By Leonard Karshima
Shilgba
There has
been a rash of proposals to resolve the menace of cattle herders’ invasion of
Nigerian farmlands, who are killing unarmed Nigerians (children, women and men)
and burning down or destroying houses and property, where understandably, no
feeds or grasses exist for their cattle. All of these are happening on the
victims’ ancestral lands, which the Nigerian constitution recognizes, even as
according to Section 25(1) of the Constitution, a Nigerian by birth is so
recognized only if either of his parents or grandparents “belongs or belonged to a community indigenous to Nigeria .”
In all
the proposals available to me, I see none that provides for the farmers, who
need even more parcels of land for their crop-farming activities than the
cattle herders do. Whether they are proposals for “grazing reserves across
Nigeria” or “Ranching”, for which the Federal Government seems prepared to
invest public money for private business (I am yet to be provided evidence that
the cattle herders are herding government animals), I see no provision of
a compensatory nature for Nigerian farmers and people, who have fallen victim
to the recurring impunities of cattle herders that seem to be ever strengthened
by some conviction of protection from certain quarters.
I wish
to remind here that whatever proposals that the federal government may
eventually adopt should be in agreement with the Constitution, otherwise they
will fuel more crises and provoke anarchy in the land. Even the weak, when they
face injustice, or perceive injustice that threatens their existence, will
fight back in a deadly manner; for, after all, they believe they only have all
to lose if they do nothing. But fighting back, they may have some to save.
Let
me cite a germane section of Nigeria ’s
Constitution: Section 42 (1) [Right to freedom from discrimination]:
A citizen
of Nigeria
of a particular community, ethnic group, place of origin, sex, religion or
political opinion shall not, by reason only that he is such a person-
(a) be subjected either expressly by, or
in the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive
or administrative action of the government, to disabilities or restrictions to
which citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of
origin, sex, religions or political opinions are not made subject; or
(b) be accorded either expressly by, or in
the practical application of, any law in force in Nigeria or any executive or
administrative action, any privilege or advantage that is not accorded to
citizens of Nigeria of other communities, ethnic groups, places of origin, sex,
religions or political opinions.
A close
examination of the above Section shows that the constitution frowns at both
discriminatory restrictions (and imposed disabilities) and discriminatory
privileges or advantages. In view of this, I frame three questions for public
determination:
1. If the federal government chooses as a
solution, to expend public money and expropriate lands from the natives across
Nigeria, and hand over those to cattle herders for grazing, would that not
amount to discriminatory restriction (of the natives, who will lose ownership
of their ancestral lands) and discriminatory offer of privilege and advantage
(to the cattle herders), who would then, like the Biblical Levites, live in
government-protected “cities of refuge” across Nigeria?
2. What would be the compensation of
government to the perennial victims and farmers, whose farmlands would be taken
away? If, at all, there would be compensation, who determines the type and
amount? If the natives are to determine the amount, what happens if they, like
the Biblical Naboth, say to the Federal Government, “The LORD forbid it me,
that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee.”? Would the Federal
Government, like wicked King Ahab and his wicked queen Jezebel, destroy the
natives and take away the lands by force, pleading the Land Use Act, that does
not prevail over Section 42, and whose spirit does not endorse discrimination?
And would there not be costly consequences? On the other hand, if the natives
ask for economic rates, can the Federal Government pay, and from which public
funds? For instance, in Benue State , it would be very hard for the people to
surrender an inch for “eternal” cattle grazing; my people, like many others in Nigeria , value
their land above almost everything, except children. And if, assuming it is
possible, my people are willing to sell their farmlands (their economic means
of livelihood), and we ask for nothing less than six trillion naira, can the
Federal Government pay? And if it can pay, under what lending terms will the
Federal Government handover the lands to the cattle herders. What guarantee is
there that another government will not reverse this injustice in the future,
and thus create a bigger conflagration?
3. If cattle ranching is the Federal Government’s
solution, will it spend Nigeria ’s
money for the private business of ranching? If so, is the Federal Government
prepared to give similar amounts to farmers, fishermen, and other farmers
engaged in animal husbandry? If the Federal Government is not prepared to
extend similar favors, then why not, even if the argument is that cattle
herders will only be advanced loans to set up ranches?
Let us face
facts, please. Nigerian farmers and natives have been losing lives and
property at the hands of belligerent cattle herders, to whom, so lamely and
flippantly, government officials refer as “foreigners”; and in discussing
solutions, I hear nothing about local defense mechanisms for the natives and
adequate re-building and re-habilitation of the shattered welfare of the
victims. I only hear of proposals that cater for the cattle herders, who are
bold enough to say why they have the license to take lives: “The natives stole our cattle.” And the
Federal Government doesn’t go after those confessed murderers! What country do
we profess to have? Such egregious official approvals of silence and inaction
are among events in my lifetime that make me agree with Chinua Achebe that “There
was a country.”
I
wasn’t born then when Achebe and his Igbo brethren started going through the
harrowing experiences that changed his views about Nigeria . But having read his
priceless parting gift to humanity and similar accounts, I see that we are
repeating the same mistakes today that could destroy faith in Nigeria by many
a Nigerian optimist. Yes, Wole Soyinka affirms that Chinua Achebe sought
to “dichotomize Nigeria ”
with his book, There was a Country. I disagree. Achebe only reported about Nigeria as an
active observer. The reporter should not be blamed. If society doesn’t like what
it reads about itself, it only has presented to it an opportunity for truthful
change. Unfortunately, I see that in my day, more than forty years after the
unfortunate civil war, Nigeria
is now officially dichotomized!
Have you
seen the report titled, “Ebonyi
State becomes the first
to ban cattle rearing in Igbo land”? Do you blame them? My governor,
Dr. Samuel Ortom of Benue
State , recently cried
out, “I didn’t become Governor to preside
over dead bodies…Our people are being pushed too far by herdsmen! The old and
young have been slaughtered, children separated from their parents and many
people chased out of their homes to sleep in the bush without food to
eat. This is genocide…” When I hear my governor cry out like
this, and see my people slaughtered almost weekly by cattle herders, would you
not expect me to ask, “Do we have a country”? To make matters more infuriating,
the federal troops sent to the areas of siege, besides not containing the
marauding cattle herders, have become a burden to both state and local
governments, who must feed them, provide fuel for their vehicles, etc., even
though they are producing no expected results. In the South-South region, there
are reports that, the youth, out of frustration at the belligerent cattle
herders, have threatened to “kidnap” them if they would not leave their land.
I love what
President Buhari is doing to fight off Boko Haram, a fight in which both
hunters and vigilante groups have got involved, resulting in the latest recue
of one of the abducted Chibok girls. But he has not yet started succeeding with
the fight against the invasion of our lands by those “foreign” cattle herders.
Should we be intolerant of our Nigerian Boko Haramers, but indulgent of the
“foreign” cattle herders? Will Buhari government’s armies actively stop our
native hunters and vigilantes in warding off those “foreign” cattle herders in
defense of our homelands? Now that we are pushed to the wall in Benue, Enugu,
Ebonyi, Edo, Ekiti, Plateau, in fact, across the breath and length of Nigeria,
it will send a suspicious message to the international community if Buhari’s
soldiers and security agencies stop our hunters and vigilante groups from
warding cattle herder-invaders off our farmlands, towns and villages, while
they can’t stop cattle herders from killing the natives on their ancestral
lands. Cattle herders should not be allowed to carry guns while we are not
allowed to carry even our bows and arrows in the open. We must not continue to
lose precious lives because we must eat beef in Nigeria .
Any people
reserves the natural right of self-defense, much more now that agricultural
activities are being disrupted by those “foreign” cattle herders, and the
Federal Government wants to create jobs through investment in agriculture and
other sectors. To deny us, the victims, that, is to advertise official
endorsement of genocide. Is there meaningful agriculture without guaranteed
safety on the farmlands, which are now being occupied by armed cattle herders?
Is government not pushing the natives to take self-help measures to protect
their farmers in the field? The Benue Movement Against Fulani Occupation (MAFO)
are now at the ECOWAS Court
in search of justice and protection, which they don’t believe President Buhari
can offer them. This is not good publicity for our president. I suspect more of
this will come up if the president does not offer leadership in the war against
cattle herders’ aggression. A stitch in time saves nine.
No comments:
Post a Comment