According to Prof. Nwabueze, 
feuds over chieftainships
instituted by the modern governments are yet another factor that has
exacerbated social discord in Igboland. The modern governments conception of
authority as something requiring, subject to checks and balances, to be more or
less concentrated in a single person, as opposed to the diffused or massed
character it assumed in Igbo traditional society, led the British colonial
government in Nigeria to appoint so-called warrant chiefs to assist the
colonial district officer in superintending the affairs of the village
communities of Igboland. Those so appointed were, for the most part, upstarts,
people smart or bold enough to come forward to meet the white colonial district
officer. They quickly established a regime of incredible corruption, rapacity
and oppression, which created widespread resentment among the people,
culminating in the famed Women�s Riot of 1929, which at last forced the
colonial government to abolish the system, and to recognize in its place the
traditional system of administration by family, lineage and village heads and
other elders.
The relations between the members of a village or
village-group, and between one village-group or clan and another are marked by
social discord. They are always disputing over one issue or the other � land,
water, ceremonial rites, traditional offices and titles, etc. None is prepared
to accept the leadership or authority of the other. Everyone is king unto
himself. The quarrels are embittered by the poverty of the traditional Igbo
society. The Igbo(s) thus come to the politics of modern Nigeria with some inbred propensity for
intra-group quarrelsomeness. Within the group, unless you are able to get them
all in one political party, partisan politics of the modern Nigerian State is, in the tradition of that of
the traditional community, approached in the spirit of a feud, which is fought
with vehemence, with no quarters given on either side.
And so we find, as l think everybody acknowledges, that
the political feud of the Second Republic was more vehement and bitter in
Imo and Anambra than in any other state. Igbos in different political camps
were at each other's throats, with frequent clashes between their organized
armed gangs which left in their trail considerable casualties in human lives
and property. There was in particular the sad case of the Igbo Governor of
Anambra State locked in hateful political feud with the Igbo Vice-President of
the country, also from the same state. And when the Second Republic was eventually overthrown by the
military, every Igbo turned informer against his brother, writing endless
petitions to the authorities.�
Ndi Igbo - A Crisis People!
Ndi Igbo are a crisis people. They
know how to pull together, close ranks and face the common enemy. Our finding,
says EKWE NCHE
Organization, is that leadership has been a major problem for Ndi Igbo since the end of the war. Igbo society rose to its
modern glory before and during the war largely because of extremely efficient,
dedicated, visional, selfless, and inspiring leadership at all levels of Igbo
Society.
Igbo
Enwe Eze!:
The Igbo do not have Kings!
Which of
the following expression is true? Is it that:
The Igbo do not want kings? (Igbo Achoro
Eze)?
This expression is not true,
because the Igbo want kings. (Igbo cholu Eze�).
OR that:
The Igbo do not have kings? (Igbo adiro
enwe Eze)?
The answer is No! because the Igbo do have kings (Igbo n�enwe Eze).
OR that:
Igbo do not recognize their king? (Igbo anamaro onye bu Eze
va?
This expression is not true
because Igbo recognize their king (Igbo n�ama Eze va.)
OR that:
Igbo do not want an oppressive,
suppressive or dictatorial king or leader?
(Igbo achoro Eze maka ochichi nchigbu
ma obu odudu nduvie; ma obu odudu dulu-ga-ndu-ga)?
This is the true expression and
interpretation of �Igbo enwe Eze�
because Igbo do not want an oppressive, bossy, suppressive, dictatorial king or
leader!
The Distinctions that
Must Be Made
�
I think that in discussing the issue of Kingship and Leadership
for Ndi Igbo, a distinction must be made between �Kingship
for political rulership� and �Leadership for social
and cultural activism� as these two qualities may not be found or combined in
one and the same person. Therefore, the two positions or roles should also be
separated in two different persons as they are, traditionally, in the towns and
communities. Even if the two qualities are found in one and the same person, Ndi Igbo do not and should not allow that person to play
the two roles at the same time, as that will lead to a tendency to deal with
the people in the way they detest. However, in whichever role, what Ndi Igbo do not want is oppressive, bossy, exploitative,
suppressive, dictatorial imposition of authority and demonstration of
superiority complex in the performance of the role. It is that kind of attitude
while in office that Ndi Igbo understand to be and
describe as �Ochichi Nchigbu�, that
is: Rulership that Oppresses or Kills; ma obu Odudu Nduvie that is:
Leadership that Misleads).�
Ekwe Nche says: To begin, we want to draw a clear distinction
between "RULERS" and "LEADERS.� We believe that Rulers are those
people who just give orders and directives and insist that they be carried out
willy-nilly. Their authority and power cannot be challenged or questioned. They
are not elected by ordinary men and women like you and us. They are appointed
by some authority somewhere over whom ordinary men and
women do not have any control. They are not accountable to those ordinary men
and women like you and us. The people they are ruling cannot disagree,
challenge, discipline or remove them from office. Therefore, they can drive
them like goats down a bottomless pit and no questions will be asked.
Leaders on the other hand are
elected by their people to guide them towards a defined and agreed goal. They
derive their power and authority from the people they are leading. The ordinary
people reserve the right to question any and all their decisions and actually
do so often. They are accountable to the ordinary people like you and us.
Whenever the ordinary people feel that the leaders are no longer leading them
towards the desired goal, they disagree, challenge, discipline or even remove
the leaders and elect others to replace them. As a result, their leaders cannot
lead them like goats down a bottomless pit.
Ndiigbo, ibe anyi, which one of these two
do you want - "RULERS" OR "LEADERS"? Every member of EKWE NCHE, worldwide has voted
and the unanimous choice is "LEADER.� How do you vote? If your vote is for
"LEADER", EKWE NCHE
ORGANIZATION salutes and congratulates you. If your vote is for
"RULER", we are saddened that you are still suffering from the
"Nigerian Disease.� We pray that you recover soon, failing, your
autonomous community should seriously consider keeping you as far away as
possible from their Leadership.�
Igbo Reaction to Kinship
that Oppresses and Leadership that Misleads
Ndi Igbo do not want to be confronted
with the expectation that he or she should be condescending, compromising and servile
to anybody or to any authority, be it natural, assumed or appointed or
constituted. If that happens, it is understood and described as enslavement -
that is Ibu Oru. The
moment the person in any kind of authority in any of capacity begins to show
any of these traits, that is the time that the Igbo, man or woman, begins to display his or her strong objections
for that state of affairs and to revolt. That is when the strong-headedness,
which Prof. Ben Nwabueze spoke about, takes over and he
or she would begin to hurl a barrage of questions and the worst kinds of abuses
and curses at the person. He or she would start with:
Who are you - Ibu onye?
The extent of his or her annoyance will determine how much
more questions and insults and curse words that would be directed at the
person, such as:
You are a beast! Anu ovia ka ibu!
You are mad! Onye ala ka ibu!
You think you will joke with me! I�cheli na iy�eji-m we kpali mkpali?!
Will the dogs lick your eyes! Nkita lacha kwa
gi anya!
May the vulture eat your body! Udene likwa
ozu gi!, Etc.
Then he would resume with the questioning, thus:
Whose house does the pathway from your house lead to - Esi be gi eje be onye?
Do I wake up in the morning from your house - Esim be gi aputa ula?
Do I get to my house through your house - Esim be gi ana be-m?
Does the day breaks from your house - Chi osi na
be gi evo?
Are you the one who feeds me and my family � Obu gi n�enye mu
na ndi
be mu nli?
Who are you that I should be cowering for you � I� bu onye na mu ya n�eze
gi?
Who is your father? Onye bu Nna gi?
Is your father greater than my father? �Obu nna gi ka nna
m?
He will tell you that there is also kingship or royalty in
his house - Eze di kwu na
be-m!
Then he would follow up with the question as to whether a king
bears any identification mark - Aruvali Eze ama? That is to say that
kingship or leadership has no permanency in any family or with anybody, or as
Dr. Azikiwe, the Owelle of
Onitsha put it: �No Condition Is Permanent� Onwero onodu obuna akpolu ntu!, ma obu nke dili
onye obuna okpu tolokpu!. To cap it all
up, the Igbo would tell the person: Je mete ve! Go
and do your worst. Then he would say to the person: Go and show what you can
do! Je zie me nke oji bulu
gi!.
At that point, it has become obvious that he is not going
to budge no matter what happens! Finally, he would conclude by saying: Am I
your slave? Abu-m oru
gi! Let the skies come down to cover the Earth, I am not thinking about it! Enu-igwe reli kpudo ana, ana-m echero maka ya!
Whatever you are saying, I am not hearing it! Ive obuna I�n�ekwu, ana-m anuro ya!
But an Igbo adage says: I�nagwa madu okwu, osi na nya ananuro ive
avu I�n�ekwu, gi kwusie nya
ike, maka na ozi ezili
anwulu oku elugo n�enu igwe!
If you are talking to somebody and he or she says that he or she is not
hearing what you are saying, you should go ahead saying whatever you are
saying, louder and clearer, because it is said that a message given to the
smoke has reached the skies!
Igbo Distrust and
Hate for Authority that Dominates, Oppresses or Dictates
But the simple truth is that in as much as Ndi Igbo claim to respect age and seniority, they find it
very difficult to respect law and authority, constituted or otherwise. The Igbo
abhors domination and rejects being dictated to. It is the same with their
women. But the oppression and suppression of women by men and the accompanying
violence and battering of wives have made Igbo women seem docile and
submissive. The Igbo man or woman would welcome dialogue and reasoning together,
but that privilege has largely been denied women in Igbo traditional culture. The
Igbo hates disappointment. The Igbo likes to keep his or her word and would
expect the other person to keep his or hers also. The Igbo woman does this in
her limited scope of operation.
Without that respect for his or her freedom and liberty lies
the strong-headedness of Ndi Igbo that Professor Nwabueze spoke about in his 1985 Ahiajoku Lecture, as he
discussed: �Why Ndi Igbo Are Feared, Resented And Hated
In Nigeria.�
He said: The Igbos are undeniably
a headstrong people, stubborn and violently self-willed. A certain stubbornness
seems to be built into our psyche; an instinctive preference to break when
perhaps it is possible only to bend. This headstrong disposition is well
depicted in Chinua Achebes
Things Fall Apart when the principal character, Okonkwo,
in true Igbo character, took his matchet off its
sheath, chopped off the court messengers head and walked home, proud that he
had acted like a man but disillusioned to know that his people had allowed the
other messengers to escape. Rebellion and the civil war are the worst disasters
it has brought to the Igbo(s).
He continued: Again we read from Elizabeth Isichei�s: A History of the Igbo People, that resistance to
colonialism was fiercest and longest in Igboland. It took the British over
twenty years of constant military action to subdue the Igbos. With only capguns, Dane guns, machetes and the occasional rifle, they
flung themselves, heedless, against the British, heavily armed with rifles,
machine guns and unlimited supplies of ammunition and were slaughtered in their
thousands. In this, they were mindless of the simple truth that discretion is
the better part of valour.� As late as 1905 when the British had smashed
almost every resistance to their colonial penetration, the Ezza
of Abakiliki were reported to have told an emissary
of the colonial government that they recognized no superior authority except
the Heavens above and the Earth beneath, and that between these two
awe-inspiring super human potentates they constituted a third force. What a
defiant spirit, but it also betrayed a certain pig-headedness and
self-delusion.
Said he: The worst in the Igbo
seems perhaps to be his lack of political sense. His tendency to look at issues in
Nigerian government and politics in a purely idealistic context and to apply to
them purely idealistic solutions often based on acquired book knowledge but
without sufficient regard to the realities of the Nigerian situation. Politics
being simply the art of the possible, the Igbos may truly be described as poor
actors, utterly devoid of a political sense. With their background of a
diffused traditional political system, they have no traditional familiarity
with the techniques and tactics which the government and politics of a large
and complex political community like Nigeria calls for.
Continuing, he said:
The Igbo political naivete is
perhaps best exemplified by Ironsi�s abolition of the
federal system in favour of a unitary system (of
government) in the belief that that it offered a short cut to Nigerian unity.
In the circumstances of Nigeria at the time, it was naive of him
to have thought that unity could be secured through a unitary system imposed by
military fiat. His solution was much too idealistic. It ignored the reality
that a country the size of Nigeria and comprising a wide diversity of tribes
separated by fundamental differences of language, culture and outlook, can live
together at peace only under a framework in which its component units are
allowed to manage their own internal affairs. It ought reasonably to have been
foreseen that a unitary scheme would arouse the age-old fear of Igbo
domination, as it in fact did among the Hausa/Fulanis.
He continues: We all know the cost to the Igbos of the
thoughtlessness of the killings in the January, 1966 coup and of Ironsi�s unitary scheme. It was in order to settle scores
with the Igbos for these killings and to counter the threat of Igbo domination
implicit in the unitary scheme that thousands of Igbos resident in the North were massacred in May, July and September, 1966. The
massacres were certainly too genocidal in their extent and too savage in their
methods to have been warranted by the provocation, but we did give some
occasion for it.
There is so much in the present political situation in the
country that makes it necessary that the Igbos should be extremely circumspect
and cautious so as not to become scapegoats for whatever might go wrong, and
thereby invite yet another massacre on themselves. Those Igbos in sensitive or
critical public positions should carefully weigh their actions and utterances
in the light of this. It is perhaps wiser for them not to express themselves
too soon on explosive public issues.
Propensity For Self-hate, Self-destruction and Intra-group Discord
The Igbo society is really a
plural one comprising various sub-groups between whom there is little common
identity beyond that based on a common language and broad cultural patterns.
There is, for example, the division between the riverine
Igbo(s) and the upland Igbo(s) (Olu and Igbo) and, in Anambra State, between Anambra North and
Anambra South. The sub-groups are marked apart from each other by differences
of dialect, customs, political organization, occupation and outlook. The
division between the riverine and upland Igbo(s) is
that between slave-dealing, kingdom� associated peoples and
slave-providing, kingship lacking populations. The Olu, with their well-watered
farms and protein rich diet, writes Elizabeth Isichei,
despised the Igbo for their food and water shortages, and their role as slave
suppliers.� The people of Owerri felt
superior, as warriors, to the neighbouring Isu, who were Traders. The smiths of Agulu-Umana
looked down on the neighbouring Oheke
who did not share their skills. The people of Arochukwu
called themselves the children of God. Even within the sub-group, the sense of
attachment grew weaker as the unit grew larger the family,
He continues: The relations between the members of a
village or village-group, and between one village-group or clan and another are
marked by social discord. They are always disputing over one issue or the other
land, water, ceremonial rites, traditional offices and titles, etc. None is
prepared to accept the leadership or authority of the other. Everyone is king
unto himself. The quarrels are embittered by the poverty of the traditional
Igbo society.
The Igbo(s) thus come to the politics of modern Nigeria with some inbred propensity for
intra-group quarrelsomeness. Within the group, unless you are able to get them
all in one political party, partisan politics of the modern Nigerian state is,
in the tradition of that of the traditional community, approached in the spirit
of a feud, which is fought with vehemence, with no quarters given on either
side.
And so we find, as l think everybody acknowledges, that
the political feud of the Second Republic was more vehement and bitter in
Imo and Anambra than in any other state. Igbo(s) in different political camps
were at each others throats, with frequent clashes between their organized
armed gangs which left in their trail considerable casualties in human lives
and property. There was in particular the sad case of the Igbo Governor of
Anambra State locked in hateful political feud with the Igbo Vice-President of
the country, also from the same state. And when the Second Republic was eventually overthrown by the
military, every Igbo turned informer against his brother, writing endless
petitions to the authorities.
The Igbo capacity for self-destruction was again well
demonstrated in what has been referred to as the saboteur mania, which had
seriously undermined the ability of their new state of Biafra in prosecuting the civil war.
Almost every person of consequence in the society came under suspicion and
harassment as a saboteur by the Biafran public, ever vigilant, and ever ready
to discover evidence of sabotage in every act, document and every utterance. A
commander who lost a battle for whatever reason, which often had to do with
inadequate resources in men and ammunition, was branded a saboteur and
harassed. Even the Biafran Inspector-General of Police was so branded, and his
son was nearly killed at school by his mates for being the son of his father.
In his admirable book, No place to Hide, Bernard Odogwu
has provided us with a telling account of how close the Biafran state came to
destroying itself on account of this saboteur mania. The onus, he writes, was
more or less on anyone to prove that he was no saboteur and there were no
exceptions, as most vigilante groups, notably the Civil Defense, took to the
streets in their searches for saboteurs. It was with that kind of confusion and
chaos reigning supreme that Enugu fell into the federal hands. All
this is somewhat reminiscent of the massed administration of the traditional Igbo
society which is, in a loose sense, rather akin to mob rule.�
Ndi Igbo and the Osu And Oru Descent-Caste
System and the Stigma
As Onye Igbo would ask whether
he was your slave in his strong-headedness, the same spirit of revolt extended
to those who are slaves to their owners who, after the illegalization of
slavery, tried to accommodate them. Prof. Nwabueze
continued:��
The Igbo propensity for intra-group discord has been
further aggravated by the modern government in two other respects. At the time
of the advent of the modern government in Igboland, slaves and their
descendants formed a large element of the societies of most Igbo communities.
They even outnumbered (and still do) the free-borns
in some of the riverine communities, notably those in
Ogbaru district where I come from. This had resulted
from the stoppage of export trade in slaves from the 1830s (the last slave ship
left the Delta in 1854) which meant that, since the internal trade did not
thereby cease, the slaves had then to be absorbed within the communities. In
the result slaves became cheaper, and their number increased vastly. They were
accumulated partly as a status symbol.
As a result of the large increase in the number of slaves,
the societies of the affected communities had become polarized. For, slaves
were without any legal rights whatever, being the absolute property of their
masters and as such subject to their power of control and disposition. They
were subjected to oppressive disabilities and debasing treatment, like being
used for sacrifices or for the burial rites of titled masters, the denial of
the right to become the head of a family or village, the right to take titles
or to intermarry with free-borns. They acquiesced in
the system, although slave revolts did erupt from time to time. Over a period
of time, the slaves and their descendants began to be assimilated into the
lineage structure of the communities. The assimilation proceeded upon a social
fiction where-by slaves and their descendants were regarded as having originated
from the same ancestral stock as the free-borns, so
that terms implying kinship, such as brother and sister, were used between them
and the free-borns. But the disabilities remained in
actual social life. There was thus in the system the seed of social discord
which eventually germinated and grew under the stimulus of certain measures of
the modern government implementing its democratic ethos of freedom and
equality.
There was, first, the proclamation of 1901 which abolished
slave dealing in all its various forms. Another proclamation of the same year,
as amended in 1912, enabled a salve to buy his freedom. And in 1916, the status
of slavery itself was finally abolished. (The Slavery Act of
1833 enacted by British Parliament applied only in the colony of Lagos, but not
in the rest of the country which was a protectorate). In Eastern
Nigeria, the Abolition of Osu(and Oru) System Law, 1956 completed the
process of emancipation by abolishing, not only the status of slavery or osu, but also all
their attendant disabilities, and by making it an offence for any one to
enforce against any person any disability based on his previous status as a
slave (oru ma obu osu).
Slaves and their descendants were naturally encouraged by
these measures to challenge the privileged position of the free-born(s),
and to demand to be admitted to the kingship of the village-group or clan and
the headship of families or villages, to the wealth title societies and to the
other rights and privileges previously denied to them. Where their demands were
not conceded, as was the case in many of the communities, they organized
separate kingships, head-ships, title societies, festivals and other
traditional ceremonial rites for themselves. Many Igbo communities have thus
become thoroughly dichotomized into two antagonistic groups feuding among
themselves over practically every issue. Social and economic development in the
communities has inevitably suffered, as the energy and resources that would
otherwise have been channeled into development projects are wasted on feuds.�
Disposition to
Ignore Laws and Disregard the Rule of Law
It is a very sad commentary, but the Igbo find it very
difficult to bend to the rule of law. This is because they also find it
difficult to forgive and forget. Otherwise, the laws prohibiting the practice
of the Osu and Oru Caste System by the Eastern Nigeria Government since
1956 should have completely wiped out the practice and its demeaning stigma
long ago. Only very few communities and town followed suit. Obedience to a Law
should be whole and entire, not half-heartedly. Right now, in most localities
of Igbo land, the practice and dread for the stigma by marriage reign supreme.
So also are other worthwhile Laws that are enacted to establish the application
of fundamental human rights for the peoples of the ethnic groups of Nigeria, including Ndi
Igbo, especially for women and children, which are totally ignored.
Reforming And Revolutionizing Omenana Ndi Igbo
The spirit of this judgement
should also be the stance and mindset of Aka Ikenga Ndi Igbo na Oha
Na Eze Ndi Igbo towards
reforming, revolutionizing and abrogating all of the oppressive Omenana Practices of Ndi Igbo. The
Organizations should view this kind of intervention as top priority so as to
curb the jealousies, greed and avarice of the in-law� - fathers, mothers,
brothers and sisters, which propel them into dispossessing widows and their
children. The sons of the deceased, especially the eldest sons, should also be
harnessed in their practice of dispossessing their father�s widows, including
their mothers. By this statement we are saying: (Onye azaro be ya, ozava Ebe?)
�That means to say that Ndi Igbo should better sweep their compounds first before
going to sweep outside the gate or the Ebe or Ama or Ilo. Otherwise, the
application of the Repugnancy Test Clause by the Law Courts, which has been
revived in the 1999 Constitution, will deprive them of the initiative for
reforming and revolutionizing their Omenana practices
and, thereby, pull the stool from under the seat of Ndi
Igbo in their customary practices.
Harmonization of
Customary Laws with Statutory Laws
Also these two apex organizations should be thinking very
seriously about harmonizing the Customary Laws and Practices with the Statutory
Laws as in the case of South Africa. After all, the two systems of
Laws apply to one and the same people as the foreign, stranger, European
colonialists, from whom Ndi Igbo were hiding their
traditional and customary practices are no longer here. Above all, all the
levels of Government � Local, State and Federal � are now in the hands of the
people themselves. See The Harmonization Of The Common Law And The Indigenous
Law by the South African Law Commission Project 90, Discussion Paper 74
Customary Marriages, August 1997. ISBN: 0-621-27723-1. It is understood that
the harmonized laws are working very well.
All
Rights Reserved.������������
Cite as: Oyibo Odinamadu on the Newspaper reports of Aka
Ikenga-Ohaneze Asaba
Retreat 2004 Part Three.