Opinion
Gov Ayade And Cattle Business
Page 5 of The Tide of Monday, December 6, 2021, carried a news headline: “Ayade Frowns At Anti-Open Grazing Law”. For Governor Ben Ayade of Cross River State to be quoted as saying that “the anti-open grazing law which some southern states have passed based on the resolution of the Southern Governors’ Forum might lead to war in the country”, is quite ominous and sad. As a state governor, Ayade must have access to unbiased security reports, one of which was that some sponsored groups were infiltrating into Nigeria as herdsmen. Who are the sponsors?
When the cattle jinx started brewing several years ago, a few concerned Nigerians who knew what was lurking behind it, raised some issues. When the issue of Boko Haram insurgency groups became alarming, President Muhammadu Buhari attributed the phenomenon to Libyan renegades after the fall of Ghadaffi. More worrisome was the alarm raised by former President Olusegun Obasanjo about “Islamisation and Fulanisation agenda”, which some Nigerians thought was a joke. Similarly, details of Nigeria’s membership of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) remain shrouded in secrecy, despite obvious signals, rarely inspiring.
To describe anti-open grazing law as legislating “to illegitimacy, a legitimate trade of a people, the nomadic herdsmen”, is to stand legality on its head. Issue of legality rests on rights and rights are only obtained by the fulfilment of duties. To “accommodate the concerns of farmers and herders” would include accommodating the rights and duties of each group within the ambit of legality. To talk about rights, duties and legality must touch on the issue of responsibility, if sanity must prevail in society.
Almost all nomadic herdsmen in the West African zone are of the Islamic brotherhood, whether they be Fulanis or not. With nomadic and wandering lifestyle as an occupation and culture, seeing adults and children move about in search of green pastures can be a pathetic sight. Concern for such herdsmen and their sad conditions called for the policy and programmes of Nomadic Education and the creation of settlements or homes for rehabilitation purposes. Even now, the University of Jos, among others, runs a programme on Nomadic Education.
That the primitive and old-fashioned system of rearing cattle over vast expanse of lands and territories must go on without modifications in line with modern realities, smacks of retrogression and narrow-mindedness. Add this to the fact that the herders are rarely the owners of the herds of cattle which they manage, then the need for intervention becomes obvious. One can say, without mincing words, even though evidence may not be presented in “chapters and verses (as Obasanjo would demand), that over 80 per cent of herds of cattle in Nigeria are owned by highly-placed Nigerians whose children would never rear cattle. Serving and retired Generals!
Then can we not see the hypocrisy and injustice in referring to cattle rearing, via open grazing, as legitimate trade and culture which must continue unchanged? Would Governor Ayade’s grandson move with cattle from Yobe State to Obudu on foot for several days? His “herdsmen brothers of the north”, in semi-arid condition, with no grass and having no money to do irrigation, must be allowed to survive. But the crop farmer in Ikom must not disallow herds of cattle from using his farm as a green and ready pasture! An Omoku man bought a head of cattle last November for N480, 000 for Nchaka Festival.
So, Ayade’s argument of herdsmen having “no money to do irrigation” to sustain their pasture does not hold any water. The issue is not preventing anyone from green pastures; rather, the apprehension is coming from other quarters covered in hidden agenda. Surely, the governor is not unaware that herdsmen kill, rape women in farms and had been seen in possession of firearms meant for soldiers in combat. Then who is “insensitive”, creating “anarchy” and “inviting the nation into war”?; according to Ayade.
Professor Ayade’s proposed Open Grazing Management Law, meant to find a solution to the cattle Jinx, is being awaited as the law that would save Nigeria from war. In his words: “I think morally, ethically, it is unacceptable to prohibit a trade that existed before I was born. I’d rather find a way to modulate it so that it will meet the definition of modern animal farming or husbandry. I think because it’s a profession, a business, it’s also a fundamental right of people to do the business”. Does that call for doing business using ancient methods?
Anti-open grazing law as made by other governors in the South never contains any clause prohibiting any trade or fundamental right of people to do business; but rather sought to bring sanity and security in the society. If Ayade is not aware of it, let him have the hint that some people have a unique mindset that cows must eat grass wherever grass grows because it is a fundamental right. It does not matter that the grass is in somebody else’s land. This is one item in Nomadic Education curriculum, under legal aspect of modern animal husbandry. Rear your cattle, but don’t breach the law or create insecurity by invading farms with impunity!
One would enjoin Governor Ayade to consult his security advisers to ascertain whether it is true or not that movement of cattle and herders southwards was not part of strategies mapped out in some quarters for implementation. He may also be told in confidence that some power blocs cling to religion as an instrument of power politics. Therefore, the issue of anti-open grazing law goes far beyond animal husbandry or legitimate trade and business, but has some value-added contents. Those who see far try to prevent what “might lead to war in the country”, by nipping the jinx in the bud.
Those who seek diligently to perceive the footprints of the ants would be shown the signs and symptoms of possible storms. Before major upheavals occur, there are usually early warning signals which obtuse, money-minded and boisterous talkers rarely perceive. In the case of Nigeria, an early alarm raised by Obasanjo has rarely been taken as a serious issue to table for national discussion. Similarly, lamentations of T. Y. Danjuma concerning ethnic and religious cleansing, of which “the armed forces are not neutral”, fell on deaf ears. How long must we pretend that all is well?
Those who can recall the origin and trend of Afghanistan situation would see similarities going on in Nigeria. In modern democracy, religious fundamentalism often clashes with the principle of freedom or self determination. Nigeria is not a theocratic state, neither must religion be used as an instrument of power politics. Governor Ayade’s concern for cattle business should also extend towards a greater concern for peaceful coexistence fostered by justice and the rule of law. Cattle business is a private affair.
By: Bright Amirize
Dr Amirize is a retired lecturer from the Rivers State University, Port Harcourt.
Nigeria, often referred to as the “Giant of Africa”, is endowed with vast natural resources,
a large population and a youthful workforce.
Despite these advantages, the country faces persistent economic challenges, most notably high unemployment rates over the years. Successive governments remain a central issue contributing to poverty, social unrest, and underdevelopment. The economic wellbeing of a nation is significantly tied to her employment levels.
In Nigeria’s case, high unemployment has become a key driver of its poor economic performance affecting everything from productivity and income levels to crime and political instability.
Unemployment in Nigeria has assumed a multidimensional nature, characterised not just by joblessness but also underemployment, informal employment and precarious working conditions.
The Nigeria National Bureau of Statistic (NBS) said the youth with over 60 percent of Nigeria’s population under the age of 30 percent youth unemployment is a time bomb threatening the nation’s future.
Many graduates leave universities and polytechnics annually with little or no hope of securing decent jobs.
This structural unemployment is the result of a mismatch between skills and labour market needs, inadequate industrialisation, and a weak private sector.
Unemployment affects an economy in numerous direct and indirect ways.
In Nigeria, it leads to a reduced consumer base, when large sections of the population are not earning steady incomes, they have limited purchasing power which in turn affects the production and growth of businesses. Companies produce less, invest less and hire fewer people, leading to a vicious cycle of low economic growth.
Moreover, high unemployment translates to lower tax revenue for the government with fewer people paying taxes. The government has fewer resources to fund infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other public services that stimulate economic development.
This fiscal weakness forces Nigeria to rely heavily on foreign loans, which leads to rising debt levels and economic vulnerability.
Furthermore, infrastructure deficits including inadequate power supply, poor road networks and limited access to credit make it difficult for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to thrive, yet SMEs are the bedrock of employment in many developed nations. Nigeria’s weak support for SMEs stifles innovation and job creation.
Another tragic consequence of high unemployment is the mass exodus of Nigerian talent to foreign countries in search of better opportunities. The brain drain weakens the country’s human capital base and deprives it of professionals who could contribute meaningfully to national development.
The “Japa” phenomenon-a slang used to describe young Nigerians fleeing the country reflects deep disillusionment with the system. Doctors, nurses, software engineers and other professionals are leaving in droves. The cost of training these individuals is absorbed by Nigeria, but their expertise benefits foreign economics. This dynamic further deepens the economic challenges as the country loses its best and brightest minds.
Addressing unemployment in Nigeria requires a multifaceted approach, first.
Secondly, industrialisation must be prioritised. The government should create an enabling environment for local manufacturing by improving infrastructure, reducing Bureaucratic bottlenecks and offering tax incentives reviving the agricultural sector with modern techniques and supply chains can also absorb a significant portion of the unemployed.
Thirdly, Governments at all levels must be held accountable for implementing job creation programmes transparently and effectively. Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) should be encouraged to drive innovations and employment in ICT, renewable energy and logistics.
Finally, Nigeria must diversify its economy away from crude oil and invest in sectors that generate mass employment. Tourism, education, healthcare and creative industries such as film and music hold immense unlapped potential.
With genuine commitment from leaders, strong institutions and the active participation of the private sector and civil society, Nigeria can turn the tide on unemployment and chart a path toward sustainable economic prosperity.
Idorenyi, an intern with The Tide, is a student of Temple Gate Polytechnic
Abia State.
Biana Idorenyin
April 25 every year is World Malaria Day. It was instituted by the World Health Assembly in 2007, “to highlight the progress made in Malaria control, the ongoing challenges that persist and the urgent need for sustained investment and innovation”. This year’s theme, “Malaria Ends with Us: Reinvest, Reimagine and Reignite”, is apt considering the loss of lives incurred and money spent to treat and prevent Malaria. The theme is a clarion-call to intentionally end the malaria scourge through robust commitment of human and financial resources.
That is why one of the best policies, of the suspended Sir Siminalayi Fubara’s administration in Rivers State, was the avowed commitment to check the malaria menace and its multiplier consequences on the residents of the State, through its “Free Malaria Testing and Treatment” innovation.
Rivers State is a microcosm of Nigeria in terms of residents; thus the secularity of the State makes the programme’s beneficiary all-inclusive.
No doubt, the Rivers State Government has by this initiative reinforced value placement on the lives of the people, especially the less-privileged in the State. Residents in Rivers State can now be tested and treated free for Malaria in any Rivers State Government- owned hospitals and healthcare centres across the 23 Local Government Areas of Rivers State. This is a lofty and laudable programme because of the prohibitive cost of malaria drugs and conducting tests at a time majority of Nigerians hardly have a meal to eat, because of the prevailing economic hardship in the country.
Malaria and Typhoid, according to medical and health statisticians are the commonest ailments people suffer as a result of dirty environment, absence of good drainage, lack of potable water. The State Government’s Malaria programme is, therefore, not just a big financial relief but also a life-saver for the teeming poverty-ridden population of Nigeria resident in Rivers State.
According to statistics reeled out by the Federal Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, “Globally, there are an estimated 249million malaria cases and 608,000 malaria deaths among 85 countries”. Such reports leave much to be desired in a nation so blessed with natural resources and manpower. This is why the Rivers State Government should be commended for defying the huge financial implications to drive the lofty programme for Nigerians and foreigners in Rivers State who are availed the privilege of accessing the largesse in all State Government health and medical facilities.
As the Rivers State Government deemed it necessary to initiate the Free Malaria Testing and Treatment programme, nothing stops the Federal Government from doing the same. But even with abounding natural and human resources in unimaginable quantity in Nigeria, Malaria programmes are either grossly underfunded, or funds for the programmes are misappropriated or embezzled with impunity.
In Nigeria, malaria is one of the leading causes of death of children under the age of six and pregnant women. Malaria is a nightmare in Nigeria so much so that price of its drugs and treatment have skyrocketed like a phoenix and outrageously outside the reach of the teeming less privileged citizens of Nigeria. The situation was so alarming that the National Assembly, in 2023 urged the Federal Government to declare Malaria an emergency in Nigeria as a matter of urgent national interest. I am not sure that has been done by the Federal Government because it seems to be in the interest of the common citizens.
Experts have recommended new approaches to fighting the malaria epidemic in Nigeria which seems to have defied continuous attempts to reduce the Malaria burden in Nigeria to zero.
According to a Senior Associate at the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public.Health, Soji Adeyi, Nigeria should begin to increase internal funding.for malaria elimination.
According to him,, “Each year reliance on external funding needs to be reduced. I looked at the summary of Malaria reports from 2008 till now and what has been common is the complaint about the lack of funding. If this is a recurring problem, what should be done is to find a new approach “.
In his view, Abdu Muktar, National Coordinator of the Presidential Healthcare Initiative, called for the local production and manufacturing of medical supplies as well as reducing Nigeria’s dependence on drugs imports.
According to him, the local production of anti-malaria and.related.medication will consider.the peculiarity of the country’s terrain, population and burden and.would improve access to effective treatment.
For his part, the regional. Director of World Health Organisation (WHO), African Region, Matshiddiso Moretti, advised Nigeria to accelerate its efforts to end Malaria by relying on adequate data for the implementation of health policies.
Malaria is an epidemic more devastating than the dreaded HIV/AIDS. Malaria triggers high blood pressure and places HIV/AIDS patients on a critical condition. The Federal and sub-national governments should therefore declare Malaria an emergency and prioritise attention to its treatment, production and importation of drugs and vaccines to stem the malaria menace.
The Federal Government should also improve incentives and remuneration of medical and health workers to end their exodus abroad in droves, for greener pastures.
Igbiki Benibo
The traditional institution is as old as human society. It predates the advent of modern organised society. Before the emergence of modern justice system of dispute resolution and political system of administration, the traditional institution has existed long ago. In fact, it was so revered and regarded as sacred because of the mythological conviction that it was the “stool of the ancestors”. Consequently, judgment given was deified as many people especially the traditionalists believe it was the mind of the gods revealed. Perversion of justice , in the pre-modern justice system was alien and considered uncommon. Chiefs and traditional rulers though may not have generated knowledge formally (through the four walls of a classroom), yet they embody and exemplify knowledge. They hold fast the virtue of integrity and honour, fairness and relative impartiality, partly because they believed that the stool they occupy was ancestral and traditional as act of indiscretion can court the wrath of the gods at whose behest they are on the traditional saddle of authority.
The Compass of Life stated unequivocally that “the throne is preserved by righteousness”. Where righteousness, integrity and honesty are savoured,and valued, perversion and miscarriage of justice is an anomaly. The judgments of traditional rulers and chiefs were hardly appealed against because they were founded on objectivity, fairness, truth and facts beyond primordial sentiment and inordinate interests or pecuniary benefits. Judgments were precedent. Traditional rulers and chiefs, therefore carved a niche for themselves, earning the respect of, and endearing themselves to the heart of their subjects. Is it the same today? Some traditional rulers and chiefs are administering their communities in exile; they are diasporic leaders because they have lost the confidence of the people through self-serving, raising of cult group for self-preservation, land grabbing and other flagrant corrupt practices.
When truth is not found in the traditional institution that, in my considered view, constitutes the grassroots government, then crisis is inevitable.In most African societies before advent of the Christian Faith, and consequent Christening of the traditional stools in many communities in recent times, ascent to the traditional institution was a function of a traditional method of selection. It was believed that the gods make the selection. And whoever emerges from the divination processes eventually is crowned as the king of the people after performing the associated rituals.Whoever lacked the legitimacy to sit on the throne but wanted to take it forcefully, traditionalists believed died mysteriously or untimely. Traditional rulers wielded much influence and power because of the authority inherent in the stool, the age of the person designated for the stool notwithstanding. The word of the king was a law, embodied power. Kings so selected are forthright, accountable, transparent, men of integrity, did not speak from both sides of the mouth, could not be induced with pecuniary benefits to pervert justice, they feared the gods of their ancestors and were consecrated holistically for the purpose dictated by the pre and post coronation rituals.
Some of those crowned king were very young in those days, but they ruled the people well with the fear of the gods. There was no contention over who is qualified to sit or who is not qualified to. It was the prerogative of the gods. And it was so believed and upheld with fear.Kings were natural rulers, so they remained untouchable and could not be removed by a political government. If a king committed an offence he was arrested and prosecuted according to the provision of the law. But they have immunity from sack or being dethroned because they are not political appointees. However, the people at whose behest he became king reserved the power to remove him if found guilty of violating oath of stool. The traditional institution is actually the system of governance nearest to the people. And kings were the chief security officers of their communities. So indispensable are the roles of kings and traditional rulers to the peaceful co-existence of their people, ensuring that government policies and Programmes were seamlessly spread to the people that many people are clamouring for the inclusion of definite and specific roles in the Constitution for the traditional institution.
Traditional rulers are fathers to every member of their domain. So they are not expected to discriminate, show favouritism. By their fatherly position traditional rulers, though can not be apolitical, are also expected to be immune from partisan politics. This is because as one who presides over a great house where people of different political divide or interest belong, an open interest for a political party means ostracisation of other members of the family which could lead to disrespect, conflict of interest, wrangling and anarchy. Traditional rulers are supposed to be selfless, preferring the interest of their people above their personal interests following the consciousness that they are stewards whose emergence remains the prerogative of the people. The position is essentially for service and not for personal aggrandisement and ego massaging. So they should hold the resources of the people in trust. However, in recent past the traditional institution has suffered denigration because of unnecessary emotional attachment to political parties and political leaders. Some traditional rulers and kings have shown complete disregard to the principle of neutrality because of filthy lucre and pecuniary gains, at the expense of the stool and people they lead. Sadly some traditional rulers have been influenced to pervert justice: giving justice to the offender who is rich against the poor.
Traditional leaders should be reminded that the “throne is preserved by righteousness”, not by political chauvinism, favouritism, or materialism.Traditional rulers should earn their deserved respect from political leaders by refusing the pressure to be subservient, beggarly, sycophantic and docile. Traditional leaders have natural and permanent leadership system, unlike the political leadership that is transient and tenured.They should be partners with every administration in power and should not be tied to the apron string of past leaders whose activities are aversive to the incumbent administration and thereby constituting a clog in the development of the State and the community they are to woo infrastructure development to. It is unpardonable error for a traditional ruler to have his conscience mortgaged for benefits he gets inordinately from any government.It is necessary to encourage kings and traditional rulers to not play the roles of stooges and clowns for the privileged few, political leaders. Political leaders are products of the people, even as every government derives its legitimacy from the people.
No doubt, the roles of traditional rulers are so necessary that no political or military government can operate to their exclusion. This is why the 10th National Assembly mulled the inclusion of Traditional institution in the proposed amendment of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.Traditional rulers and chiefs should, therefore, be and seen to be truthful, forthright, bold, courageous, honest and people of integrity, not evasive, cunning, unnecessarily diplomatic and economical with truth.The time to restore the dignity of the traditional institution is now but it must be earned by the virtuous disposition of traditional rulers and chiefs.
Igbiki Benibo