In Nigeria’s complex political history, traditional rulers have steadily shifted from being revered custodians of culture and morality to willing accomplices in the country’s governance failures. Once the last line of defense for the people against oppression, many of these rulers have now traded their authority for political patronage, aligning themselves with the very forces that undermine good governance. Their complicity is not just a recent phenomenon—it has deep historical roots stretching from the colonial era through the post-independence years, the dark days of military rule, and now, the democratic dispensation.
During the colonial period, British administrators, realizing the power of traditional institutions, manipulated them for indirect rule. The British found willing partners among the traditional elite, offering them prestige, protection, and financial incentives in exchange for their allegiance. This arrangement effectively transformed many royal fathers into enforcers of colonial policies, often to the detriment of their own people. Instead of standing against unjust colonial taxation and forced labor policies, many rulers became instruments of enforcement, suppressing dissent in their domains. This betrayal of the people’s trust marked the beginning of their decline as independent authorities.
The early years of independence saw a continuation of this trend. As Nigeria transitioned to self-rule, many traditional rulers openly took sides in the political battles of the era. The infamous Western Region crisis of the early 1960s, which led to the declaration of a state of emergency, saw some Yoruba monarchs aligning with one faction of the Action Group while others backed the federal government’s intervention. Instead of mediating and fostering unity, they became active players in the political chaos that eventually contributed to the first military coup of 1966. The same pattern repeated itself in the North, where certain emirs threw their weight behind political elites for personal gain rather than protecting the collective interest of their people.
The military era further exposed the frailty of Nigeria’s traditional institutions. Under successive military governments, traditional rulers became political tools in the hands of dictators. No period exemplifies this more than the reign of General Sani Abacha. Many first-class traditional rulers lavished praises on Abacha, bestowing him with traditional titles and openly endorsing his self-succession bid despite widespread human rights abuses. The late Ooni of Ife, Oba Okunade Sijuwade, and several other monarchs were vocal in their support for Abacha’s so-called “continuity agenda.” In return, these rulers were handsomely rewarded with privileges, state protection, and financial largesse.
The June 12, 1993 election annulment crisis was another defining moment where traditional rulers failed the people. While Nigerians fought for the restoration of Chief MKO Abiola’s mandate, many royal fathers took a cowardly stance, either remaining silent or siding with the military junta. Instead of speaking truth to power, they prioritized self-preservation, allowing the military to perpetuate injustice. Even when Abacha imprisoned Abiola, very few traditional rulers had the courage to call for his release. Their silence was deafening, proving that they had become more interested in securing their thrones than in defending the democratic aspirations of their people.
Even in the current democratic era, traditional rulers continue to serve as enablers of political misrule. The ongoing crisis in Rivers State, where Governor Siminalayi Fubara faces political battles orchestrated by his predecessor and godfather, Nyesom Wike, is a prime example. Traditional rulers in Rivers have largely remained silent or have subtly aligned with Wike, failing to act as neutral mediators. Their reluctance to challenge federal overreach—where President Tinubu’s intervention has tilted the political balance—shows just how far they have drifted from their historical role as guardians of justice.
The damage caused by this royal complicity cannot be overstated. Traditional rulers, once revered for their wisdom and moral authority, are now seen as mere political appendages, endorsing and legitimizing corrupt regimes. Their failure to defend the people’s interests has deepened public distrust in the institution, reducing them to ceremonial figures rather than active agents of progress. If Nigeria’s traditional rulers are to reclaim their dignity, they must detach themselves from political patronage and rediscover their true purpose—standing as the moral compass of society. Only then can they restore the credibility they have so willingly squandered in their pursuit of personal gain.
—–
Image: Dall-E
