Citizenship and Indigeneity Conflicts in Nigeria 1 Citizenship and Indigeneity Conflicts in Nigeria Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution Open Society Initiative for West Africa November 2012 2 Table of Contents I. Defining Indegene and Settlers Chapter One: Introduction by Dr. Jibrin Ibrahim and Idayat Hassan----6 Chapter Two: Citizenship and Exclusion in Africa: Indigeneity in Question – Key note address by Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja----20 Chapter Three: Indigeneity and Belonging in Nigeria from the Pre-Colonial times to 1960 by Prof. Armstrong Adejo----40 Chapter Four: Indigeneity and the Bifurcation of Citizenship Rights in Nigeria: The Search for a Political Solution by Jibrin Ibrahim----64 II. Indigenes and Settlers in Nigeria: Case Studies Chapter Five: Zangon Kataf by Toure Kazah Toure----82 Chapter Six: Aguleri/Umuleri by Okey Ibeanu and Peter Mbah----115 Chapter Seven: Kano by Ibrahim Muazzam----132 III. Indigenes and Settlers on the Plateau Chapter Eight: Historical Insights on Plateau Indigenes and the Struggle for Emancipation by Prof Monday Mangvwat----146 Chapter Nine: The Exclusion of minority groups in the Plateau: Uprooting Citizenship Rights by Dr. Audu Gambo----159 Chapter Ten: The Exclusion of Minority Groups in the Plateau – a Hausa Fulani Perspective by Baba Bala Muhammed----175 3 Chapter Eleven: Reflections on Citizenship -Related Crises in Jos: Finding the Road- Map for Peace by Dr. Joseph Golwa----185 Chapter Twelve: Identity Crisis and the Politics of Conflict Management in Jos, Nigeria by Joseph Ochogwu and Geraldine Yop-Kim----- 214 Workshop Report---- 227 Abuja Declaration----- 230 4 Acknowledgements On behalf of the Centre for Democracy and Development, CDD and our partners the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution, IPCR and the Open Society Initiative for West Africa, OSIWA, I would like to acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of partners in the dialogues and projects that went into the making of this book. First, I acknowledge the contribution of the individuals and organisations that made up our informal but vibrant coalition for peace in Jos. The opinions, questions and emotions expressed in this forum went a long way in shaping our thoughts and projects. Our National Workshop on Citizenship and Indigeneity Conflicts in Nigeria and this book stemmed directly from these conversations. Also, we acknowledge that the participation of this group of individuals and organisations in the April 2010 Civil Society Coalition Mission to Jos has availed all of us firsthand information about the situation in Jos which has enriched our collective and also individual projects. It is my hope that the publication of this book would inspire and strengthen our work towards improved citizenship in Nigeria. I wish also to thank the Office of the National Security Adviser, especially General Aliyu Mohammed Gusau and his staff for the series of discussion he hosted with us about the security situation in Jos. We are appreciative of this collaboration and hope that the information contained in this volume would assist in the analysis of the crisis of citizenship not only in Jos which has become the hottest flashpoint, but elsewhere in Nigeria. We thank also the authors whose works are contained in this volume for writing and participating in the National Workshop. We thank especially Professor Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja whose keynote address inspired and enriched the Workshop. We thank all other participants and the media for participating in this workshop. I acknowledge the partnership and support received from our colleagues at OSIWA especially from Dayo Olaide and Peter Ocheikwu; and from Dr. Joseph Golwa and Joseph Ochogwu of the IPCR; without their collaboration, this project could not have been a success. Lastly I thank my 5 staff: Nengak Daniel Gondyi, Idayat Hassan, Uyoyoghene Ugherughe and Terfa Hemen who worked tirelessly to get this book published and accessible to the general public. Signed Jibrin Ibrahim, Ph.D Director, CDD Abuja, November 2012 6 Chapter One Introduction Jibrin Ibrahim and Idayat Hassan Rather than pursuing the common interests of humanity – equality of rights, the satisfaction of material needs, universal respect for the dignity of an individual – their [our] efforts are directed mainly at asserting the rights of their [our] own group (James Littleton, 1991 as quoted in Engin and Patricia, 1999). th Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, Nigeria has celebrated the event, every 29 day of May. Frankly, the regular transfer of power from civilian to civilian government; as against the past experiences of uncultured interventions of the military in politics, which led to the demise of the First, Second and aborted Third Republics, is worth celebrating. This is because the survival of the democratic system offers opportunities for dialogue and open conversations on the reconstitution of the Nigerian State in the context of the promotion of human rights, constitutionalism, regular elections and the return of a development agenda for the country. However, as much as we rejoice over the enduring return of civil rule, it is very important to reflect on and examine the patterns, dimensions and dynamics of the increasingly troublesome issue of citizenship and identity-related conflict in the country. Studies on Nigeria’s citizenship and the problem of indigeneity have been intrinsically linked to the colonial experience of the country, as well as the nature and character of the post-colonial 7 state. Drawing from the works of Ekeh (1983), Tukur (1990), Otite (1992), Mustapha (1992), Mamdani (2007), amongst others, there is a theoretical understanding that the divide and rule policy of the colonial state created a series of ethno-religious platforms among the formally unified social groups and this continues to gain prominence and play a significant role in the current socio-political violence that characterizes the post-colonial state. Kenneth (1956) and Mustapha (1992) reveal the existence of inter-communal co-operation and multiple identities in Rogo, a village near Kano, as well as Kano itself, and between the Igbo and Ijaw in the Niger Delta, respectively, during the pre-colonial times. In many cases, there was culture contact, and ethnocentrism was not associated with ethnicity (Nnoli, 1998). However, with the advent of colonialism, social and political structures of traditional societies were reorganized and restructured, featuring what Osaghae (2006) referred to as “ethnic profiling,” or institutional segregation (Mamdani, 1996), which later paved the way for transformation and politicization of existing culture to suit politico-economic agenda of the colonial authority. The relationship between the citizenship and indigeneity crisis, the failure of the emerging post-colonial state to adequately maintain social order and promote nation-building and institutionalize the principles of social equality amongst existing social groups have also been advanced. At the dawn of independence in 1960, the emerging petty bourgeoisie; fractioned and factionalised along ethnic groupings, while they were confronted with the problem of how to effectively manage the complex system of citizenship, nativity and indigeneity, inherited from the colonial authority. As independence brought to light an era where universalization of citizenship became the norm following the collapse of colonial native enclaves and colonial urban centres, the concept of “indigene” was invented by the petty bourgeoisie as hybrid persona combining the attributes of the citizen and those of colonized native (Ibeanu, 2012). The implication of the ostensible remedial approach to solving citizenship/native question is that Nigerians became both individual citizens and communal natives (Ibid). They consequently became inadvertently separated within the sphere of basic universal individual political rights and freedoms, and the indigenous- community-oriented rights provided for in the 1999 constitution (as amended). 8 Related to the debate about the failure of post-independent political elites to confront the vexing question of citizenship and indigeneity, Ugo (2004) noted that the post-colonial political elites have eschewed corruption as a way of life, and subsequently incapacitated states thereby rendering the state an ineffective organ to guarantee security and other goals of social order. This was a process of vitiating efforts to improve human well-being and development at the personal and national levels. While the nation-building project was going on along with the rhetoric of national unity, old patterns of exclusion and domination continued and new ones were invented. Consequently, the reality of nation-building often saw some ethnic groups consolidating their grip on state institutions to the exclusion of others (Alubo, 2004) and thus deepened the crisis of uneven development. As the rivalry continues to wax stronger, the hitherto bottled emotions exploded. Apparently, rather than the country’s diversity to offer opportunity for exchange of ideas, innovation and creativity to tackle societal challenges, ethnic, religious, gender, regional and other identities, have become major challenges in the polity, because these are somehow associated with the perceptions of discriminations and the prevailing limitations of inclusive citizenship (Momoh, 2001). The scholars we have evoked have lucidly and elaborately provided explanations for Nigeria’s predicament on this matter. They have proferred policy and legal