A proposed bill to create the National Council of Traditional Rulers of Nigeria has triggered widespread controversy over a contentious clause that grants the Ooni of Ife and the Sultan of Sokoto permanent leadership positions above other monarchs.
While the bill, sponsored by Senator Simon Bako Lalong (Plateau South), aims to constitutionally recognize the role of traditional rulers in promoting peace and development, critics argue that the clause undermines Nigeria’s diversity and federal character.
Why the Bill is Facing Resistance
Criticism from Ohanaeze Ndigbo
The apex Igbo socio-cultural group, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, has outrightly rejected the proposal, describing it as unjust, ethnocentric, and a direct affront to the principles of equity and inclusiveness enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution.
“We are profoundly astounded by the rationale behind such an asymmetric bill… it lacks fairness, justice, and respect for the principle of federal character,” said Dr. Ezechi Chukwu, National Publicity Secretary of Ohanaeze.
The group warned that the bill risks marginalizing prominent traditional institutions in the South-East, South-South, and Middle Belt, thereby undermining national cohesion.
Middle Belt Forum: ‘Sultan’s Role is Historically and Culturally Inaccurate’
The Middle Belt Forum (MBF) also rejected the clause, pointing to historical precedence that ranks several Middle Belt monarchies above the Sultan of Sokoto in traditional standing.
The group cited the Attah of Igala, the Tor Tiv, and the Etsu Nupe as examples of traditional rulers whose histories and cultural roots predate the Sokoto Sultanate.
They further argued that the Sultan’s role is primarily religious, not secular, and that granting him such power risks alienating non-Muslim communities and undermining Nigeria’s secular constitution.
“More than six decades after independence, it is unacceptable for any traditional authority to be elevated above others,” said Luka Binniyat, MBF National Spokesman.
Hausa Stakeholders Also Oppose the Bill
‘Nigeria is Not a Two-Ethnic Federation’
The Concerned Hausa Stakeholders described the bill as historically misleading and constitutionally indefensible, stressing that the Sultan of Sokoto is a religious leader, not a cultural representative of the Hausa people.
They argued that if the bill is about traditional leadership, then ancient Hausa kingdoms like Daura, Kano, Zaria, and Katsina—which predate the Sokoto Caliphate—must also be represented.
“Recognizing only the Sultan and Ooni marginalizes other civilizations. Sokoto is the capital of the Fulani Empire, not the cradle of Hausa kingship,” the group stated.
South-West and Southern Opposition
Yoruba Voices: Ooni Cannot Speak for All Yoruba
Some Yoruba voices have also condemned the move, noting that the Ooni of Ife does not outrank other monarchs in the South-West.
University lecturer Femi Adebowale said:
“The Ooni is not higher than the Alafin of Oyo… it will be an insult for the Alafin to be subjugated under him.”
Benin Leaders Reject Subordination to Ooni
Lagos-based lawyer Caleb Osazuwa dismissed the clause as “the greatest joke of the century,” insisting that the Oba of Benin could never be placed under the Ooni of Ife.
Alaigbo Development Foundation: ‘An Insult to Cultural Diversity’
The Alaigbo Development Foundation (ADF) warned that the bill is provocative and threatens Nigeria’s fragile unity.
The group urged Igbo lawmakers to reject it, declaring:
“A million Tinubu cannot subjugate Ndigbo.”
Proposed Solutions to Avoid Division
Rotational or Democratic Leadership
Critics from across the country have suggested that the leadership of the National Council of Traditional Rulers should be:
Rotational among all geopolitical zones
Tenure-based to ensure equal representation
Elected by traditional rulers themselves in a transparent and inclusive process
Such measures, they argue, would foster unity and reflect Nigeria’s pluralistic identity.
Conclusion
With mounting opposition from socio-cultural groups, regional stakeholders, and individual voices, the bill to establish the National Council of Traditional Rulers faces a critical test.
Unless the controversial clause is amended, there are strong indications that some regions may boycott the council entirely—threatening the very unity the bill claims to promote.
