Yoruba

By Abdullahi Mukhtar Algasgaini

The leader of the Yoruba Self-Determination Group, Professor Banji Akintoye, has reiterated that the group will not back down from its pursuit of creating the Yoruba nation.

According to Akintoye, around 60 million Yoruba people, including those residing at home and abroad, support his cause for establishing the Yoruba nation as an independent country.

“We will not retreat. We must leave Nigeria, or our country will face serious problems.

“Don’t you hear our voices in the streets? The Yoruba nation is moving forward. There is no turning back.

“We are referring to the Yoruba people in Nigeria, who number about 55 to 60 million. We want to establish our own country. Nigeria will cease to exist if we establish our own nation. But if others want to continue to remain as Nigeria, that is fine,” he added.

By Saifullahi Attahir Wurno

I had the privilege of working in a private firm during a long break from medical school. It’s like a dream, being versatile and getting the opportunity to work as a marketing officer instead of holding a scalpel and stethoscope. It would allow me to enhance my communication skills and human relations, increase my networking, and learn to be more responsible and accountable.  

Indeed, it’s teaching me how to be more assertive and aggressive, unlike my initial shy character. I had to learn to sell my product, pressure people to pay me back, and say no to fraudulent transactions. Indeed, I am learning that there is a larger world outside of the hospital.

I had a firsthand experience of the reason why the ‘major’ Northern Nigerian tribes lag in terms of competitiveness in business, science, athletics, and education compared to our Southern counterparts and even the ‘minority’ tribes from the North. This is a sad reality and a bitter truth. I stand humbly to be corrected if my statement is far from fact.

I began this work not more than three months ago, but their level of humility and respect toward the bosses was something I had never seen. These people always greet their boss with respect. They respect their colleagues at work irrespective of their level. They attend to customers with courtesy and gentility. 

They have this attitude of taking their job seriously no matter how meagre their pay is. I have never heard any of them complaining about their pay despite having heard of numerous complaints from ‘my people’. Although I tried to arrive at the office at least 3 minutes before 8 a.m., thanks to my medical professional training, those people always arrived 15-20 minutes earlier. I observed this from the attendance record in front of the Security man.

This story was about our security man from the South-East. I used to see him working in the hospital where I lived (since I reside in the medical students’ hostel). He used to work with a private security company in Dutse, Jigawa State, working a shift daily between 8 pm and 5 am. I have known about this man for the past year. 

Surprisingly, we met in this company, too, working between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. daily. When I enquired more about him, I discovered he was even managing a small trader kiosk in front of his house with his wife. The most astonishing part was that this same person has a National Diploma (ND) in Public Administration and is currently doing his part-time HND at Jigawa Polytechnic during the weekend studying Criminology.

It’s hard to instil this attitude of resilience in our people, who have families to feed while juggling two lowly-paying jobs that take up most of their daily lives and are also studying for personal development.

There was this teenage girl who was also of the same South-eastern origin. She was just out of secondary school. She was the company cleaner and one of the lowly paid staff. But this Lady took her job with every seriousness, coming out daily earlier before all others arrived, sweeping and cleaning the environment neatly, and even using pleasant deodorants. She would not disappear after all this but remain in the office until 2 pm if something arises.

This young lady preferred to come out every morning and do a lowly paying, menial job of cleaning the toilet and mopping floors to be paid ₦30,000 monthly to help her parents financially and felt proud of her achievement instead of sitting down at her mother’s room all day, wasting time of social media.

The spirit of humility and looking after one another was mind-blowing and pathetic whenever I remember ‘my people’ who constantly brag about good culture and religion. There was a time when this young cleaner was sick, and all the staff arrived one morning ready for work. So, we realised she was ill and, thus, absent. We were in this dilemma of what to do; what I saw next was astonishing: there was a group of about five young and classic ladies, all of whom were graduates of the university and among those highly paid in the office. 

Without delay, these ladies volunteer to bring out all the cleaning equipment and do the job wonderfully. Without telling, this thing happened in front of about three of the same young ladies from ‘my people’ despite being Diploma holders and one with even a secondary school certificate.

During my stay, I observed that these people were not very involved in office politics, gossiping and abusing bosses. They were not in the habit of making silly excuses just to move around. I have never observed anyone attempting to involve himself in any fraudulent act to cheat a customer or act against the established rules of company ethics.

From this alone, I have come to draw the answers to why most of the reputable private investment in this country is dominated by ‘those’ people. I have discovered why they dominate our banks, the FinTech, and most prominent organisations. I have seen the reason why they dominate our science and technology establishments. I have seen why they even dominate our athletes and sports sector.

The answer is relatively straight. It is simply character and nothing else. It is about our character, perception of life, and attitudes. It is all about their attitude of resilience, respect, humility, gratitude, and discipline.  Let’s learn and not use excuses or blame games.

Saifullahi Attahir Wurno wrote via saifullahiattahir93@gmail.com

By Haroon Aremu

On a peaceful Sunday afternoon, I found myself immersed in the music of Dr. Sikiru Ayinde Barrister, a pioneer Fuji maestro known for his deep and meaningful lyrics that reflect Nigeria’s socio-political landscape. As I listened to a track titled “Adieu MKO,” which began with Nigeria’s newly adopted anthem, I was inspired to delve deeper into MKO Abiola’s legacy in relation to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s presidential journey and the adoption of the new anthem, as I began to wonder if all this could be a strategic message to Nigerians.

Sikiru Ayinde Barrister, a renowned Fuji musician, frequently added societal issues into his music, notably addressing the life and contributions of MKO Abiola. Barrister’s songs portrayed Abiola with admiration, acknowledging his philanthropy, political influence, and commitment to democracy. Barrister shared personal anecdotes, portraying Abiola as a humble figure despite his wealth and influence, creating a multifaceted portrayal of the Nigerian icon.

According to Historical research, Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola began his journey from humble beginnings. Born into a low-income family in Abeokuta, Ogun State, he started earning money at a young age by performing odd jobs, including singing and drumming at events. His exceptional intelligence earned him a scholarship to attend the prestigious Baptist Boys’ High School in Abeokuta. Later, he received a government scholarship to study at the University of Glasgow in Scotland, where he earned a degree in accountancy.

Beyond his political aspirations, Abiola was a successful businessman who built a vast business empire with interests in telecommunications, oil, and banking. He founded the telecommunications giant ITT Nigeria and was also involved in the publishing industry, owning newspapers like Concord Press. His philanthropy earned him the title of “Aare Ona Kakanfo of Yorubaland,” a highly esteemed traditional title.

Abiola is most famous for his presidential bid 1993, which is widely believed to have been the most free and fair election in Nigeria’s history. Despite winning, the election results were annulled by the then-military government led by General Ibrahim Babangida, leading to a significant political crisis. After declaring himself the rightful president of Nigeria, Abiola was arrested in 1994 by the military regime of General Sani Abacha. He remained in detention for four years and died under suspicious circumstances on July 7, 1998, the day he was due to be released.

Despite the controversies surrounding his death, Abiola’s legacy as a champion of democracy in Nigeria is honoured. In 2018, President Muhammadu Buhari posthumously awarded him Nigeria’s highest honour, the Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR), and declared June 12 as Democracy Day in recognition of his contribution to Nigeria’s democratic struggle.

Abiola was also a cultural figure with deep connections to the Yoruba cultural renaissance and promoted Nigerian culture globally. His influence extended beyond politics and business, impacting social and cultural spheres in Nigeria. He maintained extensive international connections in business and politics, improving Nigeria’s relations with other countries.

MKO Abiola embodied the patriotic spirit that “Nigeria, We Hail Thee” represented. As a businessman, philanthropist, and political leader, Abiola’s efforts were always aimed at uplifting Nigeria and contributing to its progress and unity.

The newly adopted anthem’s lyrics, emphasising unity and patriotism, reflect Abiola’s vision for Nigeria. He consistently advocated for a united Nigeria, free from the divisions that plagued the country. His presidential campaign in 1993 was a significant demonstration of his commitment to national unity and democracy.

Abiola’s contributions to Nigerian culture and his promotion of the Yoruba cultural renaissance align with the pride and national identity celebrated in “Nigeria, We Hail Thee.” He supported cultural initiatives to foster a sense of pride and belonging among Nigerians.

The anthem’s call to serve the nation resonates with Abiola’s extensive philanthropic activities. He invested in education, healthcare, and community development, reflecting the anthem’s spirit of dedication to the well-being of Nigeria and its people.

The period during which “Nigeria, We Hail Thee” was the national anthem corresponds with a formative time in Nigeria’s political history, including the early years of independence. Abiola’s political career, especially his role in the 1993 presidential election, continues the struggles and aspirations encapsulated in the anthem.

With some sense of factual comparison, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s relationship with MKO Abiola reflects a shared commitment to democracy, justice, and the advancement of Nigeria. Both leaders believed in the country’s potential and actively worked towards its progress. Tinubu and Abiola were influential figures in Nigeria’s political landscape, with Abiola’s 1993 presidential bid resonating with Tinubu’s political aspirations and being associated with the Social Democratic Party (SDP). Abiola’s leadership qualities, philanthropy, and vision for Nigeria deeply inspired Tinubu, who likely admired Abiola’s ability to connect with the masses and his unwavering dedication to democratic ideals. 

Like many other pro-democracy activists, Tinubu supported Abiola’s mandate and condemned the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election, forging a bond rooted in shared democratic principles. Tinubu continued to champion democratic values, electoral reform, good governance, and the rule of law, echoing Abiola’s vision for a democratic Nigeria. 

Furthermore, both leaders have been actively involved in philanthropic activities and community development initiatives, aligning with Abiola’s legacy of social responsibility. The Fuji icon King Wasiu Ayinde Marshal has sung about Tinubu following Abiola’s legacy, highlighting their enduring connection and further reinforcing the significance of Abiola’s impact on Nigeria’s political landscape. 

Considering the recent anthem change by the president, one could perceive it as a message of togetherness and an assurance of following Abiola’s legacy, given the similarities between Abiola and Tinubu, including their association with Muslim-Muslim tickets and other shared values.

To President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, I implore all citizens to wish and pray to God to grant him insight and foresight. Imight (strength) need to realise the democratic journey that Abiola envisioned.

Haroon Aremu Abiodun is a youth Corp Member with PRNigeria centre, Abuja and wrote in via exponentumera@gmail.com.

By Uzair Adam Imam  

A brazen attempt to seize control of the Oyo House of Assembly by individuals suspected to be affiliated with the Yoruba Nation movement was thwarted by police forces yesterday. 

At least 18 individuals were apprehended in connection with the incident, which unfolded just meters away from the Oyo State Government Secretariat. 

Reports indicate that the perpetrators, masked and clad in Army camouflage, armed themselves with rifles and strategically positioned themselves within the Secretariat’s vicinity.  

Some stationed themselves at the entrance of the Governor’s Office, while others were spotted near the state House of Assembly’s gate and the main entrance. 

The sudden incursion sparked panic in the area, prompting security operatives to respond with tear gas and arrests.  

The arrival of officers from the state Police Command and other anti-crime agencies, accompanied by sporadic gunshots, added to the chaos, forcing motorists to reroute and residents to seek safety. 

Efforts by the Executive Assistant to the Governor on Security, CP Sunday Odukoya (retd), to defuse the situation proved futile as the masked individuals remained adamant about hoisting their flag within the Secretariat premises. 

However, the arrival of soldiers from the 2 Division of the Nigerian Army shifted the dynamics, causing some of the agitators to flee.

The soldiers, described as stern-looking, reportedly pursued the remaining suspects. 

Meanwhile, the state secretariat’s main entrance was sealed off, and businesses in surrounding areas quickly shuttered as a precautionary measure. 

In a related development, a video surfaced featuring a woman identifying herself as Modupe Onitiri-Abiola, claiming to speak on behalf of the Yoruba Nation movement.

She declared the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Yoruba, asserting sovereignty and dissociating from Nigeria. 

Notable Yoruba Nation proponents, including Professor Banji Akintoye and Sunday Adeyemo (Igboho), disowned the attack, denying any involvement and stating their commitment to peaceful advocacy.  

Akintoye attributed the incident to individuals he deemed not to represent the authentic Yoruba Nation Movement. 

The State Police Public Relations Officer, SP Adewale Osifeso, disclosed that 18 suspects were arrested in possession of an array of weapons and paraphernalia.  

He condemned the incident as criminal and unpatriotic, pledging a thorough investigation and decisive action against those responsible.

By Sani Bello Hamza

When Ola Aina, the Super Eagles fullback, missed the penalty during the semi-final of AFCON 2023 against South Africa, someone close to me uttered an abusive word in the Hausa language. He said, “shege Bayarabe.” From the way he voiced it, you could tell it was not intentional. He was unconscious, as we all were, and it came out of his subconscious mind. That is a typical example of what Nigerians are and how we hate one another.

A South-easterner feels isolated and does not want to be associated with the North. A Northerner also feels the South-easterners are “arna” and sees no need to relate or intermingle with them. I once came across someone who is happy and thanking God for the blessing of not visiting a particular region. You will sometimes think hatred is naturally instilled in us.

Malam Nasir El-Rufai was once seen on air lamenting how Nigerians from various parts of the country react to his social media posts. Whenever he posts an update, no matter how small, the Northerners would be there to hail and applaud him. While his counterparts from the South would abuse and curse the former governor. Why is this the case? Is it because he is from the North?

Anyway, what made me happier after the penalty shootout was not only the fact that Nigeria advanced and made it to the final, but how I saw my fellow students, regardless of their gender, age, religion, social class, and political affiliation, celebrate the significant win for our dear country. It was one of the joyous moments of my life.

Not only at ABU, I came across videos of students from other universities and communities celebrating the great win. Others went ahead to celebrate with the family of our unbeatable keeper, Nwabali. They refused to let anyone stop them.

The same thing happened during the final when we all turned up at various locations to support and cheer the Super Eagles. Even though we did not clinch the title, the outcome of the final will be a topic for another day.

Okay, back to the subject matter.

After the jubilations were over, a question popped into my mind. I said to myself, “Who is dividing Nigeria and Nigerians? Who is spreading hatred among Nigerians? Who is fueling and igniting the fire of hatred among us?”

An Igbo man is always looking for an opportunity to curse a Hausa man, and a Hausa man is always scouting for an opportunity to unleash his abusive prowess on Igbos or Yorubas for the slightest reason.

How come do we sit under the same umbrella, supporting and praying for the Super Eagles to win? Who then is creating these divisions in our country?

To answer the question above, I believe that the root of our division in Nigeria lies in rumors and mere speculations. Most of the people fueling the fire of hatred are those who have either not traveled outside their jurisdiction or refuse to open their minds to accommodate people from other regions. They limit their thinking to their regions and consume whatever they find in the media.

The above answer may not be sufficient, but as people living in the same region, if we do not speak the same language or wear the same attire, we share the same history and are meant to be together—this is undeniable. The richness and strength in our diversity are stronger than the weaknesses. So why should we opt for the weaknesses? Come on, fellow compatriots, think!

We must learn from the lessons of the 2023 AFCON: to shun our peculiarities and differences if we must progress as a nation. Our diversity should be a source of pride, not the opposite.

Sani Bello Hamza is a Law student at Ahmadu Bello University Zaria. He writes from Zaria and can be reached via sanibellohamza@gmail.com.

By Usman Muhammad Salihu

As a citizen of this great country, my dream of a united and prosperous Nigeria is not merely a wish but a vision that I believe is soon to become a reality. 

Nigeria’s diversity is one of its greatest strengths. With over 250 ethnic groups, various languages, and a vibrant tapestry of cultures, our nation possesses immense potential for creativity, innovation, and resilience. I firmly believe embracing and celebrating this diversity is vital to unity.

As a giant of Africa, Nigeria has abundant natural resources, including oil, minerals, and arable land. Our economy has the potential to thrive, create jobs, and improve the standard of living for all Nigerians. To realise this dream, we must invest in sustainable development, diversify our economy, and ensure that the wealth generated benefits all citizens.

Furthermore, A united and prosperous Nigeria must prioritise education and innovation. Our population is a valuable asset, and by providing quality education, vocational training, and support for research and development, we can unlock their potential and drive economic growth.

To achieve prosperity, we must demand transparency, accountability, and good governance from our leaders. A united Nigeria requires leaders who prioritise the welfare of the people, uphold the rule of law, and work tirelessly to eliminate corruption.

Security is a fundamental prerequisite for prosperity. We must address security challenges, promote peace, and foster an environment where businesses thrive, and citizens can live without fear. 

Investing in infrastructure, such as roads, healthcare facilities, and power generation, is essential for our nation’s progress. This improves the quality of life, attracts investments, and creates job opportunities.

Active participation of citizens in the democratic process is crucial. We must engage in dialogue, vote responsibly, and hold our leaders accountable for their actions to ensure that our collective dream is realised.

Together, we can build a Nigeria where every citizen enjoys the fruits of unity and prosperity and our nation stands as a beacon of hope and progress for all of Africa.

Usman Muhammad Salihu writes and can be reached via muhammadu5363@gmail.com.

By Hassan Idris

Discussing trending and contentious topics has never been my preferred inclination, not because of a lack of opinions or the ability to articulate them but rather due to the potential conflicts it may engender with those who hold me in high esteem. Nonetheless, today, I shall delve into the trending and contentious subject matter that has generated a whirlwind of discourse on social media, polarising individuals along sectarian, regional, and religious lines and culminating in mutual vilification.

Specifically, I aim to scrutinise the 45-second video released by the Nigerian music sensation David Adeleke, famously known as Davido. In this video, men donned in white jalabia and caps dance boisterously in front of a mosque immediately after partaking in prayers. Adding further intrigue, Logos Olori, Davido’s protege, occupies a prominent spot atop the building’s roof.

Notably, even though the singer makes mention of the phrase ‘Alhamdulillah’ (praise be to God), the video and the accompanying song have been met with severe disapproval from many Nigerians and fans, particularly among the Muslim community, who perceive it as an affront to Islam. They vehemently demand an apology, accusing Davido of disrespecting their religious practices by intermingling sacred rituals with song and dance.

Despite the mounting pressure, Davido finally relents and takes down the video after two days of receiving criticism, opting for a predominantly silent stance and refraining from issuing formal apologies. Notably, Professor Wole Soyinka, in a surprising twist, urges Davido not to apologise for releasing the ‘Jaye Lo’ video, asserting that dancing in front of the mosque does not possess the provocative connotation purported by some.

Among the voices calling for an apology from Davido are prominent Muslim faithful such as Ahmad Ganga, Ali Nuhu, Ashraf Yaman, Ayaat Saeed, Basira Ugochi, and numerous others. Conversely, some Muslims have countered this demand, contending that the singer’s lyrics and actions did not overtly denigrate the Islamic faith. Furthermore, they argue that the video was not intended to ridicule Islam but reflected a cultural norm in Yoruba society.

Additionally, they highlight the existence of Islamic sects, such as the Tijjaniya and Shi’ite, in the northern region, who employ the Mandiri drums as part of their worship practices, thus, indicating that some Muslims themselves engage in similar expressions of religious celebration, with no objections from the community. Before delving into the sociological perspective of religion, it is imperative to recognise the profound significance of religion, particularly in Africa. For many Muslims, it is not merely the song or the jalabiya donned in the video that raises concern, but rather the potential mockery of prayer, a cornerstone of Islam, considered sacred and inviolable. It stands in stark contrast to profanity and warrants utmost respect.

Comparatively, other musicians like Naira Marley may espouse diverse perspectives, yet their words do not evoke similar anxieties. For instance, Naira Marley’s song proclaims, ‘God is the driver, while the Prophet (SAW) is the conductor,’ which, despite its unconventional nature, does not overtly trivialise prayer. Indeed, if Naira Marley had ventured into such territory, he would likely have faced a similar backlash. In response to the contention that some Islamic sects might engage in activities akin to the video’s content, it is essential to discern that while various expressions of worship exist, dancing during prayers remains absent from any Islamic sect. Moreover, the significance of the mosque, as elucidated in the Qur’an, holds paramount importance for Muslims, who regard it as the most sacred and cherished space in their lives. Thus, actions that appear to contradict the mosque’s sanctity are naturally met with vehement objection.

As for Professor Wole Soyinka’s intervention, his failure to fully grasp Nigeria’s religious and multicultural fabric, coupled with his atheistic beliefs, may have influenced his hasty entry into this contentious issue without considering the multifaceted perspectives. Thus, there seems to be an underlying layer of ethnocentrism at play, though it is crucial to clarify that this observation is not intended to belittle Soyinka in any manner.

Turning our attention to Durkheim’s Elementary Forms of Religious Life, the philosopher Charles Taylor’s elucidation of religion as a comprehensive system of beliefs and practices encompassing human existence and its relation to the ultimate conditions of being and other human beings presents a multifaceted framework for analysis.

Durkheim’s seminal work contends that religion is not confined to individual beliefs and practices but rather constitutes a sociological phenomenon that both shapes and is shaped by society. Central to his argument is the concept of ‘collective representations,’ which denotes shared symbols and ideas that foster cohesion among individuals, binding them together in a collective community. Collective effervescence, a cornerstone of religious experience according to Durkheim, entails the shared emotions and sense of unity that emerges when people unite for a common purpose, often manifested in rituals and communal activities.

Furthermore, Durkheim’s delineation of the ‘sacred’ and the ‘profane’ elucidates the fundamental distinction between holy or special elements (the sacred) and the mundane aspects of everyday life (the profane). The video in question seemingly breaches this sacred-profane dichotomy, incorporating elements considered sacred within a context that may trivialise their significance. To elucidate the connection between Durkheim’s ideas of the sacred and the profane, the concept of totemism emerges as an essential component of his thesis.

Totemism encompasses groups of individuals coalescing around a common totem, an emblematic object or animal that symbolises the collective community. The totem, imbued with sacredness, serves as a focal point in rituals and ceremonies, forging a shared sense of identity and unity within the group. By drawing this parallel, the video can be perceived as appropriating religious attire and symbols, potentially attenuating their original sacred import.

Moreover, Durkheim’s concept of ‘mana’ merits consideration of the video’s content. Mana constitutes a spiritual force or energy believed to inhabit sacred objects or spaces. Often linked to animism, the notion that objects and locations possess spirits or souls, ‘mana’ illustrates how the sacred imbue objects and places with special significance. Here, the video’s portrayal of dancing immediately after prayers may be construed as desecrating the sacredness associated with the mosque. As Durkheim transitioned his focus to modern societies, the idea of ‘mechanical solidarity’ comes into play, wherein traditional societies cohere through shared values and beliefs among relatively homogeneous groups.

Comparatively, ‘organic solidarity’ characterises contemporary societies, wherein specialised social bonds form through the division of labour, with various individuals and groups performing distinct functions. The video, juxtaposing modern entertainment (the dance) within the context of a sacred religious space, potentially mirrors the fragmentation and diminished shared values observed in present-day society, evoking notions of anomie.

As a sociologist and poet, I believe some may perceive the Muslim community’s response to Davido’s music video as an overreaction. While concerns are warranted, approaching the issue with knowledge and wisdom, as instructed in the Qur’an, would have been more constructive. Addressing Davido’s actions maturely and knowledgeably could have fostered a more amicable resolution. However, amidst the controversy surrounding the video, it is crucial not to lose sight of the pressing issues in the North, such as kidnapping, terrorism, and poverty, which demand urgent attention and resolution. Calling for uniformity in addressing these challenges alongside the concerns over the music video could have a more significant impact in addressing social issues and fostering a sense of collective responsibility.

Furthermore, it is essential for everyone, regardless of their religious background, to respect and understand the beliefs and cultures of others. Ethnocentrism and a lack of cultural relativity can perpetuate societal misunderstandings and divisions. Respect for all religions, and their sacred practices, should be upheld, emphasising the need for mutual understanding and harmony among diverse communities.

In conclusion, when scrutinising Davido’s music video from a Durkheimian sociological perspective, many potential issues concerning the sacred and the profane in religion emerge. The video’s portrayal of dance immediately after prayers and its use of religious symbols may be perceived as disrespectful and culturally insensitive by some Muslim community members. Moreover, its potential impact on social cohesion and integration in Nigeria’s diverse and multicultural society warrants introspection. Both sociologists and individuals must remain cognizant of religious sensitivities while striving for a profound understanding of different religious practices, fostering mutual respect and harmony within society.

While the controversy surrounding Davido’s music video persists, individuals and communities must engage in constructive dialogue, foster mutual respect, and address societal challenges with collective responsibility. Religion is paramount. It should be treated with reverence, regardless of the particular faith. Let us strive to uphold the principles of knowledge, wisdom, and cultural relativity in our interactions, aiming for a more cohesive and harmonious society. May we all be guided right in our actions and decisions.

Hassan Idris is a Sociologist & Poet and can be contacted via idrishassan25@yahoo.com.

By Dr Raji Bello

Last Tuesday, I listened to a panel on AIT’s morning programme discussing the increasing weaponization of ethnic and religious identity in Nigeria, particularly during the current election cycle. The discussants were particularly alarmed by the developments surrounding the governorship election in Lagos state, which has witnessed threats, intimidation and violence against voters of a particular ethnic group. The politicisation of ethnic and religious identity in this election cycle is, of course, not limited to Lagos.

Religious identity was a major issue for the APC presidential ticket and some governorship tickets like that of Kaduna state. Religion was a major issue in the Taraba governorship contest, and the issue of indigene vs settler reared its head during the Kano governorship election. There is even a Facebook group which is committed to getting candidates with pure Hausa blood elected into the governorship posts in the Northwest states. Nigeria may be on a slippery slope towards eventual implosion. 

What I have noticed about the AIT discussion is the same thing that I have observed about other similar discussions – they are limited to expressions of sadness followed by appeals to Nigerians to change their behaviour. There is very little discussion on why Nigerians do what they do and if there are any enablers for those tendencies. In my personal reflections, I have tried to answer these questions.

Most negative human tendencies have things which enable them, and rooting out the enablers is an important part of the measures for suppressing these tendencies. Anyone who is familiar with Islamic theology, for example, knows that there is little tolerance for things which are deemed to be enablers of vices. The prohibition of the consumption of alcohol is an example; alcohol intoxication is regarded as an enabler for many vices, which has necessitated a full prohibition of it.

Likewise, the encounter, in isolation, of two eligible and unmarried members of the opposite sex is regarded as an enabler for sexual vices. In the secular world as well, drinking and driving are prohibited in many countries because it is an enabler of fatal road accidents. Relationships between academic instructors and students are prohibited or restricted in many American institutions because they could be enablers for abusive relationships and conflicts of interest.

If Nigerians have come to the conclusion that toxic identity politics is harmful to the corporate well-being of the country, they must find the enablers for such politics and uproot them. Issuing passionate appeals is bound to be ineffective because human beings do not always respond to reason or appeals to stop a negative behaviour, especially when there are things which incentivise such behaviour. In my view, there are two enablers for the weaponization of identity in Nigeria:

1. There is no punishment for it. There are either no laws against toxic identity politics and incitement against ethnic and religious groups in Nigeria or they are never enforced. The result is that offenders almost always get away with their actions. This lack of accountability is a powerful enabler for similar behaviour by the same individuals or others.

2. There is a reward for it under our federal system. Our current constitution provides for semi-autonomous federating units (states) which are loosely coterminous with ethnic and religious identities – for example, Imo State is Igbo and Christian, Katsina is Muslim and Hausa-Fulani, Niger is Nupe, Gbagyi and Hausa, Ogun is Yoruba etc. The federal system has also granted these federating units the power to elect their own leaders (governors and LGA chairmen), unlike in unitary states where these leaders are often appointed by the central government.

Since elections are competitive and every state is identified with certain ethnic and religious identities, the possession of these identities by any individual becomes an advantage towards winning elections. This is why Nigerians have learnt to hold on to these identities and even to flaunt them. Being a Tiv is a huge advantage in Benue state, just like being a Kanuri is in Borno state. It’s not hard to imagine that when electoral competition becomes very stiff, these identities will be weaponised. There is no way to stop Nigerians from engaging in toxic identity politics as long as these two enablers are in place.

Our country was founded on the basis that it has diverse and irreconcilable ethnic and religious communities. Our founding fathers wanted it that way, and they chose a federal system which they thought was best suited to manage our diversity (although most of the major federal states in the world are not so diverse internally). While countries like Ghana took off with the mantra of unity in diversity and did everything to build a united nation, our founding fathers did not even pretend that the country was united. Each of them had regional priorities higher than Nigeria’s unity.

We started with three federating units and have now grown to thirty-six plus the FCT, and the more we created states and LGAs, the more identity fault lines we created. The country is now balkanised into 37 identity enclaves (states), and 774 LGAs and each citizen is marooned inside their own enclave and is entitled to few formal privileges in others – even neighbouring ones.

In the First Republic, this divisive effect of federalism wasn’t up to what we have now because the federating units were much bigger, and they functioned as unitary states internally. The former Northern Region, for example, had thirteen or so provinces whose administrators were appointed rather than elected, and a northerner from one province could be posted to work in any of the other provinces. The provincial boundaries did not keep northerners away from each other, and as a result, the people of the region saw themselves as one because they were indeed one in practice. 

The Northern Region alone has now evolved into 19 federal states and hundreds of LGAs, each with a rigid boundary which separates it physically and functionally from other federating units. This has made intercommunal relations to be worse than they were in the old Northern Region. The late former SGF Alhaji Gidado Idris, who was from Zaria, was once a divisional officer in Benue, Adamawa and Sardauna Provinces, but his grandchildren cannot work for the Benue State Government in today’s Nigeria. They may even struggle to gain admission into state-owned schools in Benue State.

Mr Selcan Miner, a former secretary to the government of Benue-Plateau State, was once an administrative officer in Sokoto Province, and he still has fond memories of his stay there, particularly his close relationship with Sultan Abubakar III. But in the present day, the government of Sokoto State may not grant privileges to Mr Miner’s grandchildren because they are not “indigenes” of the state.

The late chief of the Mbula people in Adamawa state Joram Fwa, who was a US-trained educationist, was the pioneer principal of Ramat Technical College in Maiduguri under the then Northeastern State. He was entrusted with the assignment of establishing the college and was made its pioneer head. The college has since grown to become Ramat Polytechnic and belongs to the Borno State Government. I will not be surprised if, in the present day, the application of Mr Fwa’s grandchildren for entry into the polytechnic is turned down on the grounds that they are not from Borno state. I have used the examples of these three Northern elders to illustrate what we have done to ourselves over the years through our so-called federal system.

Not too long ago in the 1990s, the governor of Lagos state was a military officer named Buba Marwa, a native of Adamawa State. He was appointed under the military government’s unitary style, and he was well-received in the state because the people knew that that was the system in operation then. At a different time before that, a native of Lagos State, Bode George, was appointed the governor of Ondo State. From all indications, Marwa had performed well in Lagos in terms of infrastructure and crime fighting.

If we do a cost-benefit analysis of the process of appointing Marwa as governor and that of the re-election of Governor Sanwo-Olu in 2023, we would see that the former didn’t cost any significant amount of money and didn’t involve any fracture in relations between major ethnic communities in Lagos while the latter had cost the federal government a lot of money in election expenses and has led to flaring of inter-ethnic animosity, intimidation and violence. In the end, both governors are capable of doing a lot of good for Lagos, the difference in the nature of their appointment notwithstanding. This is why we need to ask ourselves if we really need to have elected governors and LGA chairmen as provided in our current federal constitution or we could simply have them appointed and monitored by the central government.

In the late 1960s and 70s, the governor of Kano State was Audu Bako, a police commissioner and native of present-day Kebbi State. He was appointed by the government of General Yakubu Gowon, and from all historical indications, Kano State has had it so good under him. His appointment didn’t cause any inter-communal upheaval in Kano, and there was no violence. Compare that to the re-election of Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje in 2019 or the election of Abba Kabir Yusuf in 2023, which were both marked by communal tension and violence. Why should we keep using this costly option of election and risk so much when Kano can have good appointed governors just like Audu Bako and Sani Bello? Only a small number of democracies around the world have elected sub-national chief executives as we have, and countries which don’t have them are not deemed to be less democratic than us.

Sometimes Nigerians view unitary systems negatively because they equate them with military governments, but there is nothing that stops us from having a unitary democracy like many countries in the world. The appointed governors and LGA chairmen under this system are going to be civilians, maybe even members of the ruling party at the centre, just like in the system in Ghana, whose 16 regions are all governed by appointed regional ministers who, at the same time, are elected members of the national parliament.

The other fear that Nigerians have about a unitary president becoming too powerful is also misplaced. Ghana’s presidents are not regarded as dictators, and opposition presidential candidates have even won elections there. In any case, parliament is always there as a check on the powers of the president. Unitary systems are cheap, can minimise toxic identity politics, guarantee harmony in the pursuit of developmental priorities and provide better coordination in fighting insecurity. It’s a better system to have than our current federal system, with its unaccountable and politically autonomous governors whose elections are now driving our ethnic and religious communities further apart and threatening the stability of our country.

Whoever brought this American-style federal constitution and gave it to our African tribal groups to implement has not served us well. It’s time we found the courage to abandon the farce. What Nigeria requires is a unitary democratic system with an element of rotational leadership at the centre to ensure its various groups of inclusion.

Dr Raji Bello wrote from Yola, Adamawa State.

By Suleiman Ahmed

In Nigeria, an election period is like watching a classic Series for the umpteenth time. You know how it’s going to play out, but it doesn’t make it any less fascinating. The most entertaining episode, of this Series, after the presidential election, of course, is the debate leading up to the Lagos gubernatorial election.

Firstly, the Yorubas must perform a ritual of agonisingly re-iterating the exact same thing: that Lagos is not a “no man’s land.” This is quickly followed by an outcry from the non-Yoruba, Lagos-based (mostly southern) Nigerians. They argue that, as Nigerians, every inch of land in the country, belongs to all Nigerians. That any attempt to deprive them of this right is ethnic bigotry. But how true is this? And do they practise what they preach? Let’s go down memory lane.

A few years ago, when the federal government suggested to some (southern) state governors to provide grazing lands to cattle farmers (who’re predominantly Fulanis) to grow their herds; to control herder-farmer clashes in parts of the country, many of the governors rejected this proposal. (Mostly) Southern Nigerians also took to social media to applaud the governors for refusing fellow Nigerians access to Nigerian lands.

Dangerous words like “invaders” and “take over” were recklessly deployed to stoke ethnic tension. No one cared to remember that these people, too, were Nigerians and therefore were entitled to own land and do business anywhere in Nigeria.

Now, in 2023, it’s election time again, and this same divisive rhetoric is being deployed, albeit in different circumstances. The same people who once championed an anti-Fulani campaign that ensured their fellow countrymen from the north couldn’t get lands in their own country are now complaining of being othered by Yorubas in Lagos. So, I’m asking: why is it ok for them to own lands and freely do businesses, have some influence on who becomes governor in “another man’s land,” but at the same time, see no contradiction in telling northern Muslim cattle farmers to return to the north, to look for land, because “the south does not belong to them?” Why are you concerned that the Fulanis “will take over your land” but are now getting triggered because the Yoruba people feel the same way towards you?

They wanted the land for free

When I first shared my thoughts on this topic on my Facebook Page, some interlocutors argued that the reason for the southern governor’s pushback was that the federal government wanted the land free of charge.

“Free,” in this context, is debatable. When an industry such as cattle farming wants the land for its activities, it’s not usually a mere hectare or two. A reasonable size would be hundreds to thousands of hectares. The size and complexity of such a project is not something private individuals can execute without support from the government.

Therefore, it was not out of order for the federal government to step in to help with things like making the land available and then building the infrastructure needed for the place to function properly. After which interested parties can be invited to come in and rent/buy spaces to set up shop. These farmers were clearly going to pay taxes to local authorities and generally operate the same way market stall owners do in places like Kano, Lagos or Aba.

Having said that, let’s say, for the sake of argument, I agree that the federal government wanted the state government to give “free” land to the cattle farmers; why was the response not: “bring more money!” Or “let’s have a better financial agreement?” We didn’t hear of any such request — of a better (financial) offer, from the southern governors. Instead, what we got from them, and many southern Nigerians, were: “the Fulanis should go back to the north and ask for land there,” “this is a plan by the Fulani government to take over our land and hand it over to their people,” and many other unpleasant, divisive comments. The protest from the south was a clear message to those cattle farmers from the north. It was made known, loud and clear, that their land was in the north and not in the south. What happened to being a Nigerian citizen with full rights anywhere in Nigeria?

We can’t be comfortable with othering and divisive languages when it involves the Fulanis and then suddenly become appalled when they’re deployed against a different group of people. It doesn’t work that way. We cannot, on the one hand, say things like Idoma land, Ijaw land, Tiv land, Igbo land, or Niger Delta land (or Niger Delta oil) and then throw tantrums when Yoruba people say Lagos is Yoruba land. You’re clearly not appalled at any injustice. You’re only now concerned because you are at the receiving end of it. What you’re practising is Selective Outrage (apologies to Chris Rock), and it is hypocritical.

Suleiman Ahmed is a writer and the author of the socio-political novel, Trouble in Valhalla. He tweets from @sule365.

By Maryam Augie-Abdulmumin

With the approval of the National Language Policy by the Federal Executive Council (FEC), instruction in primary schools within Nigeria will now be done in the mother tongue. As with every other issue of importance in this country, the policy was greeted with passionate arguments, both for and against. The Government’s decision to promote language learning for greater learning outcomes has been in the making for many years, especially at the lower primary levels. The Federal Government may have officially made it compulsory for the primary mode of instruction to be in the mother tongue. However, this policy has been in practice in most remote communities, especially in the North.

Whilst some arguments against the idea (which we shall review shortly) were valid, it is worth considering the fact that Nigeria is currently facing what is akin to an education emergency. In this regard, whatever little effort is made, especially at the policy level, should be greeted with some positivity whilst exploring ways to augment the effort in the non-governmental and private sectors.

Having said that, it is equally important we explore reasons why this policy might not work. This is because it is only when we clearly understand the hurdles ahead that we will be sufficiently prepared to effectively nurture the policy seed that the Federal Government has planted. Below are three strong reasons advanced against the policy:

The Financial Implication of Educating Children From 500 different ethnic groups.

Without mincing words, I agree with those who say it is unrealistic and unachievable to educate children from over 500 ethnic groups. This is especially true considering that education has always been at the low end of budgetary allocations. Let’s face it, the current economic profile of the nation does not look promising for a radical overhaul of this nature. However, in order to take advantage of this policy and benefit from what technologically advanced countries like China, Germany, and Russia have benefited from for many years, we can start with the low-hanging fruits. By this, I mean let’s start with the three dominant languages – Hausa, Yoruba and Igbo.

These languages already have advanced international media backing (BBC Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo, for instance) and a copious body of knowledge accessible through search engines like Google. There is a possibility of easily scaling beyond the three languages by leveraging the data and lessons learnt at this phase of the implementation.

The dearth of Qualified Teachers and Instructional Materials

Closely related to funding is the challenge of the dearth of teachers and the availability of adequate instructional materials to implement such a grand overhaul. The truth is even the current system is grappling with the same challenges, so it is an open secret that any change will mean more challenges. However, with what is available through scientific research on the benefits of children receiving instructions through their local languages, it is clear that it is only a matter of time before this issue becomes the front burner of national discourse. And although we don’t have it all figured out, we have to start with what is available. The NCE curriculum makes provision for every college of education in the Federation to have departments of Hausa, Igbo, and Yoruba and some provision for the language of the immediate community.

Community ownership, NGO, and private sector support will go a long way in ensuring effective implementation. It is also important to note that whilst the Federal Government makes policies, the responsibility of implementing basic education lies with State Governments. Thus, the onus of ensuring this success will vary from state to state. If, for example, northern governors believe this policy will serve their interest most, they should do everything within their powers to ensure the success of this policy at the state and regional levels. The same may not be a priority for the southern region. What is significant here is how we make this policy work in the best interest of Nigeria’s peace and prosperity.

Favouritism and the Challenge to the Fragile Peace in Nigeria

Viewed from the historical context of education in Nigeria, it is obvious that English is more accessible, learnt and understood in the southern part of Nigeria than in the dominantly Hausa-speaking North, where the region has always relied on the Hausa language for the mass dissemination of information. In such a situation, it is obvious that a policy of this nature will find more fertile ground in the north compared to other regions of the country. But let’s face it, the earlier we speed up access to quality education through whatever medium possible, the better for our country’s peace and prosperity.

The data available on the out-of-school population in Nigeria is disproportionately in the north, and the earlier we bridge this gap, the better for our developmental outcome. In the final analysis, this policy might actually make it more cost-effective and efficient to educate a Nigerian child than the current western-based model.

In conclusion, whilst a radical policy of this nature is bound to be confronted with many obstacles, research and comparative curricular studies have proven that our nation gains from a policy favouring our local languages over foreign languages.

It is true that the English language gives us a platform to compete globally, but the spice is in what is truly ours, our local languages, which tell the stories of history and survival. Let’s not forget that nobody says our own languages cannot gain global dominance under the right circumstances, and it all begins with the curriculum.

Mrs Maryam Augie-Abdulmumin is the Founder and  Executive Director of Illmi Children’s Fund. She can be reached via: info@illmichildrensfund.org.