Dr. Olusegun B. Abejide

Nigeria stands today as a constitutional republic, not a caliphate, not a monarchy, and certainly not a federation of hereditary kingdoms. The framers of the 1999 Constitution did not create an aristocracy above the Nigerian people. They created a republic founded upon equality, federalism, secularism, and the principle that no unelected office should enjoy permanent constitutional superiority over another. Senate Bill 546 threatens to violate that very foundation and should be killed immediately by the Nigerian Senate.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with recognizing the important role traditional rulers play in preserving culture, mediating local disputes, fostering peace, and providing moral guidance to their respective communities. Nigerians generally hold their traditional institutions in high regard. However, elevating any traditional stool to a permanent national constitutional position is a dangerous departure from republican governance.

The most contentious aspect of Senate Bill 546 is the proposal to make the Sultan of Sokoto and the Ooni of Ife permanent co-chairs of a National Council of Traditional Rulers. This proposition is fundamentally flawed.

First, Nigeria is not a monarchy. Republics do not constitutionally entrench hereditary authority above citizens or above other traditional institutions. Permanence is alien to republicanism. If a national traditional council is considered necessary, its leadership should rotate among the six geopolitical zones or among the country’s major traditional institutions. Permanence creates hierarchy. Hierarchy breeds resentment. Resentment undermines national cohesion.

Second, confidence in leadership matters. Vast sections of the Middle Belt, which have endured years of devastating insecurity, displacement, and loss of life, have openly expressed discomfort with permanently vesting leadership in the Sokoto Sultanate. Whether one agrees with those concerns or not, they cannot simply be dismissed. A national institution that immediately alienates millions of Nigerians cannot serve as an instrument of unity.

Third, traditional rulership is principally a residual matter under Nigeria’s federal arrangement. The National Assembly should exercise great caution before attempting to constitutionalize a structure that would effectively rank certain traditional institutions permanently above others. The Tor Tiv, Attah of Igala, Obi of Onitsha, Shehu of Borno, Emir of Kano, Etsu Nupe, Gbong Gwom of Jos, Ekiti Obas when occupied, and numerous others are custodians of ancient civilizations and peoples whose histories predate Sultan and modern Nigeria itself. No stool should be granted immutable national precedence.

Finally, the Senate must remember that constitutions are designed to solve problems, not manufacture new ones. At a time when the nation struggles with insecurity, distrust, regional grievances, and growing political polarization, creating permanent traditional offices is unnecessary and provocative. It risks reopening old wounds and deepening existing fault lines.

History cautions nations against permanently constitutionalizing inherited authority within republican systems. Nigeria itself provides a compelling lesson. In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, many Hausa rulers tolerated and, in some cases, patronized Fulani Islamic scholars and reformers within their territories. Few among them could have imagined that what appeared to be a religious reform movement would eventually evolve into the jihad of 1804 under Usman dan Fodio, resulting in the collapse of numerous Hausa dynasties and their replacement by emirates aligned with the Sokoto Caliphate.

Beyond Nigeria, history presents another cautionary tale. The Ottoman Empire’s millet system granted certain religious authorities enduring political privileges over diverse populations. While this arrangement initially brought administrative convenience and stability, it eventually deepened communal divisions and contributed to nationalist tensions that outlived the empire itself. Republics survive because they continuously renew legitimacy through equal citizenship and shared institutions, not because they constitutionalize hereditary precedence.

More than two centuries later, scholars, activists, and ordinary citizens continue to debate the long-term implications of that transformation. Some view it as religious renewal, others as political consolidation, and many regard it as a conquest whose consequences still shape Northern Nigeria. Whatever interpretation one adopts, the historical lesson remains clear: political communities must exercise extreme caution before granting permanent institutional privileges that future generations may find difficult, if not impossible, to reverse.

Nigeria today is not the Sokoto Caliphate. It is not a kingdom, nor an emirate confederation. It is a constitutional republic comprising hundreds of ethnic nationalities, ancient kingdoms, emirates, chiefdoms, and communities, all of which deserve equal dignity before the law. The framers of the Constitution wisely declined to establish hereditary offices with permanent national authority. To do so now would amount to introducing into a republican order a constitutional aristocracy that the Nigerian people never voted to create.

The Senate should learn from history. Temporary political arrangements tend to become permanent structures. Permanent structures tend to outlive the circumstances that produced them. Senate Bill 546 should therefore be rejected in its entirety. It should not be amended, deferred, or cosmetically adjusted. It should be killed immediately. A republic survives by preserving equality among its citizens and institutions, not by elevating hereditary authority into constitutional permanence. Nigeria must remain a republic governed by law, consent, and federal balance—not by irreversible arrangements that may one day become the source of the very divisions they were supposedly designed to heal.

For these reasons, Senate Bill 546 should not be amended. It should not be delayed. It should not be repackaged. It should be rejected outright. The Senate should kill this unconstitutional initiative immediately and reaffirm Nigeria’s identity as a democratic republic in which legitimacy flows from the people and no hereditary institution, regardless of its prestige, can claim permanent constitutional supremacy over others.

Dear readers, we really need your support to keep on serving you with authoritative, truthful, and juicy stories everyday. For your support, please reach out to the editor @gavelinternational66@gmail.com