadership in Nigeria operating political boot camps to recruit and groom youths for future leadership roles.
This might be why many young people have a misguided understanding of politics, viewing it as merely a means of sharing the nation’s commonwealth. Mhairi Black was elected to the British House of Commons at 20 years old.
However, the key point is that Black had started becoming involved in politics at a young age. By the time she was elected, she had already gained significant experience, effectively becoming a veteran in the field. In Nigeria, politics is often seen as one of the few avenues for self-fulfillment. However, the economy is stagnant, with few jobs created in the public sector and limited investment opportunities.
This is a far cry from the 1950s and 1960s, when political parties were more substantial. Today, it’s worth asking how many Nigerian political parties have functional Research Departments. Besides, what socialization into any philosophy or ideology do our politicians have? Similarly to former Governor Rotimi Amaechi, many of those who currently hold power are motivated to stay in politics due to concerns about economic stability.
Of course, that’s why the Lagos State House of Assembly has had to revert itself. It is the same challenge that has reduced the traditional institution to victims of Nigeria’s ever-changing political temperature. It is the reason an Ogbomoso indigene is not interested in what happened between Obafemi Awolowo and Ladoke Akintola.
It is also the reason an Ijebuman sees an Ogbomoso man as his enemy without bothering to dig up the bitter politics that ultimately succeeded in putting the two families on the path of permanent acrimony. Of course, that’s why we have crises all over the place! May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419)

Opinion
Rivers of emergency dilemma!

Byabiodun KOMOLAFE

Rivers State is now under emergency rule, and it’s likely to remain so for the next six months, unless a drastic change occurs.

If not managed carefully, this could mark the beginning of a prolonged crisis.
In situations like this, opinions tend to be divergent. For instance, some people hold the notion that the security situation and the need to protect the law and public order justified President Bola Tinubu’s proclamation of a state of emergency in, and the appointment of a sole administrator for Rivers State.
However, others view this act as ‘unconstitutional’, ‘reckless’, ‘an affront on democracy’, and ‘a political tool to intimidate the opposition’. When we criticize governments for unmet expectations, we often rely on our own perspectives and biases.
Our individual identities and prejudices shape our criticism. However, it’s essential to recognize that not all criticism is equal. Protesting within the law is fundamentally different from protests that descend into illegality. Once illegality creeps in, the legitimacy of the protest is lost.
As John Donne wrote in ‘Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions’, “Never send to know for whom the bell tolls.” A protest is legitimate when it aligns with societal norms, values and laws. But when protests are marred by violence or sabotage, they lose credibility. Without credibility, protests become ineffective.
Regarding the validity or otherwise of the emergency rule in Rivers State, it is imperative that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors approach the Supreme Court immediately. They should seek a definitive clarification on whether the proclamation is ultra vires or constitutional.
For whatever it’s worth, they owe Nigerians that responsibility!May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
Abiodun KOMOLAFE,ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419 – SMS only.

Opinion
Rivers state: Why Tinubu’s administration resort to state of emergency

Abba Dukawa

The political crisis began in December 2023, when Governor Fubara ordered the demolition of the state House of Assembly complex, which remains unrebuilt to this day. This act has effectively paralyzed the legislative arm, disrupting the state’s system of checks and balances.

The Supreme Court highlighted the severity of this situation on February 28, 2025, emphasizing the absence of a functional government in Rivers State and the executive’s role in collapsing the legislative arm, thereby creating a governance void
Additionally, recent reports indicate that militants have been vandalizing pipelines and issuing threats without any intervention from the state government, raising concerns about the state’s security and economic stability.Given Rivers State’s crucial role in the country’s economy, this situation necessitates urgent and cautious intervention from the federal government.Despite interventions from various stakeholders, including Tinubu himself, the crisis has persisted
.It’s worth noting that Tinubu is the third president to invoke Section 305 of the Constitution, after Ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo and Former President Goodluck Jonathan.
President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has sparked intense debate about its necessity and potential motivations. During his nationwide speech, Tinubu warned that this decision could set off a chain of unpredictable events, potentially leading to radical ideologies and extremist tendencies.
Critics argue that Tinubu’s decision was unnecessary and politically motivated, particularly given his connection to Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, who is accused of being the “arrowhead” of the crisis. Some believe that Tinubu’s administration aims to remove Governor Fubara, perceived as hostile to the 2027 Tinubu/Wike project.Ultimately, the motivations behind Tinubu’s decision remain unclear, and its implications for Rivers State and Nigeria as a whole are yet to be fully seen.
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has strongly opposed President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and his suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and members of the Rivers State President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.House of Assembly. President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.
The NBA pointed to Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, which governs the procedure for declaring a state of emergency. While this section grants the President emergency powers, it does not allow for the removal or suspension of elected officials. The NBA stressed that the only constitutional method for removing a governor or deputy governor is through impeachment as outlined in Section 188.
Furthermore, the removal of lawmakers must adhere to electoral laws and constitutional provisions insisted that a state of emergency does not equate to an automatic dissolution of an elected government, and any attempt to do so is an overreach of executive power.
Also Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has strongly condemned President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, calling it an “assault on democracy” that must be denounced in the strongest possible terms . Wazirin Adamawa argues that Tinubu’s administration is responsible for the chaos in Rivers State, either by enabling it or failing to prevent it. He emphasizes that the President should bear full responsibility for any compromise of federal infrastructure in the state, rather than punishing the people of Rivers State with a state of emergency.
Abubakar also accuses president Tinubu of being a partisan actor in the political turmoil in Rivers, and his refusal to prevent the escalation is seen as “disgraceful to the people of Rivers” The former Vice President believes that the destruction of national infrastructure in Rivers State is a direct result of the President’s failure to act, and punishing the people of Rivers State would be undemocratic.
In his statement, former vice president asserts that the declaration of a state of emergency “reeks of political manipulation and outright bad faith. He urges that the people of Rivers State should not be punished for the political gamesmanship between the governor and Tinubu’s enablers in the federal government. Other analyst believes that the situation in Rivers State, though politically tense, does not meet the constitutional threshold for the removal of elected officials.
For a state of emergency to be declared, Section 305(3) of the Constitution outlines specific conditions, including:
1. War or external aggression against Nigeria. Imminent danger of invasion or war. A breakdown of public order and safety to such an extent that ordinary legal measures are insufficient.
Other reasons for such decisions to be enforced are clear danger to Nigeria’s existence and Occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity affecting a state or a part of it. Where public danger constitutes a threat to the Federation.
Since the state of the emergency in Rivers state has been promulgation, political watchers questions whether the political crisis in Rivers State has reached the level of a complete breakdown of law that has warranting the removal of the Governor and his administration. Political disagreements, legislative conflicts, or executive-legislative tensions do not constitute a justification for emergency rule.
Had been the president remain filmed Such conflicts should have been resolved through legal and constitutional mechanisms, including the judiciary, rather than executive fiat.
A state of emergency is an extraordinary measure that must be invoked strictly within constitutional limits. The removal of elected officials under the pretext of emergency rule is unconstitutional and unacceptable.Tinubu’s administration decision to declare a state of emergency has been met with mixed reactions. Some argue that it was necessary to restore sanity to the state and ensure the country’s stability. Others,, believe that it was an unnecessary decision that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Was declaration for Rivers state is necessary or political motivation? President Bola Amed Tinubu is fully aware that the declaration of State of Emergency in a prevalent democratic system is not the solution to the self-inflicted crisis bedeviling the State.
What Tinubu needed most was to call Wike, his Minister of FCT, to order. The former governor Wike is the arrowhead of the crisis bedeviling the State.
Now what the president Tinubu decision for the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State was an unnecessary decision” that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Other views whether president decisions of keeping his ally, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, is worth jeopardizing Nigeria’s economy.The keen watcher of events regarded the decision as a display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027.
Tinubu administration wants to use the excuse of the political instability and other security challenges in Rivers to remove Governor FUBURA from the POWER considered hostile to the minister of the Federal Capital Territory or TInubu/Wiki diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027 election.
During his speeches Mr. President, blaming only the state governor and House of Assembly for the crisis in Rivers State is like expecting one iron to make a loud sound – it’s unrealistic and ignores the roles of others, including the former governor and a cabinet member in your administration.
Let us not forget; The situation in Rivers state is indeed complex, with President Tinubu’s intervention aiming to restore order, but also raising important questions about the balance between federal intervention and state autonomy. Invoking a state of emergency to suspend elected officials is a drastic measure that may set a worrying precedent, especially if not handled carefully.
The appointment of a retired military officer as the state’s administrator also raises concerns about the militarization of a democratic government. This move may be perceived as an attempt to exert federal control over the state, rather than allowing democratic processes to unfold, the initial six-month period of emergency rule, with provisions for extension, could lead to prolonged federal control. This is why it’s essential to establish clear timelines and measurable objectives to ensure a timely return to democratic governance.
Some of the key concerns that need to be addressed include: The potential for abuse of power*: The suspension of elected officials and the appointment of a military administrator could be seen as an attempt to consolidate federal power.
– *The impact on democratic institutions*: The emergency rule could undermine the democratic institutions in Rivers state and set a precedent for future interventions.
– *The need for transparency and accountability*: The federal government must ensure that the emergency rule is transparent, accountable, and subject to regular review. Ultimately, finding a balance between restoring order and respecting democratic institutions is crucial. The federal government must tread carefully to avoid exacerbating the situation and ensure a peaceful resolution.
Dukawa public affairs commentator and can be reached at abbahydukawa@gmail.com

-
News5 days ago
Bill to establish National Cashew Production and Research Institute in Kogi passes first reading in Senate
-
Politics1 week ago
Retired military officer, colonel Gbenga Adegbola, joins APC with 13,000 supporters
-
Politics1 week ago
CPDPL accuses Adeyanju of orchestrating smear campaign against FCT Minister Wike
-
News5 days ago
Shehu Sani debunks Governor Uba Sani’s alleged diversion of LG funds, challenges El-Rufai to publicly tender evidence
-
News5 days ago
Report of attack on Wike’s Port Harcourt residence false, misleading – Police
-
News4 days ago
Plateau gov’t expresses concern over violence in Shendam LGA, calls for calm
-
Sports6 days ago
Merino gives Arsenal win over Chelsea
-
Interview5 days ago
Senators Natasha-Akpabio saga should have been resolved privately – Rev. Mrs Emeribe