Editorial

Enforcing Rivers’ Anti-Open Grazing Law

Published

4 years ago

September 13, 2021

Many states in the South of the country did not meet the September 1, 2021 deadline agreed upon by their governors to enact anti-open grazing laws in their respective states. This has drastically decompressed the urgency of the legal instrument which the governors accepted to employ to protect their people, their livelihood and make the entire region safer.
The governors of the 17 states in the Southern region of the country had set a deadline during their July 5 meeting in Lagos that followed the announcement of a full ban on open grazing at the previous May 12 meeting in Asaba, the capital of Delta State. This decision was deemed necessary after several unsuccessful attempts to address the threat of outdoor grazing in the South and the insecurity it generates.
In a resolution after the governors’ meeting, the forum explained the rationale behind the ban on open grazing, and stated that, “development and population growth have put pressure on available land and increased the prospects of conflict between migrating herders and local populations in the South. Given this scenario, it becomes imperative to enforce the ban on open grazing in the South, including cattle movement to the South by foot.”
Unfortunately, at the end of the September 1 deadline, only Bayelsa, Ondo, and Rivers States enacted anti-open grazing laws. During the tenure of AyodeleFayose, its immediate past governor, Ekiti State had already promulgated a law banning open cattle grazing. A similar law was legislated in Oyo State shortly after SeyiMakinde became governor. Other states may have sent the bill without corresponding follow-up.
Governors who have not enacted the law must act quickly as it is the surest means to protect their people from rampaging herdsmen. Rhetoric and grandstanding cannot prevent these killer-herders whose wanton campaigns of destruction of farms and kidnappings across the Southern states are without bounds.
Herdsmen have been on rampage, destroying and killing people in many states. Following this precarious situation, there has been a burning question as to whether or not the menace of the herdsmen can be classified as terrorism.
However, herders have been named the fourth deadliest known terrorist group operating in Nigeria and parts of the Central African Republic.
Herders’ violence was rated six times more deadly than the Boko Haram insurgency. The destruction and bloodshed have been going on for a long time, and the governors have the responsibility to find emergency solutions since they always swiftly maintain their status as the chief security officers of their respective states.
These terrorist organisations continue to gain a foothold in the South by forming evil alliances with murderous herders, resulting in a high degree of insecurity, particularly in the South-West. Killer-herdsmen live in government forest reserves without authorisation, and criminals use them as hiding places to commit crimes, especially murder and kidnappings for ransom.
Acting to check the trend in line with his constitutional responsibility to protect lives and property and in keeping with the resolution reached by the Southern governors to enact anti-open grazing laws in their states by September 1, Rivers State Governor, Chief Nyesom Wike, on August 19, signed the Open Rearing and Grazing Prohibition Law No. 5 of 2021 of Rivers State. This meant the activation of enforcement of the state ban on open grazing.
Signing the bill into law, the governor said it was inimical to development and peace for any state to condone open grazing of cattle. “It is no longer a story. All of us know what our people have suffered in terms of this open grazing. Today, all Nigerians have come to accept the reality that open grazing is no longer fashionable. Even our brothers in the North have agreed that it is no longer fashionable,” Wike emphasised.
The law is divided into four parts. The first part deals with its objectives; that is what the law intends to achieve. The second part is about the establishment of ranches and issuance of ranching permit. The third is on the prohibition of open rearing and grazing of livestock offences and penalties, while the final part has miscellaneous provisions, including power to arrest, detain and impound trespassing livestock and the jurisdiction of the court to try offenders.
In summary, the law stipulates that no person is allowed to openly graze livestock in Rivers State, except within the confines of a ranch. And to establish a ranch, such a person must apply to the state committee for approval. And that committee having regard to the guidelines it is going to issue, may or may not issue approval to establish a ranch.
With the law now in force, open rearing or grazing of livestock in Rivers State is prohibited and criminalised. Therefore, there is an urgent need to meet with herders in the state to sensitise them on the new law to forestall likely claims of ignorance of it. Anyone seen violating the law after the enlightenment should be immediately apprehended and prosecuted to serve as a deterrent to others.
It should, however, not be only about promulgating a law to establish order, but for the Rivers State Government to rigorously enforce it to curtail the excesses of the marauding herders. Governor Wike should empower security agencies in the state and possibly set up a task force to enforce this law to the letter. It must not be reduced to a mere paper tiger based on their lethargy. The ordinance demands a resolute political will to be effective.
Rivers people, including the traditional institution in the state must complement government’s efforts by watching out for violators, especially those who would place their personal or political ambitions above the dignity and safety of their people by paying lip service to the realisation of this law. Southern leaders must take all legal measures to protect the integrity of the land and the lives and property of the people.
This is the only way to tame the menace of arm-bearing herders and their likes, whose stock in trade has been to constitute nuisance on roads and streets, and deprive farmers the joy of their hard labour and contributions to ensure food sufficiency and security in their communities, states and the entire country. All hands must be on deck to support the government’s efforts to protect our people in the communities from invading herders.

Editorial

Charge Before New Rivers Council Helmsmen

Published

2 days ago

September 29, 2025

The Tide

On the 30th of August, Rivers people trooped out to participate in local government elections conducted across the state. These elections, which produced new chairmen and councillors for the 23 local government areas (LGAs), were organised by the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC). The exercise has ushered in a new crop of grassroots leaders whose shoulders now bear the responsibility of steering the affairs of their respective councils. With the polls concluded and winners duly announced, the time has come for the newly elected officials to roll up their sleeves and begin the hard work of governance.

According to the results declared by RSIEC, the All Progressives Congress (APC) secured a dominant lead, winning chairmanship seats in 20 of the 23 local government councils, while the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) clinched the remaining three. This outcome not only reflects the current political dynamics in the state but also places a significant weight of expectation on the shoulders of the APC-led councils to justify the confidence reposed in them by the electorate. It is imperative that political rhetoric now gives way to tangible development, especially at the grassroots level where government is felt most directly.

Following the elections, the successful chairmen were officially sworn into office by the former Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas. The solemn ceremony marked a transition from campaign promises to the reality of public service. With their inauguration complete, the time for celebration has ended; the time for delivery has commenced. The electorate now awaits meaningful action that reflects the hopes and aspirations of the voting public.

As helmsmen of their various LGAs, these leaders must quickly settle down to work. Their constituents expect them to provide direction, formulate policies, and execute programmes that will uplift communities long neglected. The local government tier is closest to the people and, as such, must rise above politicking to meet the everyday needs of the citizenry. It is not enough to occupy office; they must make their impact visibly and positively felt across their domains.

The Supreme Court ruling mandating direct allocation of funds to local governments—although not yet fully implemented—is a welcome development that underscores the autonomy of the third tier of government. Once this is operationalised, the excuses often cited for underperformance will no longer hold water. With funds directly accessed from the Federation Account, council administrations will be better empowered to meet the developmental needs of their localities, if only they manage resources judiciously and prioritise the right projects.

The onus is now on the chairmen to contribute meaningfully to the broader development of Rivers State. The state government cannot and should not be expected to do everything. Local government councils have defined responsibilities—ranging from rural infrastructure, primary healthcare, and basic education to waste management and local security—that must be adequately addressed. It is high time they stopped passing the buck and started acting as the elected leaders they are.

We extend our congratulations to all who emerged victorious in the elections. However, with this victory comes great responsibility. It is no longer about party affiliations or electoral campaigns; it is about governance. The chairmen must launch people-centred projects that will genuinely improve the lives of the rural populace—projects in water supply, road maintenance, school renovation, and youth empowerment, among others. Let their tenure be remembered for its impact, not its slogans.

Central to their mandate should be the welfare of workers. Council employees form the engine room of local governance, and their morale significantly affects service delivery. The new chairmen must ensure regular payment of salaries, staff training, and a conducive working environment. Neglecting this vital aspect will only hinder whatever grand plans they may have for their LGAs.

It is also essential to institute a robust peer review mechanism. The new LG officials should not operate in isolation; rather, they should learn from one another, share ideas, and compete constructively in a bid to outperform each other in service delivery. Healthy competition among council areas will drive innovation and foster accelerated development. Such a system will also help the public identify high-performing councils for emulation.

Given the typically short tenure of council administrations, it is crucial that they focus on projects that are realistic and impactful. Time and resources should not be wasted on white elephant ventures that are neither sustainable nor beneficial to the people. Instead, chairmen should pursue programmes that match their timelines and address immediate community needs.

Peace and security must remain a cardinal objective for all council steersmen. Regardless of who facilitated their election or what political loyalties they hold, they must ensure peace reigns in their areas. Development cannot thrive in an atmosphere of tension and distrust. These leaders must work closely with traditional rulers, youth groups, and civil society organisations to maintain law and order.

A critical understanding must also prevail—that chairmen are leaders of the people, not just leaders of political parties. They must conduct themselves as impartial administrators serving all constituents, irrespective of political affiliations. Additionally, they must work harmoniously with the state governor, who remains the leader of the state. Petty rivalries and political infighting serve no purpose in the development agenda.

Now that the elections are over and governance has begun, it is essential for these chairmen and councillors to adopt an inclusive approach. They must carry everyone along—party members and opposition alike—in their development plans. Creating division or playing favourites will only fracture communities and stall progress. Leadership at the grassroots demands fairness, equity, and a listening ear.

Rivers people have played their part by coming out to vote. The baton has now been passed to the new council helmsmen. They must seize the opportunity to leave lasting legacies in their communities. History will not judge them by the number of rallies they held or the speeches they gave, but by the quality of life they brought to their people. Let them not squander this moment.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

1 week ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.