Increasing the traditional institution’s strength and effectiveness in carrying out its duty is now appropriate.
As you may recall, there have been worries about the historic institution becoming politicized. According to commentators, several palaces have become political playgrounds.
They claim that contract-seekers and sycophants have taken over the hallways that were once famed for sage advice and community justice.
One of our informants says, “Patronage and political survival have come at the expense of the stool’s dignity.”
Nowhere is this unsettling tendency more noticeable than in places like Katsina, Adamawa, and Kano.
The ruthless politicization of the emirate—the deliberate destruction of a centuries-old institution on the altar of control and retribution—was something we saw in Kano.
Traditional unity has been undermined in Adamawa by polarizing politics. Creeping involvement in Katsina poses a threat to the voices of moral fortitude and tradition.
Professors Tunde Adeniran and Taoheed Adedoja, two former ministers, are at odds over a proposed constitutional amendment that would create a formal and consistent financial system for traditional institutions.
The House Committee on Constitution Review, which is chaired by Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu, adopted a proposal that led to the bill’s current status in the House of Representatives.
The committee is putting forward a proposal to amend Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) in order to give traditional councils nationwide a specific source of revenue.
According to the Constitution’s Section 162, which regulates the Distributable Pool Account, money that is in a state’s local government councils’ credit “shall be distributed among the local government councils of that state on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the state.”
In the proposed modification, the committee suggests adding a new clause that requires state legislatures to pass legislation requiring the direct funding of traditional councils after Subsection (8).
According to the new clause, a House of Assembly must “enact legislation for the direct payment of not less than five percent of the amount standing to the credit of the local government councils in the state to the head of the traditional council in that state.”
If the amendment is approved, traditional institutions will no longer be dependent on state and municipal governments’ discretionary subventions, as they would have a constitutionally guaranteed source of revenue for the first time.
A former education minister, Prof. Adeniran, warned against the perils of forcing a standardized national model on traditional institutions in an exclusive interview.
According to their unique histories and requirements, he maintained that subnational governments are in a better position to decide how such organizations should be run.
“From state to state, traditional institutions’ relevance varies,” he remarked. They must not be handled with national homogeneity and politicized. These are state-level concerns, and constitutional protections for conventional institutions shouldn’t exacerbate federal troubles and difficulties.
Former Minister of Sports and Special Duties Prof. Adedoja has thrown his support behind the proposed amendment, which is in stark contrast to Adeniran’s stance.
Adedoja praised parliamentarians for bringing about the constitutional reform and stressed the importance of traditional leaders in grassroots government and dispute settlement. He also called for widespread support.
According to him, “In every local government in Nigeria, traditional institutions are the ones closest to the people at the community level. They are essential in resolving family and land disputes, mediating conflicts, and preserving peace through culturally recognized means.
Financial assistance allows them to react quickly to these neighborhood disputes, relieving the strain on formal courts that are overburdened with cases. He told our correspondent that traditional institutions support local government regions’ efforts to maintain peace and order.
Constitutional support for traditional council funding is justified solely by the preservation of cultural and social values, according to Adedoja.
“Traditional leaders are the guardians of indigenous culture, history, and moral principles,” he stated. Funding helps preserve local history, organize cultural events, and spread ideals that encourage citizens to be united, respectful, and self-assured.
“This cultural stability supports community development initiatives by local governments and fosters social cohesion.”
The proposed law was further defended by the former minister on the basis of community mobilization for security and development.
Additionally, he stated that “traditional institutions are effective channels for mobilizing communities for development initiatives like public health campaigns, education enrollment, sanitation, and local security efforts.”
“They can better engage stakeholders, support vigilante and early-warning systems, and work with local governments to implement policies at the grassroots level thanks to budgetary allocations.”
Since 1999, when democracy was restored to Nigeria, the fight for constitutional funding and recognition of traditional institutions has taken center stage in constitutional discussions.
Despite their impact on grassroots mobilization, cultural preservation, dispute resolution, and community governance, traditional rulers are not given any official position in the current Constitution’s governance framework.
Reformers contend that despite their continued importance, this exclusion has undermined traditional institutions, especially in rural areas where they frequently serve as the closest authority to the populace. In order to address security issues, resolve intercommunal conflicts, promote public health initiatives, and foster local development, proponents contend that traditional rulers are essential allies.
Constitutional funding would improve the independence, dignity, and efficacy of traditional institutions, according to proponents of the proposed amendment. They contend that the current financial structure, which is mostly reliant on the cooperation of governors or chairmen of local governments, breaks the neutrality of traditional rulers and exposes them to political pressure.
They contend that a statutory funding structure would promote predictability and transparency, bolster administrative capacity, and enhance traditional councils’ potential to assist grassroots government. While nominally acknowledging the historical and social relevance of traditional authority inside Nigeria’s federal structure, they nevertheless maintain that distributing a small portion of local government funding will not disturb fiscal balances.
However, the lack of clearly defined constitutional duties for traditional rulers and accountability are the main worries of the opponents, which are likely to dominate legislative debates on the idea in the upcoming weeks.
