In the early
times, the geographical area now known as Nigeria comprised different
settlements. Among these settlements were some
350 ethnic
groups and 500 dialects. Each ethnic group had its own language(s), cultures
and customs.
Despite the
ethno – linguistic differences, the various settlements were not isolated from
one another. Rather, there existed some forms of political, economic, social
and cultural relations. Some of the settlements were linked to one another by
rivers, creeks, or land mass or a combination of two or all of them. These
links provided routes which facilitated and promoted exploration, discovery,
trade and commerce. They enhanced mobility of labour, migration, and other
social relations and interaction. There were also inter-tribal wars.
The
settlements in due course, either by conquest or by other growth processes,
metamorphosed into kingdoms, empires and principalities, which by accident of
history and by numerous geographical handicaps or fortunes (as the case might
be), attained varying levels of political, social, cultural and economic
development.
Certain
physical features influenced the occupational distribution of the early
settlers, as well as their type of ancestral workshop. For example, northwards
were savanna areas; the inhabitants were chiefly pastoral; they worshipped the
god of the sky. Southwards were the forest belts; for the settlers who were
mainly farmers, the object of their worship was the god of land. Still further
southwards are the coastland areas; the settlers were mainly fishermen and they
worshipped the goddess of the sea.
With time,
these groups interacted with considerable frequency and in consonance with some
established and regular process. Indeed, the notion of settlement itself
connotes a level of human organisation; and where there is an organization,
there has to be a scheme of rules or laws and compulsion to enforce obedience
if the group or society must survive and continue.
Each of the ethnic- linguistic groups
therefore had its own concept of law, judicial process and customary laws
without which human society could not exist. These laws played a prominent role
in the regulation of the affairs of members of the group. They varied with
space, character and level of socio-economic development and challenges which
faced the various settlements. As should be expected therefore, there were
manifestation of different (and sometimes conflicting) ways and conditions as
one moved from one place or age to another or one empire or kingdom to another
and across the jurisdiction of different customary laws. Before delving into
these conflicts, there need to be some understanding of the development of the
legal systems and the nature of customary law.
Development
of General Customs in Nigeria
The empires
of the North as well as the kingdoms in the Southwest were chiefly societies.
Authority was exercised along vertical lines, authoritarian and despotic in
nature. Their legal system was centralized; exercise of judicial power was
territorially delimited, and coercive.
At the same
time, there were features of democracy. For example, the monarchs held
consultations with their council of chiefs, queen mothers, courts, priestly
officials, secret cults, etc. Powers were decentralized particularly in the
Northern empires where Emirs, Serikis and others exercised delegated
authorities. There were also checks and balances Akin Oyebode noted that in the
old Oyo empire, for example, the king makers or subordinate chiefs could demand
that a tyrannical Alafin (the Monarch) should “open the calabash” or in
other words to commit suicide. Elsewhere junior chiefs were empowered to secede
from the commonwealth of a cruel king or in the alternative depose or banish
him.
The East of
the Niger was made up of chiefless societies and these societies were less
integrated. Authority was organized along horizontal lines. Relatively, they
were democratic and egalitarian. They relied more on synonym bonds, lineage and
kinship within the clans and other social groups. The legal system was decentralized
and judicial power was based primarily on the attainment of a specific rank,
age or status within the social unit.
In both the chiefly societies of the
North and the West and the chiefless society of the East, the members of the
communities had no cause whatsoever to entertain any fear that the monarch or
other rulers would be absolutist or tyrannical. There were broad similarities
among the customs and cultures transcending ethnic boundaries as there were
conflicting ones. The broad similarities served as bonds between the different
communities and the people. They also served to regulate the relationship among
the members of the communities. In effect, there was conformity with the social
norms: and this was reinforced by the strong belief in myths, dogmas, and
ancestral spirits. Everywhere – be it chiefly or chiefless, the legal system
was the same – the enterprise of subjecting human conduct to the governance of
rules. The law was no respecter of persons or ethnic group; the legal system served
as an instrument for abridging the gaps between them.
-ONAH MARY JOHN
KUW/U14/SLG/2026
No comments:
Post a Comment