SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020

A Self-Affirmative Discourse on the Impact of Supremacy Conflict among Traditional Rulers in Oyo State on the Attainment of Agenda 2030 in

Bakare Kehinde Najimu Department of Political Science Faculty of Social Science Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria [email protected]; +2348057944219 Abstract This study was carried out to examine the impact of supremacy struggle among traditional rulers in Oyo state on the attainment of sustainable development goals in Nigeria. Library research method was used to gather the data. Elite theory was used as the theoretical framework. It was revealed that conflict of supremacy has taken the traditional rulers away from addressing major challenges facing the welfare of their subjects like poverty, unemployment and insecurity. It was also gathered that inconsistent government policy is one of the major causes of supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in the state. The conflict makes citizens of the state lose interest in reporting any suspected criminal act to the traditional rulers because they have the mindset that the traditional rulers are no more serving their interest, but their family and themselves. It was, therefore, recommended that government at all levels should involve traditional institutions in the process of implementing any sustainable development agenda, in order to improve the standard of living of the people and to make the agenda achieve its goals at the grassroots.

Keywords: Supremacy Struggle, Traditional Ruler and Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction Traditional institution is one of the pillars of development in any country in the world. This is because the institution deals with culture, customs and beliefs of people which constitute the basis of their actions and the pattern of their behaviours in the community, as handed down from one generation to another. The institution is also described as an indigenous socio-political authority which manages the affairs of the community, settles and resolves disputes or conflicts, arising among the rulers and members of the community by the instrumentality of laws and customs of the particular society (Robert, 2004; Crook, 2005; Amusa & Ofuafor, 2012). Bakare (2015) argues that development cannot be said to take place in any African countries, Nigeria for instance, without involvement of traditional rulers, as traditional rulers are saddled with the responsibility of maintaining the customs and traditions of the community, as well as, other fundamental principles the purpose of community development and people’s welfarism. The subjects, on the other hand, summit themselves to the ruling authority in order to keep their community alive with unity, peace and orderliness of their various communities. Such indigenous political

241

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020 arrangements are oriented towards people’s interest and societal development in many countries in the world. Ashiru (2010) supports the above statement when he noted that traditional rulers are the gatekeepers of any society and catalyst for – socio economic and political development. This is because they are closest to the people and understand every nook and cranny of the various territories and as such, their subjects believe whatever they say without the use of force to obey. This means that traditional institutions are essential factors in societal development, if these institutions battling with disunity, rivalry and power tussle as a result of supremacy conflict. Olaoba (2013) opines that the above objective cannot be met by their communities. However, the current conflict of supremacy among traditional rulers in Oyo state council of Obas and Chiefs began in 1950. The crisis arose between the Ooni of Ife and the Alaafin of Oyo over political headship of Yoruba land after the collapse of Old . This degenerated to party crisis and power tussle between the traditional rulers and the political functionaries under the leadership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the Western Regional Government between 1950– 1976. It resurfaced after the creation of Oyo State in 1976 over the rotational system of the chairmanship position in the state council of Obas and Chiefs between the Ooni of Ife and the Alaafin of Oyo from 1976 to 1980. In 1991, the conflict also reoccurred in both Oyo and Osun States over the rotational system of the chairmanship position in the traditional council of the states under study. In spite of carving Osun state out of the old Oyo state. This also degenerated to the challenge of the constitutional power of the state government to upgrade the traditional Chiefs to Obas and establishment of new chieftaincy council in the state. It is against this backdrop that this study was carried out to determine the impact of the supremacy conflict among the traditional rulers in Oyo state on the attainment of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development in Oyo state of Nigeria.

Objective The major objective of this paper is to examine the impact of the supremacy conflict among the traditional rulers in the council of Obas and Chiefs in Oyo state on the attainment of sustainable development goal 2030 in Nigeria.

Theoretical Framework: Elite Theory This theory is adopted to explain the impact of supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in Oyo state council of Obas and Chiefs on the attainment of agenda 2030 sustainable development in Oyo state of Nigeria. The main focus of this theory is that man can never be liberated from the subjugation of an elite structure because elite represents those who excel and the best members of a group of people within a society are those worthy of respect and emulation (Johnson, 2005). They are also the people that have capacity to make real political trouble in the society and they are at the top of the pyramid or pyramids of political, economic and social development of the state (Putnam, 1976). In this case, Gaetano Mosca (1854-1941) postulated that the people are necessarily divided into two groups which include the rulers and the ruled. The ruling class controls most of the wealth, power and prestige in society, traditional rulers

242

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020 inclusive, while the ruled are not competent to replace them. Moscal also states that ruling class represents the interests of the important and influential groups in government. As a result of this, he agreed that constant competition between the upper and the lower strata of the society led to the circulation of elite (Varman, 1975). The justification for the use of this theory to explain the impact of supremacy conflict among traditional rulers on the attainment of agenda 2030 sustainable development in Oyo state of Nigeria is that the theorists maintained that elites are necessary and inevitable and that any evolution which pretends to abolish the elites would end by simply replacing one set of elites with another. In the same manner, elites exist in every society and they always seek for power (Varma, 2004). This means that there is interconnectivity between the traditional elites and partisan politicians in Oyo State and they collaborated to seek for power either politically or traditionally through the use of traditional rulers who are capable to mobilise their subjects for the candidate of their chose as the Chairman of the Council. This is one of the reasons the conflict of supremacy in Oyo state among the traditional rulers occurring and reoccurring in the state and the traditional rulers and political functionaries are not working together to look into the people’s challenges like insecurity, poverty and unemployment.

Factors Responsible for the Supremacy Conflict in Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs There are different views and opinions on the factors that responsible for the recent supremacy conflict among the traditional rulers in the council of Obas and chiefs in Oyo state. Nevertheless, scholars have identified the following factors:

Historical Factor With regards to the factors responsible for the supremacy conflict among traditional ruler in Yoruba land, historical record cannot be overemphasised. Scholars like Law (1974), Johnson (2000), Ogunmola (2010) and Akinjogbin and Ayandele (1980) are of the opinion that this factor largely contributes to the recent conflict. This is because any issue or event in this contemporary world that attracts reaction and counter-reaction must have its root cause; therefore, the root cause of the supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in Oyo state connected with historical events (Ogunmola, 2010). However, one of the historical connections to this conflict is the controversy over the successor of the Oranmiyan who was the last son of Oduduwa. It is on this note that Atanda (1973) states that every Ooni of Ife after Oranmiyan is not a direct descendant of Oduduwa, but a guardian of the objects of worship in Ile- Ife. In their own submission, Law (1974) and Ogunmola (2010) observed that Ooni of Ife after Oranmiyan is a slave who left as a curator of the palace deities at Ile–Ife when the sons of Oduduwa departed to establish their kingdoms. However, Atanda (1973), Ogunmola (2010) and Johnson (2017) considered this as a contradiction to one of the Yoruba fundamental principles of unity in Yorubaland. This is because the doctrines of heredity (blood relation), historical origin and descendant (Orirun) uphold the spirit of unity in Yoruba land. For instance, the direct descendants of the Oduduwa means that only the relatives of Oduduwa can become the Ooni of Ife and inherit the moveable properties of the deceased king. While seniority is based on the direct descendants and founders of territories in Yorubaland with beaded crown long 243

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020 before colonialism (Ogunmola, 2010). According to these scholars, this is considered one of the causal factors for the today conflict among traditional rulers in Yoruba land. In this case, the researcher supports the position of Ogunmola (2010) that supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in Oyo state affects unity and oneness of the traditional rulers on the policy and programme of government.

Colonial Legacy There are divergent views among scholars that colonialism has more harms than good on the Yoruba traditional political system; for instance, Atanda (1973), Ajayi & Akintoyin (1981) and Johnson (2017) state that the primary aim of colonial rulers in Yoruba territories was not to end civil war, but establish their political and economic power, as well as expanding trading and Christianity in Yoruba territories. But civil war of nineteenth century in Yoruba land paved way for the colonial rulers to achieve all these aims through the policy of indirect rule at the point of entrance. In other words, Atanda (1973) and Johnson (2017) submit that colonialism in Yoruba land destructed the unity, peace and orderliness among the leaders and created inter-tribal conflict among traditional rulers. This is because the policy of indirect rule neglected the fundamental principles of heredity (blood relation), historical origin or descendant (Orirun), taboo (Eewo), inheritance (Ogun Pinpin), covenant (Imule), seniority (Agba) and respect (Ibowo fun) in the traditional political system in Yorubaland. In view of this, Atanda (1973) states that instead of to tailor the policy of indirect rule to the above principles and maintained orderliness and peace in the in Yoruba territories, colonial rulers reorganised the traditional political system and came out with indirect rule system that reduced the prestige and power of the Chiefs to the extent that educated subjects of the traditional rulers could be able to challenge their authority. This posed a threat to the existence of traditional rulers and their power in contemporary political system (Ogunmola, 2010).

Western Regional Government political party led the government of the Western Rgion, under the leadership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo (the first Premier of the Region). This party upheld the policy of free education for all Nigerian citizens within the region. It also reduced policy to reduce the excessive power of the traditional rulers in the region condoned by the British administration (Olaoba, 2013). In disregard to this customary limitation, Chief Obafemi Awolowo asserted that the Chiefs must not be permitted to exercise arbitrary powers, emphasising that the sole legitimate foundation of government was under the auspices of the educated minority was freely and democratically expressed (Richard, 1963). This paved way for the for the appointment of the late Ooni of Ife Aderemi II in the position of sole native authority in Yorubaland (Concord, 1984). This is because he was the first educated traditional ruler in the region. He was also one of the Yoruba educated nationalists who advocated for the reforms in the Native Authority System. Added to this is that both Oba Aderemi II and the Chief Obafemi Awolowo were friends. They both retuned to Nigeria, at the same time to launch the Egbe Omo Oduduwa at Ife (Concord 1/1984). Above all, his experience, age, literacy and personal relationship with Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his associates paved way for him to be

244

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020 appointed as the President of the Western House of Parliament, as well as the Governor of Western Region in 1960 (Concord, 1984). In view of this, Richard (1963) and Ayanlakin (2008) submit that the above credentials made him superior over all Obas in the region. In this regard, the ex- Alaafin of Oyo (Oba Adeniran Adeyemi II) registered his displeasure over the leadership of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa and the Action Group for the respect they accorded his brother Oba than for himself (Ayanlakin, 2008). This bred disquiet between Oba the Alaafin Adeniran Adeyemi II and the founders of Action Group and eventually led to the political unrest in Oyo Township. As a result of this unrest, Richard (1963) reports that Action Group political party lost one of the foremost founders of the party in Oyo Township, Chief Bode Thomas (Richard, 1963). The Alaafin of Oyo beard the consequences of the loss of Chief Bode Thomas, whereby his salary was cut down to $ 650 and the Oyo divisional council finally suspended the payment of his salary on August 1954. This was based on the ground that Alaafin Adeniran Adeyemi II alleged collusion with the agitations against the regional levy and eventually led to his exit from office and was sent on a permanent exile to Ilesha (Richard, 1963). As a result of this, societal group called “Oyo Peoples’ Party” emerged and supported the Alaafin against party punishment. In view of this, Ayanlakin, (2008) supports the position that the dethronement of the ex- Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Adeniran Adeyemi II and the party policy on chieftaincy affairs were factors that affected unity and peace among traditional rulers in Yoruba land and end result of this is the current supremacy struggle among the Obas and Chiefs in contemporary political system.

Inconsistence Government Policy from Old Oyo State to New Oyo State (1976-2019) The old Western Region was broken into three States, Oyo, Ogun and Ondo States. Oyo and Ife were still together and the ex-Ooni continued his position as permanent Chairman of the Council of Obas and Chiefs. After the departure of the ex-Ooni of Ife, Oba Okunade Sijuwade succeeded him and was made permanent Chairman of the council in 1980 (Oladele, 2014). The Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Lamidi Olayiwola Adeyemi III challenged his authority and the murmuring of the supremacy struggle came out loud. The rift had to do with the continued chairmanship of the Council by Oba Okunade Sijuwade (Ooni of Ife) with the claim that the Alaafin is the head of Yoruba Obas as had been the case in the Old Oyo Empire (Falola & Akinrinade, 1985). He also claimed that Yorubas history or custom does not allow the Alaafin to play second fiddle to any other traditional ruler in Yorubaland (Ayanlakin, 2008). As a result, he demanded that the position of Chairmanship of Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs be rotated which the late Ooni Aderemi II held in perpetuity. He asked that the position be rotated between himself, the Ooni, the Olubadan of Ibadan land and the Soun of Ogbomoso land to indicate that it was not going to be business as usual in the dominance of the other Obas by the current Ooni of Ife (Dunmoye, 2009). As at the time of this struggle, the state Council of Obas and Chiefs consisted of twelve (12) members, but the Alaafin of Oyo had the support of the Olubadan of Ibadan,

245

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020 the Soun of Ogbomoso and the Owa Obokun of Ijesha land (Concord, 1983). The election of 1979 favoured the Ooni of Ife, Chief Bola Ige became Governor of Oyo State from 1979–1983 and made the Ooni of Ife the permanent chairman of the council of Obas based on the principles of Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) headed by Chief Obafemi Awolowo. In other words, the 1983 election changed the policy of permanent chairmanship of council of Obas during Chief Bola Ige after which Chief Omololu Olunloyo became the Governor of the State on 1st October 1983, under the platform of National Party of Nigeria (NPN) having defeated the incumbent Governor, Chief Bola Ige of Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). The rotational system of the chairmanship of council of Obas was such that the Ooni of Ife was to continue the chairmanship till 1984 when he would have completed his two terms of two years (Adepegba, 1986). Unfortunately, the military administration took over power. A new Governor, Colonel Oladayo Popoola was appointed as the Military Administrator on 4th January, 1984. Consequently, the rotational system that had been sustained by the Olunloyo’s administration in 1983 did not see the light of the day (Daily Concord, 1983). This led to the continuation of the Ooni of Ife as the chairman of the Council. The tussle became a public concern until the old Oyo State was split into two- Oyo and Osun States on 27th August, 1991 by the administration of the then Head of State, General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (Daily Independent, 2014). The creation of Osun State changed the nature of the tussle for the chairmanship of the Council of Obas and Chiefs between Ooni of Ife and the Alaafin of Oyo as the Ooni of Ife was now in the newly created state (Osun State), while the Alaafin remained in Oyo State. The Obas in the old council were divided into two (Adepegba, 1986).

Sources of Data Secondary sources of data collection were used in this paper and these include text books, newspapers and internet.

Role of Traditional Rulers on the Attainment of Sustainable Development in Nigeria Sustainable Development Goals is an agenda of United Nations which is meant to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all citizens of the member states and meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (SDG, 2019). However, agenda 2030 focuses on how member states of United Nations would put all efforts in place end all forms of poverty, inequalities, tackle climate change and ensuring that no country is left behind either rich or poor in achieving these goals (Thunbeg, 2019). To achieve these goals in Nigeria, Olaoba (2013) & Bakare (2015) opine that the involvement of traditional rulers is very important. It is on this that Adekola (1986) submits traditional rulers are important for the implementation of any form of developmental project in this contemporary world. This is because they serve as a link between the community and political office holders. Traditional ruler (Yoruba for instance) reaffirmed moral and cultural values of their community by presenting the needs of their subjects to government at all levels. Thus,

246

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020

Ashiru, (2010) considers the position of the traditional rulers in the community as an important instrument for the attainment of agenda 2030 sustainable development goal. But Bakare (2015) states that it would be difficult to achieve these goals in the atmosphere of conflict in the traditional council of Obas and Chiefs. Adewumi & Egwurube (1982) states that traditional rulers have important contribution on the attainment of agenda 2030 objective in Nigeria. They stress that they are the closet leaders to people at the grassroots and any form of community development that can bring peace, unity and better life for their subjects. This gives them better chance to take any message of the agenda 2030 to their people at the grassroots. In the same vein, Amusa (2010) states that traditional rulers are custodians of the people’s customs, norms and values and anything that comes out from them always influence their subjects’ behaviour and way of life. As a result of this, Ashiru (2010) opines that their people pay serious attention to whatever information received from their traditional rulers. This is because people submit themselves to their actions and authority traditional rulers and they are expected to ensure peace, security and bring development to the entire citizens of the community. On the basis of their authority and influence in the life of their people, traditional rulers are in the best position to handle the processes of implementing addenda 2030 in Nigeria. This is because people at the grass root trust them and better understand their language than the government machineries like local government workers. In addition, Atanda (1973) states that traditional rulers are seen as the symbols of the peoples past, custodians of their history, upholder and preserver of their culture and customs, epitome of cultural norms and values of the society such as truth, discipline, courage and responsibility and so on. In this regards, people comply with their directive without the use of force (Amusa, 2010). Added to this, Atanda (1973) states that divine right and authority of the traditional rulers also aids the compliance of the people to any developmental programme. This is because people are of the opinion that their words and actions are divine and sacred. Since the traditional rulers derive their authority from the traditions of the people, they were considered to have divine rights over the people to rule and govern them. Their words were orders and their actions were divine and sacred (Atanda, 1973). In his own view, Olaoba (2013) states that involvement of the traditional rulers on the actualising agenda 2030 in Nigeria is imperative. This is because they have the authority to mobilise people for such a programme and ensuring peaceful atmosphere for its implementation at the grass root. They are also in position to advise the political functionaries in all levels of government on any issue affecting their subjects and offer suggestions on how to go about it like poverty which has been a serious challenge in many governments in the world Nigeria for example. In the same vein, Bakare (2015) states that traditional rulers are also in position to consult state governments or any organisation on behalf of their subjects on matter that may affect the implementation of any developmental project in their communities. In addition, Nwankwo (1992) also supports the position of the above scholars that traditional rulers play important role in law-making process in their state by ensuring peace, orderliness and security in their various communities.

247

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020

Impact of Supremacy conflict among Traditional Rulers on the Sustainable Development Goals in Oyo State of Nigeria Conflict in any form has been identified by scholars like Iyeh (2004), Oshaege (2004) Olaoba (2013) and Bakare (2015) as one of the factors hinder the attainment of any developmental programme like agenda 2030. This is because it creates disunity, rivalry and enmity among the leaders, as a result of struggle for values, power, political and economic scarce resources and the aim of the opponent is to neutralise, injure or eliminate the rivals (Jeong, 2000). It is on this note that Iyeh (2004) and Olaoba (2013) submit that supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in Oyo state has great impact on the attainment of agenda 2030 sustainable development goals. This is because, the struggle is about sovereignty or independence of territorial leaders which translates to power struggle for economic and political influence in the state politics (Iyeh, 2004 & Bakare, 2015). As a result of this, Olaoba (2013) states that between 1950 to 1976, supremacy conflict among traditional rulers in Yoruba land degenerated to party crisis and power tussle between traditional rulers and political functionaries under the leadership of Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the Western Region. It also led to the loss of one of the founders of Action Group political party in the region (Chief Bode Thomas), also resulted to the exit of ex- Alaafin of Oyo and was sent to permanent exile to Ilesha. In this regards, regional government was unable to implement some policies to the later, like regional levy (taxation) which some traditional leaders like ex- Alaafin of Oyo did not throw his weight on it. Added to this, Bakare (2015) states that in spite of the creation of Oyo state in 1976, the conflict resurfaced but transformed to the agitation for rotational system of the chairmanship position in the state council of Obas and Chiefs between the Ooni of Ife and the Alaafin of Oyo. Added to this, in 1991, it reoccurred in Oyo and Osun States over the rotational system of the chairmanship position in the traditional council of the state under study. This degenerated to the challenge of the constitutional power of the state government carry out chieftaincy law and implement other policies that can benefits the mass council in the state. In this case, Olaoba, (2013) & Bakare (2015) state that conflict of supremacy poses serious challenge to the state government to bring the traditional rulers together for the implementation of developmental programme that addresses the needs of the citizens in the state. But the conflict does not allow the Obas to hold council meeting and discuss on how to collectively work with government in order to facilitate peace, security and the distribution of infrastructural facilities to both rural and urban areas (such as, construction or grading of roads, building of classrooms, health centers e.g. maternity, dispensary), instead they resulted in exchanging words through Nigerian newspaper publications on the tussle among them (Olaoba, 2013 & Bakare 2015).

Conclusion and Recommendations The researcher concludes that traditional rulers play significant role in achieving the objectives of any sustainable development agenda in both rural and urban settlements. This is because they are custodians of peoples’ culture and tradition and their closeness to people at the grassroots. However, supremacy conflict among them has caused disunity, rivalry, inter-community crisis and increased their involvement in the contemporary politics for the purpose of themselves and their families. The following recommendations are hereby given: 248

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020

1. It is unarguable that traditional rulers play important role in the implementation of government policies and programmes. Therefore, government at all levels should carry traditional institutions along in the process of implementing any programme that can improve the standard of living of the people at the grassroots. 2. Government at all levels should formulate policy that would cater for the involvement of the traditional rulers in orientating Nigerian citizens on any developmental programme like agenda 2030. This is because people at the grass root trust them and better understand their language than the government machineries like local government workers. 3. Government at all levels should make appropriate provisions for the upgrading of traditional rulers in order to ensure unity and peace among them and the entire state.

References Adepegba, O. (1986). The descent from Oduduwa: Claim of superiority among some Yoruba traditional rulers and the art of ancient Ife: Boston University African Studies Centers. The International Journal of African Historical Studies, 19(1), 77- 92. Adewumi, J. & Egwurube, J. (1985). Role of traditional rulers in historical perspective. In O. Aborisade (Ed.). Local Government and the Traditional Rulers in Nigeria (pp. 40- 50). Ile Ife: University Press. Ajayi, J. & Akintoye, S. (2001). Yorubaland in the Nineteenth Century. In O. Ikime (Ed.). Ground Work of Nigerian History (pp.281-287). Ibadan: Heinema Educational Book. Amusa, D. & Ofuafor, F. (2012). Resilience of traditions in contemporary politics: A historical study of the political influence of traditional rulers in Nigeria. Current Research Journal of Social Science, 4, 407-414. Amusa, S. B. (2010). Chieftaincy, festivals and rituals: The role of the Ataoja in the Osun Osogbo Festival in historical perspective. In T. A. Babawale., A. Alao & A. Adesoji (Eds.). The Chieftaincy Institutions in Nigeria (pp. 66-70). : Concept Publishers for Centre for Black and African Arts and Civilisation. Ashiru, D. (2010). Chieftaincy institution and grassroots development in Nigeria. In T. Babawale., A. Alao & A. Adesoji (Eds.). The Chieftaincy Institution in Nigeria (pp. 115-140). Logos: Concept Publishers for Centre for Blackand African Arts and Civilisation. Atanda, J.A. (1973). The new Oyo Empire: Indirect rule and change in western Nigeria, 1894-1934. London: Longman. Aynlakin, A. (2008). Alaafin claims of supremacy. Retrieved from Facebook.html Badmus, R. (1984, March 6). Ooni is subordinate to the Alaafin of Oyo (2). Daily Concord, p. 8. Bakare, K. N. (2015). Effects of the struggle for supremacy among traditional rulers in the council of Obas and Chiefs on politics of Oyo State of Nigeria (1991 – 2014). M.Sc. thesis submitted to Department of Political Science and International Studies. Faculty of Social Sciences Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria Nigeria. Dunmoye, R. A. (2009). Olofa chieftaincy tussle: The politicisation of traditional institution: 1959–1969. Zaria: Ahmandu Bello University Press Limited.

249

SAU Journal of Management and Social Sciences www.sau.edu.ng/colmassjournal (ISSN: 2550-7302), Volume 5, Number 1, June 2020

Edewumi, A. & Egwurube, J. O. (1982). Traditional rulers and modern local government in Nigeria. In local government in West Africa since Independent. Lgos: University of Lagos Press. Ekeh, P. E. (2004). Colonialism and socialsStructure. Ibadan: University of Ibadan. Falola, T. & Akinrinade, S. (1985). The role of traditional rulers in society: A case study of Yoruba Obas and Chiefs before 1960. In O. Aborisade (Ed.). Local Government and Traditional Rulers in Nigeria (pp. 40 -50). Ile-Ife: University of Ife Press. Iyeh, P. (2011). Reconsidering place of traditional institutions under the Nigeria constitution: A comparative analysis. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalisation, 4, 40-51. Johnson, S. (2017). The history of the Yoruba. Lagos: C.S.S Book Shops. Law, R. (1974). The Oyo empire c.1600 – c.836. A West African imperialism in the era of the Atlantic slave trade. Ibadan: Oxford University Press. Ogunmola, B. (2010) A new perspective to Oyo Empire 1530–19 44. Oyo: Samuel Ayodele Reformed Press. Olaoba, O. (2013). Writing Yoruba monarchs into history. Ibadan: John Archers Ltd. Osaghae, E. (2004). Between traditional and rulers: The making of contested retribalisation. In O. Vaughan (Ed). Indigenous Political Structures and Government. Ibadan: Book Craft Ltd. Putnam, R. D. (1976). The comparative study of political elites. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs NJ. Roberts, O. (2004). Traditional and government and the Post-Colonial State. In O. Vaughan (Ed). Indigenous Political Structures and Government. Ibadan: Book Craft Ltd. Varma, S. P. (2004). Modern political theory. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House PVT Ltd.

250