5.5 The Extended ‘Families’ in the Igbo Ohacracy Governance
5.5.2 The Village Assembly as Family: Basics for Ohacracy Governance
privileged people who felt left out in economic gains and development of the states. These less privileged African population have developed negative feelings and sense of hate towards the few rich and highly privileged and favoured in the hash economic conditions. Jealousy against wealthy members of society finds expression in sortilege (divination) by the poor and those who think they are not benefiting from the wealth of the nation.
This scary situation is slowly eating up the Igbo community in which people have resorted to the membership of organisations known as “Secret Societies” and are involved in diabolic activities. Members are promised riches and wealth in a short time and without working hard for it. The killing of family members and relatives are part of the ritual by which a member becomes rich. While articulating this scandalous disease which has eaten deep into the fabric of Igbo Ohacracy governance tradition Uzukwu (1996:106-107) notes:
…Witchcraft functions as a metaphor for balancing relationships in societies in which the relational notion of person, as displayed in community, dominates. This relational notion is being threatened by the radical individualism of the modern world… The jealousy, which finds its expression through witchcraft, is in the final analysis, the expression of anger at the individualistic hoarding of goods, goods that should be utilized creatively for the common welfare (good)…
Of course the centralised system promoted aimless and endless individual competitions and accumulation of wealth without the consideration of the weak or the ‘others’. Hence, it can be seen that individualism has devalued the decentralised community life where neighbours know and care for each other; pulling and supporting each other in participatory system is the way for the Igbo Ohacracy order. The Igbo therefore have proverbs to demonstrate a high level of unity that must exist among members of the Umunna family; such as: “Anyuko mamiri onu, obguo ofufu” – best translated, ‘when one urinates together, it foams’ and; “Ihe Ohazuru mee, nwere amamihe” – what the assembly has agreed, is wisdom at its best. By so thinking and doing, the Igbo demonstrate that Ohacracy solidarity is the best form and means of governance and development (see Ukpokolo 2009:17-18 and Echeruo 1971:63-66). The chapter will now turn to the village set up in which the elders provide able leadership towards Ohacracy governance among the Igbo people.
in Igbo-land, the enthronement of warrant chiefs69 did not displace the village councils that pre-dated the Whiteman (Muo and Oghojafor 2012:155).
Such is the basic reality around the village context of Igbo Ohacracy governance. The village remains the most single Ohacracy governance effect that has revolutionised the Igbo communities of the south-eastern Nigeria. Its effectiveness and highly organised nature has made it the envy of the contemporary system that cannot bit it in all ramifications. In articulating Onwumechili (2000) and Nwaezeigwe (2007) on the Igbo Ohacracy village governance, Muo and Oghojafor (2012:158) argue that the Igbo society in its traditional setting is an egalitarian and highly competitive socio-cultural society. Meanwhile, it is founded on the basis or framework of gerontocracy and movement of social title systems and the traditional governance was fully participatory.
In line and keeping with this principle of common good, the Igbo village communities are able to give courage and strength (life-forces) to its members in their formal and informal meetings held as a group in an atmosphere of Ohacracy cordiality at marriages, births, and occasional windfalls of achievements (Agbasiere 2000:89-91). The village in this relation is another level of family unit70 composed of groups of individual and extended families who co-operate with each other for the purpose of well-being, security and protection from harm and support in time of need and difficulties. The village community therefore in all its ramifications provides the Igbo Ohacracy solidarity with its second level of organised and recognised government after the Umunna family level, and hence, the most primary among the Igbo people of South-eastern Nigeria (see Okafor 1992:4-5 and Uchendu 1965:41-43).
Most importantly, we must emphasize that the village is not an autonomous social unit within the traditional Igbo system. A village is an integral part of town. The village in the Igbo context depends on the decisions made at town level, which is an autonomous entity in the Nigerian political usage. Hence, at least five villages and more therefore make up an autonomous town. It was in agreement to this that Okeke (2010:12) explains that at the local
69 The British introduced warrant chiefs because they wrongly assumed that all Africans were ruled by Kings of Chiefs. The traditional Igbo government was rather democratic with no individual enjoying more formal political authority than any other. While the warrant chief system was successful in the North characterized by a traditional feudal system, and partially successful in the west; it was impractical in Igboland. The way warrant officers were chosen in total neglect of the traditional norms and later their abuse of power and corruption, made them very unpopular (Isichei 1976:143; Duru 2005:217).
70 In the Igbo meaning and usage of the term “village” all individual families in one village community are understood as members of one family since they all originated from one stock of blood ancestral relations.
level, “natural communities” (villages or village groups of pre-colonial origin) are established into “autonomous communities.” Because of the numerous makeup of traditional Igbo society, autonomous communities in Igbo land are plentiful.
To bring this section to a close, the role of the village in Igbo Ohacracy system is focused on the common good of all who live in the land and co-operate with its improvement and survival. It is vital to note other specific areas by which the Igbo village contributes immensely towards the realization of Ohacracy order and development of the Igbo communities. Meanwhile, this chapter proposes that the Catholic Church’s centralised system among the Igbo communities, to consider strongly the “Basic Christian Communities” or the
“Small Christian Communities” since they come closer to the decentralised system of the village governance among the Igbo Ohacracy communities. This basic understanding and practise of the Church as family has not taken root in the Igbo Catholic communities.71 By so doing, most Igbo Ohacracy Catholic adherents will find a means of participating in their faith activities.
Of course, the Igbo village unions undertake many joint projects to create a people led and centred development. The Ohacracy governance solidarity is possible by the means and practice of the traditional values and their roles in the recent years in the Igbo polity. These include the following among others:
I. The construction (expansion as population grows) or improvement of market-places and its surroundings.
II. The creation or mounting of scholarship schemes in recent years since the dawn of modernity.
III. Road construction and maintenance (see Egboh 1987:64-76; 83-91).
IV. Organising social entertainment like Masquerade egwugwu and age-grade wrestling tournaments by which immense influence of age-grades, women and deities to ensure social Ohacracy order (see Ezeliora 2009:46; Achebe 1965:110-112 and Egboh 1987:131-135).
V. The establishment of a revolving loan/fund for the businessmen and women of the village.
71 Refer to the ‘Presbyter Ministry’ in governance in chapter 3 to note the hindrance for SCC or BCC to take effect.
VI. The settlement of disputes among members.
VII. The review of the activities and involvement of their members living abroad and the Diaspora; if need be to check crime and bad behaviour. They organise vigilance over the behaviour of her citizens.
VIII. Finally, they also make sure that the village community is fully represented in the higher town unions’ political organisation (Ejiofor 1981:50).
The village therefore represents the primary decentralised system whereby every individual family is given opportunity of representation and participation in the governance of the community affairs. By this practice no particular individual (centralised) has authority over the entire community. This is key in seeking a participatory model of governance among the Igbo Ohacracy communities. Instead the group of families meet as assembly to dialogue over issues affecting the entire community and is able to make decisions based on informed ideas.
This is unlike the centralised system of the Roman Catholic Church where the priest (clergy) reigns supreme. Even in the closest comparison of the so called “parish council” formed in local Catholic parishes, the priest remains a single authority determining proceedings and has
“veto” power over issues being deliberated upon. The lay participants only have consultative role to play (see Arrieta 2000:39).
The following section of this chapter discusses the last stage of family among the Igbo Ohacracy order the town which is a conglomeration of all the village groups in a particular political division known as autonomous community in the Nigerian political sense of the word.