In view of the seemingly fragile peace, killings, and kingship tussle in Igarra, Akoko-Edo Local Government Area, the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry has become more indispensable over the past decade. When established, among other tasks, the commission as a fact-finding body should assess potential violations by various entities in Igarra with respect to human rights.
It is against this background that this article examines the impact the proposed commission of inquiry will have on the traditional institution, the formality of Igarra and procedural fairness of the gazette, as a means of rectifying some of the issues associated with the current fraudulent and unsustainable situation.
I am worried by reports in the media about the absence of the Edo State Governor, Mr. Godwin Obaseki, at the recently celebrated 20th anniversary ceremony of the Otaru of Igarra, Adeche Saiki II.
As if this embarrassment was not enough, it was learnt that the Chairman of the ceremony, the senator representing Edo North Senatorial District, Mr. Francis Alimikhena, former senator, Deacon Domingo Obende, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Kabiru Adjoto, the member representing Akoko Edo Federal Constituency, Comrade Peter Akpatason, and the Chief of Staff to the Governor, Mr. Taiwo Akerele, were among others who snubbed the poorly attended event.
In what appeared as a major discomfiture, many guests invited to the ceremony conspicuously stayed away over alleged kingship tussle and its traditional administration. They say Igarra is divided into five autonomous clans headed by Oshiresus (traditional heads) whose powers are absolute over but do not extend beyond their subject clan(s).
Traditional rulers in Igarra, apart from religious leaders who also distanced themselves from the ‘lone event’, are the Oshidu, Oshemi, Otu, and Oshemdase who rule over Ezidowo, Eshimozoko, Anona, and Anonyete in that order.
Investigations revealed that this scant turnout is an indication that all was not well with the system of traditional rulership in Igarra, headquarters of Akoko-Edo Local Government Area.
As far as history is concerned, any issue concerning the governance of the community, none of these aforementioned traditional heads (including Otaru) can unilaterally take a decision on behalf of others.
As member of the Eziobe (Ezi) Group of Clans of Igarra, I stumbled upon a publication by the Eziezu group of Clans on the chronological and historical reigns of Otaruship by Adeche Saiki II and wish to quickly put the records straight.
I am also aware that the Eziobe Group of Clans had since repudiated and distanced themselves from the contents of that publication as a pack of misinformation about the cultural institutions and traditional governance structure of Igarra town.
Secondly, the list of Otarus reeled out in the said publication is nothing other than a ploy to give validation to false narrative which Eziezus has been peddling in pursuit of a dubious agendum.
A study of the list reveals a lot of chronological and common sense errors which exemplify the truth of the popular saying that, ‘in an attempt to deck falsehood in the garb of truth, common sense is usually the first casualty’.
Most salient among the self-contradictions that characterise the publication is: Ariwo Ovejijo whom Eziezus has, beginning from the 1940s, been credited with primogenitor of the Otaru lineage is absent from the list despite being supposedly the first Otaru, assuming the account crediting him with pioneership of Igarra kingship is true.
His deliberate omission is a clear testimonial to his mythical existence because Ariwo Ovejijo making the list would make it 20 Otarus instead of 19. An instance of incoherence naturally arising from a penchant for lies.
Also, the ‘reign’ of Aininoto (1836 – 1862) clearly overlaps that of Ainoje (1848 – 1862) which itself overlaps that of Aine (1856 – 1862). Adeche Saiki, on behalf of Eziezus, therefore obviously owes his open-minded readers an explanation on the possibility of three ‘kings’ reigning simultaneously in Igarra at least between 1856 and 1862, and as well all died the same year 1862.
While attempting to conjure history, the present Otaru said Aido reigned between 1926 and 1952 while Idanage’s was between 1934 and 1966. But the question would be: What about the overlap from 1934 to 1952, which indicates that both of them were on the throne at the same time?
The list has Izuse II, Obine II, Aidokai II, Ainoje II, and Okuo Luse II, but does not account for Izuse I, Obine I, Aidokai I, Ainoje I, and Okuo Luse I.
Also conspicuously missing is Adeche Saiki I’s version of Adeche Saiki II himself who produced the list. Onusagbo III, Osuwa III and Idanage III have no versions I and II. It is hoped that Adeche Saiki and Eziezus will clarify this misnomer which makes the list fictitious and exposes the falsehood inherent in their narrative about Igarra kingship.
The ‘reigns’ of Igodi I (1865 – 1894) and Ashibowa (1892 – 1899) overlap again. Same question of multiple ‘kings’ reigning simultaneously in Igarra comes to the fore once more.
The claim that Otaru lineage began in the 15th century is at huge variance with the plausible account of genuine Oshuku descendants’ history which places the arrival of Igarra people in Etuno land in the 16th century.
Furthermore, there is an obvious fabrication of lies as per how Otaruship rotates amongst the five Eziezu families. In their own publication, it betrays a massive lop-sidedness as Eshinavaka family has taken seven times (4, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17 and 19), Eshinogu four times (3, 8, 12 & 18), Andede, the most senior of them all, only twice (1 and 6), Eshinagada, twice (2 and 14) and finally Andiba, four times (5,10,16) plus Adeche. Even when Hallims Commission Report, which they so much cherished, recommended that it was the turn of Andede family, they disregarded that part of the report with impunity.
If, as the publication would have readers believe, Ariwo Ovejijo actually led the migration from Kwararafa to Etuno (a journey that reportedly took over 100 years and was more than 1000km long), then he must have started the journey at an age too young to have had children. It would mean that he only began to have children much later into the journey. That presupposes that Eziezus were not in existence from the beginning of the journey as their fathers (Idede, Avaka, Idiba, Ogu, Agada) were yet to be born.
In that context, Ariwo Ovejijo led only Eziobes to Igarra. Thus, he himself was a member of one of the Eziobe clans whom he purportedly led down to Etunoland. The question becomes: Which of those Eziobe clans did he belong to before he decided to have his sons evolve into clans which were initially non-existent?
The claim that the children of Ozoko – the purported Ariwo Ovejijo’s only daughter – became the Eshimozoko Clan of today is pooh-poohed by the very fact that descent in Igarra and indeed virtually all African cultures have from prehistoric times been patrilineal and never matrilineal. On that note, if Ozoko’s husband was a native of Igarra, then her descendants would have automatically become members of the clan to which Ozoko’s husband belonged.
If, on the other hand, Ozoko’s husband was a non-native, then her children would not have been regarded as Igarra people at all, let alone being recognized as a clan therein. A lot more fallacies are embedded within the publication, but we limit ourselves to those outlined above.
- Ambassador Ozioma Olajide-Ogbodo, a historian, writes from Ibadan.
