IJCRR

IJCRR - 8(16), August, 2016

Pages: 09-13

Date of Publication: 22-Aug-2016

GOVERNMENT AND SOCIAL CONFLICTS BETWEEN TRADITIONAL RULERS AND PRESIDENTS-GENERAL OF TOWN UNIONS (TUS) IN ANAMBRA STATE, NIGERIA

Author: Andrew O. Obiajulu, Makodi Biereenu-Nnabugwu

Category: Healthcare

Abstract:This paper has investigated how financial releases and creation of care-taker committees by Anambra state government influence social conflicts between Traditional rulers and Presidents-General of TUs in some communities. About 524 respondents given the quantitative tool for this study were drawn from members of TUs within the three communities used for the study: Nri,Isi-agu and Amansea. Qualitatitve data were also derived for the study from: victims of TU conflict, members of the vigilante, government officials involved in resolving TU conflicts and community leaders. Findings showed that the state government is a pronounced source of social conflict between the institutions. It does that through her financial releases; creation of care-taker committees and fermenting conflict even in peaceful communities that are seen as her political opponents. Government officials associated with fermenting TU conflict should be prosecuted (Word count: 131).

Keywords: Social conflicts, Town unions, Presidents-General, Community leaders, Care-taker committees, Anambra state

Full Text:

INTRODUCTION
Town Unions are social organisations existing in many cultural areas of Nigeria. They are known by different names such as: development unions, progressive unions, people`s assembly etc.IThey arose to advance the primordial cultural value preferences of communities having them. Their members claim a common ancestry and developmental challenge as Nigerians. As agents of social change, they have demonstrated that, through collective action, they can improve on their material conditions of existence (Azikiwe, 2001), mobilise against the out-group (Nzimiro, 2001), and defend a common cause (Nwosu, 2009). Although TUs are locally initiated, their influence and cultural appeal transcends local confines. Their members believe that, through collective action, they can modify national policies to suit local realities, needs and challenges. In pre-colonial Igbo society, it exited as a well-structured social network that guaranteed civil society participation in governance namely: the village assembly (Afigbo, 1972), council of elders (Nzimiro, 1972), the okpala in family and lineage administration (Ifemesia, 1980), the age grade system (Nwosu, 2009) and so on. Through such associational life, members of a community indulge in self governance through dialogue, consultation, advocacy and consensus building. Lineages comprising a town or community are hierarchically organised. Thus, Nzimiro (2001:10), notes that “within a lineage are adopted lineages absorbed within specific lineage groups”. Most of the adopted lineages suffer some social disabilities. Consequently, when a TU is assumed to have a common ancestry, its internal structure has endemic social formations that predispose its members to fission. That notwithstanding, in Nigeria, TUs have tried to assist their members from colonial days to the modern era, meet their survival needs, especially the challenges of urban life (Nnoli, 2008), rural development (Nzimiro, 2001), political mobilisation against the out-group (Nwosu, 2009), scholarship programme (Azikiwe, 2001) and relating to the state on community development matters (Okafor, 2010). As agents of community development, TUs exist as: channels through which local needs and preferences are identified, expressed and addressed. To do this, they create the enabling environment for voluntary cooperation, selfhelp and mutual aid efforts to thrive among their members.

Structurally, every TU has a working constitution adopted by the members. This defines the roles, status and benefits of membership of the association (Aguda, 1998; Nwosu, 2009). TUs have male and female wings. Women`s wing of TUs are those whose husbands belong to the men`s wing. However, in a community like Mbieri, unmaried women who are up to 45years can become members (Nwosu, 2009).They are structured like men`s wing. Mbanefoh (1998:103) describes the Eziowelle women’s wing as having elected officers comprising president, vice-president, secretary, treasurer, financial secretary and provost. Women officers handle all matters affecting their wing,but they are expected to seek advice from the men`s branch in serious matters. This expectation reinforces the subordinate position of women in Igbo society.

Traditional rulers
According to Cap (148) of 1986, which established Anambra State Traditional Ruler`s Council, a traditional ruler is a recognized head of an autonomous community in the state. They are known by different names such as Igwe, Obi, Eze and so on.They are expected to be the gate keepers of their communities.They symbolise the collective spirit of the people they represent. When percieved as ancestors reincarnate many believe they can bless and curse their subjects .Although this institution never prevailed in some pre-colonial Igbo societies, not many people today can wish it away.

Conceptualising the relationship between the government, traditional rulers and PresidentsGeneral of TUs.
The process of acquiring, consolidating and using state power in Nigeria has been conflict -infested (Nnoli, 2012).The norm of civil society administration promotes prebendial politics at different levels of government. Co-existence of TUs, traditional rulers and state machinery of civil-society administration, is amply illustrated by the theory of two publics which face most Nigerians in their civic engagements namely: that associated with their primordial cultural preferences and that represented by the civic cultural equivalent (Ekeh, 1975). Members’ inclination to the former explains why they tend to shift their loyalty from the state towards the development of their homelands, often avoid payment of taxes to the state and periodically, honour a member that has attracted public amenities from the state to the homeland (Nwoga, 1987). In this way, TUs often serve as institutional mechanisms for struggling for collective resources at the state level. The government hardly constrains many members of TU from acting out their free will on community development matters (Igun, 2006, Okafor, 2010). Infrastructural facilities which TUs have built, through selfhelp exist in many communities of igboland.Because TUs are rallying points for socio-political mobilization, the government finds them useful in public service delivery. In Anambra state, a law which makes TUs independent of traditional rulers exists. Thus, whereas traditional rulers are described as custodians of cultural values of their people, PresidentsGeneral of town unions are entrusted with the day to day administration of their communities. Role conflict tends to arise between them often due to struggle over values (Coser, 1957). Moreover, TUs are expected to recommend political officeseekers before they are considered at state level (Atupulazi, 2011). Also, government makes periodic financial releases to the TUs for public service delivery (Ilozue, 2010). PresidentsGeneral of TU are members of Anambra State Association of Town Unions (ASATU), a socio-political organization where matters of state and national importance are unofficially discussed. Its` members are believed to be important stake holders in the political process of the state (Atupulazi, 2011; Ilozue, 2010). It`s members can be rewarded. Although Leadership struggle pervades many TUs (Onu, 2011, the government is not wonderfully disposed to it`s peaceful resolution. Government officials have been implicated in exacerbating conflicts between traditional rulers and presidents-general of TUs in communities like: Isiagu, Isuofia, Awka Etiti (Onwuegbusi, 2011); Aguleri (Ibeanu, 2003); Alor (ADI, 2014); Nawfia (Nwakwesili, 2012); Ekwulobia (Maduabuchi, 2013) etc. In these communities, government imposes care-taker committees to manage the affairs of communities it defines as having conflict-infested TUs their objection, notwithstanding.

Traditional ruler’s involvement in TU affairs
While the TUs can be said to have evolved from the cultural preferences of the people, the traditional rulership cannot be so described. Igbo society is described as acephalous. Kings existed only in centralized polities like: Nri (Onwuejiogwu, 2001); Onitsha and Oguta (Nzimiro, 1972); Osomari and Aboh (Wandeers, 1990). It is only among these riverine Igbo people that kings existed as in such centralized polities like Oyo, and Benin, (Afigbo, 1972); Wandeers,1990; Nwosu, 2009). Colonial rule, through the 1916 Ordinance, created and imposed warrant chiefs on the Igbo people. The warrant chiefs were arbitrarily chosen by the colonialists. They became the channel of communication between the colonialists and the colonised. They were used in tax collection and settlement of disputes in colonial courts. The conflict and social disapproval surrounding their appointment and roles were some of the factors that led to the Aba Womens Riot of 1929 (Ananaba, 1980).The women objected to an envisaged taxation of women by the colonial masters through the warrant chiefs. Following the military coup of January 1966 in Nigeria, the hieftaincy institution was suspended. However, in 1978, an edict was enacted reinstating it. Many families that produced the warrant chiefs saw it as their birthright. Conflict arose in many communities when many of them were resisted (Nwosu, 2009). The military was not prepared to interrogate these conflict situations. Some wealthy indigenes who were influential enough to ‘buy’ the position, did so. Many of them became traditional rulers. Rulers who emerged in this way were extensively used by the military to stay in power. They became one of the agents of conflict suppression under military rule in Nigeria. Under the prevailing democratic dispensation, traditional rulers are still seen as custodians of primordial cultural values of their people. This often makes their roles to conflict with that of TU leadership. In communities like Onitsha (Azikiwe, 1976); Ekwulobia, Ogbunike (Okafor,2010), the traditional rulers and their TUs have been in court. Also, the government created the Traditional Rulers Council where government-recognised traditional rulers periodically meet and network with state government officials on matters of state policy and direction. In this way government manipulates local institutions at will. Government hardly investigates role conflicts between traditional rulers and Presidents-General of TUs. For example, in Ekwulobia, the traditional ruler connived with the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Matters to proscribe their TU. He ignored an order given by the Aguata High Court to restore the TU. Also in Ebenebe, the same commissioner was said to be very reluctant bringing the President-General of their TU to order. Although Edict 22 of 1986 expects that TUs will elect their traditional rulers according to the culture of the community, the document makes mockery of the TUs because the culture in question has no room for traditional rulers position, hence the imposition of the body on the people. Town unions are also expected to present the elected traditional ruler to the chairman of their local government who will, in turn, present the ruler-elect to the government (Nwosu, 2009). This provision is based on a false notion of representativeness. The provision little addresses endemic social arrangements that make such a selection elitist and unrepresentative of the people’s value preferences and needs. The provision has created a situation where some of those opposed to a particular traditional ruler–elect, have taken to the formation of a parallel TU. Nwosu (2009:18) avers that: ‘from all indications, the eze established by governments statutes, crowned by the government, paid by the government and removed at will by the government cannot be said to enjoy a high level of autonomy`. Research questions How has government`s financial releases to communities, influenced the relationship between traditional rulers and presidents-general of TUs in Anambra state? 1. Has the creation of care-taker committees by Anambra state government enhanced the relationship between traditional rulers and presidents-general of TUs?

Methodology
The study adopted a cross- sectional survey design. Nri was selected through simple random sampling method from a list of 5 communities with two TUs in the state where one should exist. Likewise, Isiagu was selected from a list of 12 communities with care-taker committees. Amansea was selected purposively from list of 160 communities with functional TUs as the study locations. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect quantitative data from 516 respondents. The sample frame was the list of TU members as held by ward leaders in the towns. Participants were selected as follows (Nri-128; Isiagu-204 and Amansea-184) using simple random sampling method. Whereas 12 in-depth interviews were conducted on members of vigilante (6), victims of TU conflicts (6), 23 key informants interview were conducted on traditional ruler`s representatives (6), ward leaders (15) and government officials (2) to obtain qualitative data for the study. The quantitative data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics, Chi-square test at 0.05 level of significance. Qualitative data were content analysed.

RESULTS
State Governments’ financial releases as a source of TU conflict In Isiagu, 75.6% of respondents saw this variable a significant source of TU conflict (x2 =52.8; p.001). In Nri, 53.3% of respondents held a contrary view but this was not statistically significant (x2 .53; p.5). Also in Amansea, 98.4% did not see the release as a source of their TU conflict (x2 =39.5; p.001). It can be inferred that State Government’s financial releases to TUs is a source of conflict in Isiagu and to an extent Nri. Qualitative data from Nri upholds that: Financial releases to communities in the state through town unions don’t reach us. The road network to our section of Nri town is not tarred. When government gives allocation for the renovation of roads, they simply trip laterite on some of our roads and leave it to be washed by the rains (KII, Secretary Ikenga Nri). Here again, The President-General and his loyalists thought governments’ financial allocation to Nri town should be appropriated by the town union alone. When they discovered the palace is entitled to partake in its disbursement, they took an avoidance approach. For this reason Eze Nri is often compelled to go to the state government for the money (KII, community leader Nri).

In Nri therefore, the financial release is a source of conflict within members of NPU and between them and members of Ikenga-Nri, the parallel TU. In Isiagu, a school block initiated by the caretaker committee, with two million naira released to them by the state, could not be completed. Both members of caretaker committees, and elected TU officials never explained to anybody, how they spent the finance released to the TU. “Leadership of our TU has been characterized by the leaders trying to intimidate and silence those who tried to probe into how the financial releases were utilized” (KII, ward leader Isiagu). In Amansea, the financial release was not seen as a source of conflict by President-General of the TU. He contended that the traditional ruler does not get involved in the utilisation of the fund. This is at variance with what we found at Nri and what a government official involved in the disbursement remarked. To exclude royal fathers in the disbursement of such monies is to put cracked palm kernels in a perforated sack. Royal fathers exist to ensure the finance is judiciously utilised (KII, government official).

Creation of caretaker committee by the state as a source of TU conflict.
In Isiagu, 57% of the respondents saw the creation as an external source of TU conflict (x2 =3.9, p 0.5). In Nri, 78.9% of respondents did not see such a creation as a source of TU conflict. This is not different from the responses got from Amansea where 79.9% did not see the creation of caretaker committee as a source of TU conflict. Thus but for Isiagu, where respondents were divided on this, the creation of care taker committee was not seen as a source of TU conflict in communities without such a committee in Anambra State. The finding is not at variance with some of our respondents` view during the KII and IDI sessions. In Isiagu, (the only community that experienced the caretaker committee), the source of the conflict was inordinate ambition of the selfstyled kingmaker to dictate how TU should be run. Caretaker was an aftermath of this quest.

In 2008 while our town union election was in progress, a very rich man from Ebe (one of the factions to the conflict), stormed the venue of the election with a team of mobile policemen. He was opposing a candidate nominated and presented by Umuzo (another party to the conflict), according to the constitution of our TU. They were asked to leave. They did. On hearing that the election had been held, the man used his connections with the state governments’ ministry of local government and chieftaincy matters to nullify the election and impose a caretaker committee on us. We challenged the government by obtaining court injunction restraining the government from imposing the caretaker committee. Government ignored this court order (KII, Community leader, Isiagu). This finding shows how conflict suppression has permeated institutions for civil society administration in Nigeria. It was entrenched by colonial rule, sustained after it , perfected by the military while in power and has remained resilient virus threatening the evolution of true democratic culture in Nigeria. Discussion of findings Financial releases to TUs are poorly accounted for. Nigerian leadership has been criticised for being incurably corrupt (Beckman, 1985; Joseph, 1992; Nzimiro, 2001, Achebe, 2012). Nzimiro(2001)and Igun (2006), associated the corruption to the character of Nigeria’s dependent capitalist economy. It is an economic arrangement that encourages skewed distribution of collectively owned resources by agents of the state. This study showed how the practice prevails at the grassroots. Nri and Amansea had not experienced caretaker committee. Nri people attributed this to their cultural proscription of shedding human blood. Their land abhors bloodletting (Okonkwo, 2007). In Amansea, the traditional ruler is said to be working hand in hand with the president general. It respected by the state government. Conflict suppression is a pronounced strategy of using state power in Nigeria. To Albert,(2003), the method is a mere expression of social conflict arising from unequal power relations.

CONCLUSION
This study has shown how two efforts of the government to facilitate community development, influenced the emergence of social conflict in the communities studied. This is partly because some top government functionaries who are expected to be objective in managing communal conflicts actually ferment the same. At a time when most ethnic groups in Nigeria complain of being marginalized, this study has shown that identity politics prevails even within communities considered culturally homogenous. Thus even if TUs are made states, the problem of social exclusion will be far from being over. It is therefore necessary that public functionaries be made to be universalistic in thinking. This entails their de emphasizing primordial sentiments in matters of state policy formulation and implementation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We acknowledge help from the scholars whose works are cited in this study, and also, that this study benefitted significantly from Obiajulu, Andrew (2014) Perception of Sources, Effects and Resolution Methods of Conflicts in Town Unions in Anambra State, Nigeria a Ph.D Dissertation submitted to the Department of Sociology, University of Ibadan, Nigeria

References:

1. Achebe, C. 2012. There was a country personal note of Biafra Allen Lane: Penguin.

2. ADI, 2014. Alor Development Initiative “Anambra State acts of meddlesomeness in internal affairs of Alor community and continuous acts of marginalization and persecution against Alor indigenes” in 247 U Report of May 18.

3. Afigbo, A. 1972. The Warrant Chiefs. London: Longman.

4. Albert, O. I. 2003. The Odi Massacre of 1999 in the context of the Graffiti left by the Invading Nigerian Army. Ibadan: Programme on Federal and Ethnic Studies (PEFS).

5. Ananaba, W. 1980. Trade Union Movement in Nigeria. Benin City: Ethiope Publishers.

6. Atupulazi, J. 2011. Succession crisis rocks Anambra State town union. Next October, September, 30. 7. Azikiwe, N. 2001. My Odyssey: An Auto biography Ibadan: Spectrum Books.

8. Azikiwe, N. 1976. Let us forgive our children. Onitsha: Tabansi Press.

9. Beckman, B. 1985. Peasants versus state and capital in Nigeria. Journal of Political Science; Vols I and I.I pp 76-101.

10. Coser, L. 1957. The functions of social conflict Glencoe: The free press. 11. Ekeh, P. 1975. Colonialism and the two publics In Africa: A theoretical exploration. Studies In Society and History Vol.17, No 1

12. Fafunwa, B. 1974. History of Western Education In Nigeria. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

13. Ibeanu, O. 2003. Aguleri-Umuleri conflict in Anambra State. In Imobighe, T.A (ed) Civil Society and Ethnic Conflict Management In Nigeria Ibadan: Spectrum Books.

14. Ifemesia, C. 1980. Humane living among the Igbo Enugu: Fourth Dimensions Publishers. 15. Igun, U.A. 2006. Governance and national development. Onitsha: University Publishing Company

16. Ilozue, C. 2010. Obi meets with rulers, town unions doles out 13.5 billion for security. Daily Independent 4th July.

17. Joseph, R. 1991. Democracy and prebendial politics in Nigeria: the rise and fall of the second republic. Ibadan: Spectrum Books.

18. Mbanefo, V. 1998. Eziowelle Improvement Association Home Town Associations Indigenous Knowledge and Development, Honey , R .and Okafor, S. (eds) Ibadan:Sam Bookman Publishers.

19. Nnoli, O. 2008. Ethnic politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth Dimension publishers.

20. Nwoga, D. 1987. Visions, alternatives, literary studies in a transitional culture University of Nigeria Inaugural Lecture Series 4 Nsukka: University of Nigeria Press.

21. Nwosu, A. C. 2009. Episodes in encounter between the town unions and the Eze institution over issues of good governance downloaded @ ttp//www.assatashakur.org/forum/hanescircle/34548-episodes encounter between town unions – Eze institution.html/ posted November 2.

22. Nzimiro, I.1972. Studies in Igbo political systems: chieftaincy and politics in four Niger States. London: Frank CASS. 23. Nzimiro, I. 2001. Strangers at our gate: the Igbo nationality in Nigeria Oguta: Zim Pan Press.

24. Okafor, B. 2010. Conflict mapping in 3 crisis-prone communities (Aguleri, Ogbunike and Akpu) in Anambra State. A research report submitted to the United Nations Development Programme UNDP as part of its 7th UNDP-FGN Programme of Assistance to Anambra State (2009 -2012).

25. Okonkwo, N. 2007. .Nri Kingdom:a lost Igbo race. Lagos: Intra Prints.

26. Onu, N. 2011. Anambra State community peace under threat. The Nation 30th September.

27. Onuorah, J. 2011. Our people no longer return home: Anambra group laments. The Sun. 28th September.

28. Onwuegbusi, C. 2011. Isuofia youths threaten war path over Igwe stool. Nigerian Compass, 13th September.

29. The problem with us. An address presented to members of Enugwu Ukwu General.

30. Onwuejiogwu, M. A. 2001. Igu aro Igbo heritage. Inaugural Lecture. Nri: Front for the Defense of Igbo Heritage.

31. Wandeers,H.1990. Eze Institution In Igboland. Nimo: Esele Publishers.