Constitutional Role For Royal Fathers

Royal fathers across the country, time and again, have voiced their desire to grab a constitutional role. This desire is, however, considered diversionary to their traditional roles. Why do traditional rulers need a constitutional role before doing what is needful?

When Nigeria practised a parliamentary system of government, between 1951 and 1966, there was a constitutional recognition for the House of Chiefs, comprising the traditional rulers in the regions, who acted in an advisory capacity, drawing from the wisdom of the traditional rulers.  But it seems the creation of a uniform local government in 1976 and the absence of a constitutional role in the 1999 Constitution enacted by the military regime have whittled down their powers and influence. They appear to have been sidelined in the scheme of things politically since then.

The traditional rulers who were once actively involved in governance in the colonial era are agitating for a National Council for Traditional Rulers, a semblance of the Houses of Chiefs of the First Republic- to play an advisory role to the Federal Government. They are also of the opinion that their closeness to the people at the grassroots could be used as a viable instrument of development.

It is pertinent to note that the influence of the traditional rulers as custodians of culture and history are not in doubt. The fact that their roles are germane to ensuring peaceful co-existence in their territories is quite eminent. But do they need a constitutional role before they function adequately in this capacity? Would their official demand for an advisory role to the Federal Government not be an avenue to get entangled in politicking or get their hands soiled in the so-called murky waters of Nigerian politics? Will this liaison not affect the neutrality expected of their offices or won’t they be seen as aligning with a particular political party to the detriment of other parties?

Giving traditional rulers a constitutional role means they can sue and be sued.  In case a traditional ruler is sued for whatever reason, will that not constitute a distraction to his statutory responsibilities?

Traditional rulers are held in high esteem due to their influence and wisdom. In their local domains they have been highly instrumental to the maintenance of peace, development and progress even without being given constitutional roles. Hence, their roles do not necessarily warrant constitutional endorsement before they could wield their influence and powers.