advertisement

nonso@nsu.edu Norfolk, VA, USA

ANNOUNCE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR FRIENDS

FOUNDATIONS OF OKIJA JUSTICE

PREFACE

o many Nigerians, the continued existence and strength of the country’s traditional (native) social control systems contradict the country’s status as a “modern” state.

While citing the August 2004 Okija incident (in which the Nigeria Police recovered dozens of human skulls and decaying bodies at the site of Ogwugwu Isiula, Okija, a traditional Igbo shrine) as an example of the evils of traditional social control, these Nigerians, in and outside the country, take the position that they do not expect the continuation of “outdated, heathen” native-based social control in modern Nigeria. But, there is strong evidence that traditional social control remains very popular among Nigerians. So, I ask, “Why do the Okija’s (traditional courts, tribunals, and other native-based social control organs and processes) exist and flourish among us?” The fact that Nigeria’s official Criminal Code criminalizes the type of traditional crime management that apparently occurred in the August 2004 Okija incident makes this question particularly relevant. The Code defines this form of native-based crime management as a “trial by ordeal” punishable under sections 207-213. In view of this strong, negative official attitude toward this traditional process, those Nigerians that persist in managing their civil and criminal cases through the deities must be doing so for compelling reasons. Thus, on close examination of the 2004 Okija incident and other similar cases, I have identified several explanations for the continued existence of the Okija and similar deities in Igbo and other parts of Nigeria.

advertisement

A careful analysis of the facts has led to the following nine ingredients as the bases for the continued relevance of the native-based social control systems in Nigeria.

Many, perhaps most, Igbos and other Nigerians view the English system of law and justice, as introduced and practiced in Nigeria, as ineffective and inefficient for social control in the country. This view is based on personal experiences as well as other people’s accounts. There are numerous cases tried, decided, and, it seemed, concluded by Nigeria’s official, English-style courts, but which disputes festered long after they were supposedly settled. For these cases, there is no doubt that Nigeria’s official, English-based common law system has been unable to identify and address the deep-seated issues between the parties and mollify them. In some cases, a mere perception that the English-based common law system is ineffective or inefficient suffices for Nigerians to be wary of voluntarily managing their cases within the system. In social control, perception goes a long way to encouraging or discouraging compliance, as the case may be. After all, social control is about complying or being influenced or made to comply; thus the complier’s state of mind toward the guiding rules of conduct is important.

It is well documented that imperial Britain, through its colonial regime in Nigeria, imposed the English-based common law system of social control on Nigeria. A consequence of the imposition is that the English law and justice system in Nigeria is widely regarded as rootless because it is without the foundation that it enjoys in its native England. The system is alien to Nigeria and Nigerians. In varying degrees, most Nigerians (including the so-called well-educated, modern Nigerians) have some appreciation for their native cultures and traditions. These cultures and traditions are strikingly different from the English culture and tradition, on the basis of which the English common law evolved. The mere absence of consultation by imperial Britain before importing and imposing the English law and justice system on Nigeria is sufficient for Nigerians to reject the system or, at least, treat it with suspicion and trepidation. With little, if any, confidence in the English-style, British-imposed law and justice system and its officials (police, judges, prosecutors, prisons and corrections personnel), the average Nigerian has no significant choice but to depend on his/her native system of justice and law.

The chasm between indigenous Nigerian cultures and traditions, on the one hand, and the English-based elements of the English common law in Nigeria, on the other, is very wide. Many principles and rules of the common law contradict some widely held, native-based beliefs in Nigeria. The use of the English language to write the English common law-based laws in Nigeria, as well as to process cases in the common law courts, illustrates the extent to which Nigerians are alienated by the official system. Although most Nigerians neither speak nor write the English language, they continue to be subjected to foreign-based laws couched in English. How can a citizen conform to, or challenge, a set of laws when the state, represented by the government, denies the citizen the opportunity to know, understand, appreciate, comply with, and critic, the set of laws? Without doubt, Nigerians’ alienation from the English system operating in Nigeria contributes to their continuation of Nigeria’s traditional social control systems.

Pride in one’s culture (example, an Igbo person’s pride in his culture) also helps to explain the continued existence and boom of Nigeria’s native social control and justice systems, such as the Ogwugwu Isiula Shrine in Okija represents. Of course, the “Substitutive Interaction” agenda behind Britain’s imposition of its common law system on Nigeria (see Nọnso Okereafọezeke, Law and Justice in Post-British Nigeria: Conflicts and Interactions Between Native and Foreign Systems of Social Control in Igbo (2002), ISBN: 0-313-31308-3, Greenwood Press, pp. 18-20) fuels the rejection or cold reception that Nigerians have extended to the English system in Nigeria. Culture is mainly bred within a society. A society’s culture represents the society’s history, experiences, failures, successes, and its other ways of doing things. In short, a society’s culture is its essence. Culture, as a society’s heart and soul, ties, or should tie, directly to its substantive and procedural social control statements and interpretations. Hence, even with full recognition of globalization and the need for the right kind of interaction (“Cooperative Interaction” or, at least, “Pluralistic Interaction” – see Nọnso Okereafọezeke, Law and Justice in Post-British Nigeria: …, pp. 18-20) (cited above), justice and law, like crime, remain largely culture-specific. This means that there are variations – sometimes fundamental variations – in interpreting “justice”, “law”, “crime”, etc. between societies. It is therefore quite natural and essential for Nigerians to remain proud of their native social control and justice systems, even in the face of sustained British colonial, and Nigerian postcolonial, efforts to destroy or emasculate the native systems. There is something to be said for Nigerians’ desire and preference to be identified with, and to practice, a system that belongs to them naturally (“ours”), rather than a system that belongs to the British (“theirs”). The sheer pride in Nigeria’s native systems helps to sustain interest in, and increase the uses of, the traditional mechanisms of social control.

Another important factor that adds to the sustenance of the Okija’s in Igbo and other parts of Nigeria is the absence of, or limited, knowledge or understanding of other systems and methods of social control and justice. The issue here is the lack of sufficient exposure to other world cultures and systems of social control and justice. Such exposure often occurs through education (formal and informal). An adult person that has spent all or virtually all of his life in a secluded village, where the Ogwugwu Isiula Shrine is accepted as the highest judge, is not likely to contemplate or take steps to deviate from his obligations to the shrine. Thus, some of the chief priests, priests, servants, enforcers, and other agents that participate in, or patronize, the deities in Nigeria do so because these agents are trapped physically and psychologically by the circumstances in which they were born, were brought up, and live. These agents know no differently from their surrounding circumstances.

A hallmark of a developed (or even developing), modern country is that basic state institutions and infrastructure exist and they work. There has to be a reasonable expectation that the institutions and infrastructure will work for the benefit of the average citizen, not just the privileged few. Thus, public institutions such as the legislature for law making, the police for security maintenance and law enforcement, the courts for judging cases, and infrastructure such as electricity, motorable roads, and clean water, should be present and functioning reasonably well. In virtually every respect, the institutions and infrastructure of the Nigerian State and its constituent authorities (State and Local governments) have degraded substantially. Today, these institutions and infrastructure are, in most cases, far worse than they were under imperial British rule. The quality of the services expected from the institutions and infrastructure has practically disappeared, mainly because of immense corruption among government officials at the Federal, State, and Local levels. While these officials trumpet religiosity and Godism, they are some of the most morally bankrupt goons to run any country. No wonder then that these governments, highlighted by the prevailing Olusegun Obasanjo regime, preach one thing while doing something different.

The negative images that the citizens witness around them contradict any official claim to development or modernism in reference to Nigeria. In many parts of Nigeria – exemplified by my state, Anambra – there are no motorable roads. For example, the Ekwuluobia to Okigwe road is so bad that it is a misnomer to call it a “road”. Judging by its condition, it does not deserve that label. This, after the responsible authority (the Federal Government of Nigeria) budgeted and as usual corruptly diverted the money for the road to private pockets. An inspection of the “road” will surely provide a reasonable observer with an atavistic Stone Age picture. In addition to the horrible road conditions, most parts of Nigeria have no (reliable) electricity supply, clean water, medical care, educational system at the primary, secondary, or tertiary level, etc. In the place of developed and modern services and policies, the overwhelming majority of Nigerians are perpetually subjected to the negative images of the official governments, their policies, and programs.  A quick illustration here of this negative culture of official action in Nigeria will suffice. Since the inception of the present Obasanjo regime on May 29, 1999, he has increased the prices of petroleum products seven times, each time without input or prior notice to Nigerians. Each of the seven increases is by about 30% over the previous price. What sort of “developed” or “modern” government ambushes its citizens to destroy their lives, seven times over a five-year period? What “developed” or “modern” government abuses its citizens as the Obasanjo regime has abused Nigerians? The government actions more accurately represent a throwback junta that is reactionary to the expectations of a free people. In the face of the successive governments’ cave-mentality, evidenced by these arbitrary and unilateral increases in the prices of petroleum products with no regard for the overwhelming majority of the citizens who are already impoverished, it is not surprising that many Nigerians retreat to their kinship groups and highlight their native cultures, religions, and traditions, including their traditional social control and justice systems.

There is abundant evidence that the officials of Nigeria’s successive governments have been some of the most prominent clients of the Igbo and other Nigerian deities. These individuals patronize the deities for varying purposes, including material wealth, influence, political fortunes, and supernatural protection from (perceived) enemies. They claim to be successful in their pursuits, hence these people continue their allegiances to the deities. These officials’ successes – especially on increased wealth, influence, and protection – lend credence to the claim that the deities are potent, thus drawing more Nigerians to follow the deities. However, the government officials’ loyalty contradicts their official position (that condemns and sometimes criminalizes doing business with the deities and their agents). It is very common, therefore, for a public official in Nigeria to publicly condemn ritual and other activities involving deities, while privately participating in the same activities. It makes no difference that the activities at issue may contradict official law and other policies as well as the public official’s self-assumed “Christian” or “Muslim” label. This is quite telling in a country where virtually all public officials claim to be either Christians or Muslims. Credible media and other reports state that the recent Nigeria Police raids on the Okija shrine yielded a list of some of the shrine’s patrons. Also, that the list includes prominent, influential public figures. The police promised to publicize the list, but that has not happened.

The patronage of the Igbo and other Nigerian deities by government officials demonstrates that there is nothing inherently wrong with participating in shrine activities. Those Nigerians that reason thus and rationalize their participation in native religious shrine activities are correct. Shrines are commonplace throughout the world. Some of the widely known examples are the Christian churches, the Islamic mosques, and the Jewish synagogues. There is no reason that the Igbo native religion should not have its shrines provided that the deities and their shrines are used to do good, rather than evil, in society.

There is another significant way in which Nigeria’s governments and their officials send mixed signals to the citizens. The official Local, State, and Federal governments continue to meddle in traditional community matters. These official, Western-style governments intrude in the traditional community affairs in a variety of ways. As examples, the official governments appoint, recognize, or sack the various communities’ traditional rulers (such as “Eze”, “Oba”, or “Emir”) more or less at will. These official interferences are really forms of blending native with official, Western-style politics and government. In view of this officiousness, it must be asked: Why don’t Nigeria’s official governments take equal interest in unifying the native and official, English-style law and justice systems to minimize the chance of another Okija incident happening in the country?

The long, drawn-out and expensive justice process in Nigeria’s English-style official law and justice system is well documented (see as example, Nọnso Okereafọezeke, Law and Justice in Post-British Nigeria: …2002) (cited above). Civil and criminal justice clientele (plaintiffs, defendants, victims, accused persons, witnesses, interested communities, etc.) incur great costs to achieve some justice in Nigeria’s official system. The types of costs vary from money to time and reputation, among others. On time cost, as an example, it is very common for a criminal case to drag on for years, while a civil case goes on for decades. The average Nigerian cannot afford the attorney fees for conducting a case in the official system, especially in the prevailing harsh economic conditions. In this condition, it is not surprising that many Nigerians yearn for less expensive, faster media for doing and achieving justice. The country’s native tribunals and systems of social control and justice, such as Okija’s Ogwugwu Isiula Shrine, respond to the need. The deities are widely regarded as quick and cheap dispensers of justice, relative to the English common law-based official justice system. Again on this matter, the perception by the majority of Nigerians goes a long way to shaping an acceptance of the native-based systems over the foreign, English-style system.

Most Igbos, indeed most Nigerians, defer to the deities on important issues. Nigerians defer to the deities because they (Nigerians) respect and regard the deities highly. It is not just the practitioners of the native religions that hold the deities in high regard. Nigerians, who describe themselves as “Christians” and “Muslims”, for examples, routinely appeal to the various deities for different forms of interventions in the appellants’ lives. As stated earlier in this article, such appeals are for such things as wealth or increased wealth, influence, political fortunes, and supernatural protection from (perceived) enemies. Of course, these Nigerians would not appeal and defer to the deities if they (the Nigerians) did not believe in, or fear, the deities. Because of the widespread use of the deities in Nigeria (by “Traditionalists”, “Christians”, and “Muslims” alike), it is safe to state that most contemporary Nigerians fundamentally believe in, and/or fear, the deities. Thus, the average Nigerian – even if he/she carries the “Christian” label – is convinced in the potency of the supernatural powers of the Nigerian deity.

Those Nigerians that (completely) reject the deity – and they are in the minority – really have nothing to do with the deity and so they generally stay away from it. This means that while the Traditionalists follow the rules of the deity in their religious and other practices, the Christians that reject the deity concentrate on Christian principles, even if the Christians criticize the Traditionalists occasionally. However, most Nigerians that do not believe in the deities prefer to leave it and its followers alone. The result is that unscrupulous members of the society may perpetrate evil in the guise of Traditional religion and the evil would go unnoticed for a long time. Sometimes, however, the generally silent attitude of Christians towards Traditionalists degenerates into violence, even if violence rarely happens. A December 2004 incident in Enugu State illustrates the religious extremism that Christians can visit on non-Christians in Nigeria. In the incident, Christian youths in Abor, Enugu State, took it upon themselves to destroy the traditional religious shrines in their area because, according to the youths, those who worship the deity are holding back the progress of the community (see Tony Edike, “Tension in Enugu as Youths Destroy Shrines”, in VANGUARD newspaper online, January 5, 2005).

In particular, Christianity and Islam – the two dominant (that is, most widely claimed) religions in Nigeria – contribute to lethargy toward the deities and Nigeria’s traditional social control systems. Nigerian Christian and Muslim citizens’ dismissive attitude to the traditional systems takes away from the reasonable pressure that the society could put on the traditional systems for reforms. Such pressure could have come in the form of closer scrutiny of the traditional systems to gauge the compliance of the substantive and procedural rules with important issues like human rights guarantees, special protection for children, and the need for open judicial processes in the traditional systems. Instead, the Nigerian Christians and Muslims’ holier-than-thou attitude attempts to place these Christians and Muslims above the rest of the society and thus allows the followers of the traditional systems (and I have explained that they are an extensive proportion of the Nigerian population) to continue their practices with minimum constructive scrutiny by the wider society.

This is another strong reason why some Nigerians persist in, or begin, following the deities and similar traditional social control institutions. There are money and other forms of material gains to be acquired by creating or championing an entity and presenting it (sometimes, falsely) as having supernatural powers. In many instances, Nigerians in difficult situations, and who are asked to accept such an entity with promised redemption from their difficulties, accept the offer. There is nothing unique about this condition in the Nigerian traditional environment. Cheaters and the cheated are found in every institution of every society. Those who use religion to further their selfish interests and enrich themselves are called false prophets. False prophets are very common among Christians, Muslims, and other so-called major religions. Similarly, among traditional Igbo and other Nigerian religious followers, there are false prophets. These “prophets” regard their religious endeavor as a business and thus exploit their “clients” for maximum profits. This is so because great opportunities exist for these false prophets to defraud unsuspecting citizens who, because of their ignorance and naivety, usually accept, without question, any person that is labeled “Christian” or “Muslim”. In an environment that accommodates all manner of “prophets” with little or no questions asked, the false spiritualists take over their believers’ material and financial belongings. Since it is this easy to enrich oneself by falsely claiming to be righteous, many dishonest people are encouraged to do so, through the Christian, Islamic, as well as Traditional religious shrines.

CONCLUSION

It remains to state: The nine identified bases for the continued and, sometimes, expanded uses of the traditional courts and other native-based social control institutions in contemporary Nigeria show that the practice will not soon abate. There are compelling religious, cultural, ethnic, and material reasons, as well as reasons of official ineffectiveness, inefficiency, citizens’ pride, belief, fear, apathy, and limited resources for Nigerians to use the native-based social controls, including the traditional courts. The practice will continue, and will likely increase as more people lose faith in the English-based official system.