The Call for Legal Recognition of Traditional Rulers in Nigeria
Imo State Governor Hope Uzodimma has called for legal backing for the roles of traditional rulers, emphasizing the need to formalize their positions within the nation’s constitutional framework. He stated, “The absence of a constitutional role is a gap that ought to be filled. It is a failure on our part that we have not updated our laws in line with our realities.” Uzodimma highlighted that the time has come to give legal status to what already exists, comparing it to formalizing a long-standing union. “The marriage is real. The only thing missing is the certificate,” he said.
The governor made these remarks during the meeting of the National Council of Traditional Rulers in Nigeria held at the Hotel Continental on Victoria Island, Lagos. The theme of the conference, presided over by co-chairmen Sultan Sa’ad Abubakar of Sokoto and Ooni Adeyeye Ogunwusi, was: “The traditional institution: Imperative of its inclusion in effective and efficient governance in Nigeria.”
A Historical Perspective
Uzodimma described the traditional institution as one of Nigeria’s enduring systems, adding that “its custodianship of culture, its ability to mediate disputes, its place in the lives of the people; all make it indispensable to national stability.” He emphasized that whenever the subject matter of constitutional roles comes before the National Assembly or requires support at any level of government, he would stand with the monarchs without hesitation.
He stressed, “We are not here to ask for privilege. We are here to reflect on a reality: that across the country, traditional rulers continue to carry out responsibilities that are essential to the stability, cohesion, and governance of our communities.” However, these responsibilities remain informal, acknowledged in principle but not secured by law.
The History and the Gap
Our history tells us that traditional rulers once held a defined place in Nigeria’s constitutional order. Their role was not symbolic. It was recognized by law. Under the 1963 Republican Constitution, the Oba of Lagos was listed as an ex-officio member of the Senate, alongside other chiefs selected to represent the Lagos Territory. This provision, set out in Section 34(2)(ii) of the Constitution, gave traditional rulers direct legislative presence at the federal level.
Across the regions, the structure was even more entrenched:
- Northern Region: The Northern Region Constitution established a House of Chiefs as one part of the legislative arm of the government. The northern regional government was modeled after the Westminster government of Britain. So the House of Chiefs was the equivalent of the House of Lords in Britain.
- Western and Mid-Western Regions: These regions followed the same model. Their legislatures also included Houses of Chiefs composed of recognized traditional rulers.
- Eastern Region: The Eastern Region provided even broader constitutional recognition. Section 4 of its 1963 Constitution created a legislature composed of the Governor, the House of Assembly, and the House of Chiefs.
So, across the country: North, West, East, and Mid-West, traditional rulers were not mere custodians of culture. They were constitutional actors, assigned formal duties within the architecture of regional governance.
This changed with the 1979 Constitution, which removed these roles. The 1999 Constitution did not restore them. And so began the drift into informality where traditional rulers were left with advisory positions defined not by law, but by the discretion of government.
Role of Traditional Rulers
Across communities, traditional rulers perform multiple roles, many of them parallel to those in the executive, legislative, and even judicial branches:
- Settling land and family disputes where the courts have failed.
- Supervising chieftaincy matters and succession plans with cultural precision.
- Conferencing titles that preserve heritage and encourage service.
- Mediating between the government and the people in matters of policy and development.
- Leading civic campaigns on peace, public health, elections, and security.
- Mobilizing their communities to support projects the government alone cannot execute.
- Serving as custodians of culture and traditions.
These are the everyday works of governance carried out by men who draw their authority from history, not appointment; from community trust, and not political tenure.
Traditional Rulers in Other African Countries
Some argue that Nigeria, being a republic, should not constitutionally recognize traditional rulers. They point to countries like France or the United States, where no such role exists. But those systems did not emerge from our realities. They were not built around our histories, and they cannot answer the questions our society must confront.
To understand what is possible, we must look to countries that, like us, have had to reconcile modern governance with deep-rooted traditions; countries that did not discard their heritage to build their democracy.
Examples:
Ghana:
Ghana’s 1992 Constitution offers a clear model. Under Chapter 22, Articles 270 to 277, the chieftaincy institution is explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. Article 270 declares that “the institution of chieftaincy, together with its traditional councils as established by customary law and usage, is hereby guaranteed.”
South Africa:
South Africa’s Constitution of 1996 dedicates Chapter 12 to the role of traditional leadership. Article 211(1) states: “The institution, status and role of traditional leadership, according to customary law, are recognized, subject to the Constitution.”
Namibia:
Namibia provides a strong statutory and constitutional precedent. Article 102(5) of the Namibian Constitution establishes a Council of Traditional Leaders to advise the President, particularly on issues concerning communal land.
These are not fringe systems. Clearly, these are constitutional democracies that have found room for their traditional institutions without compromising the integrity of their republics.
A Question of Relevance
The continued influence of traditional rulers in Nigeria is not a courtesy extended by the state. It is a consequence of lived reality. Across towns and villages, traditional leaders remain the first point of contact in moments of crisis, the first to be consulted when tempers rise, and the last to retreat when disorder threatens stability.
We must stop pretending that the absence of a constitutional role means an absence of function. I can tell you today without fear of equivocation that your relevance is not in question, was never in doubt and would never be in doubt. What is questionable is the failure of the system to give legal backing to a role it already depends on.
Neutrality and Moral Authority
This brings me to a related but important point. A point that must be addressed with honesty. Your royal majesties, your continued relevance also rests on public trust. And that trust must be protected.
As royal fathers, your voice carries a weight that political office cannot replicate. You do not serve a party. You serve people. For that reason, the nation expects, and rightly so, that you will rise and remain above the noise of partisan politics.
That neutrality is not a weakness. It is strength. It gives credibility to your counsel and dignity to your institution. To maintain that trust, the line must remain clear. You must speak when necessary, guide when needed, and send a warning when danger is imminent. This must always be done as statesmen, not as political actors.
