A Nigerian legislative proposal to enshrine the Sultan of Sokoto and the Ooni of Ife as permanent co-chairs of a national traditional rulers’ council has sparked fierce backlash from the Middle Belt Forum (MBF), which warns the move could deepen historical and cultural divisions. The bill, introduced by Senator Simon Lalong and advancing through the National Assembly, aims to centralize the advisory role of traditional leaders in governance but faces criticism for privileging two prominent monarchs over others.
The MBF, representing ethnically diverse communities in Nigeria’s central region, argues that granting the Sultan of Sokoto — a key Islamic leader — permanent co-chairmanship undermines older indigenous monarchies in the Middle Belt. In a statement by spokesperson Luka Binniyat, the group asserted that the 19th-century Sokoto Caliphate is historically “junior” to ancient kingdoms like the Kwararafa Confederacy, which dates to the 9th century. They highlighted the Aku Uka of Wukari, a spiritual heir to Kwararafa, as one monarch whose legacy predates the Caliphate.
Similar objections were raised about the Attah of Igala, whose kingdom flourished before the 14th century and remained independent of Caliphate rule, as well as the Tor Tiv, a symbol of the historically acephalous Tiv people. The MBF emphasized that the Nupe kingdom, with roots in the 15th century, also maintains traditions older than the Sokoto Sultanate, despite later Islamic influence. “To suggest these rulers defer permanently to the Sultan is a distortion of history and an insult to our dignity,” Binniyat stated.
The forum further contested the Sokoto Sultan’s eligibility, noting his primary role as a religious figure overseeing Muslims across northern Nigeria. It warned that codifying his secular authority risks conflating spiritual and traditional governance, sidelining non-Muslim communities. If the bill passes, the MBF pledged to boycott the council and establish a separate body for Middle Belt monarchs, arguing that the current structure disregards Nigeria’s pluralism.
As an alternative, the group proposed rotational leadership across geopolitical zones or a democratically elected chair to ensure equitable representation. The bill, now under Senate committee review, has yet to draw a formal response from southern leaders regarding the Ooni of Ife’s proposed role. Analysts note the debate reflects broader tensions over cultural recognition in a nation where traditional institutions often wield significant social influence.
The controversy underscores the delicate balance required to harmonize Nigeria’s diverse heritage with modern governance frameworks. With the Middle Belt’s threat of non-participation, the bill’s fate may hinge on amendments addressing calls for inclusivity and historical equity.
