Part 3 – Why Nigeria Needs to Create Special States for Fulani Herdsmen: Doing things differently to achieve different, better results (my second response to readers)

By Sylvester Udemezue

MEMORY VERSE:

(1). “We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them.”
~ Albert Einstein

(2). “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” ~ often attributed to Einstein, Franklin, Twain, or Rita Mae Brown

THE MISCONCEPTION:

Please graciously read my open letter to Nigeria’s National Assembly, titled, “An Open Letter of National Emergency: A Call For Creation of Special States For Fulani Herdsmen” By Sylvester Udemezue, published on 02 June 2025. A common response to my proposal therein, is that Fulani already govern many states in Northern Nigeria. One reader remarked, “Fulanis (not even the ethnic ones) are Governors in all the Northern States except Taraba, Kogi, Benue, Plateau and Kwara.”

MY HUMBLE RESPONSE:

1. Respectfully, the reaction quoted above (as given by a reader) misunderstands the very essence of my argument. With due respect, the presence of a Fulani governor in a state does not make that state a Fulani state. This distinction between political leadership and ethnic identity is fundamental. A state’s identity is not determined by the ethnicity of its governor, just as appointing a non-Igbo as Governor of Anambra would not erase its Igbo identity. Col. Rufai Garba (a northern Muslim) governed Anambra State during the Abacha era (1996–1998); Anambra didn’t become a northern or Fulani state. Ibok Abas, from Akwa Ibom, was Military Administrator of Rivers State. Yet Rivers retained its distinct Ijaw and Ikwerre character. Even as I write, Ibok Abas is the Sole Administrator of Rivers State, appointed for an initial period of six months by President Tinubu following declaration of a State of Emergency in the State. In AG Federation v. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1041) 1, Niki Tobi, JSC said, “In our federating units, identity is largely a matter of historical and ethnic continuity, not mere legal appointments or administrative control.” The states currently governed by Fulani leaders remain, demographically and historically, the ancestral lands of their indigenous non-Fulani populations.
2. The proposal to create special states or territories for Fulani nomads is not only pragmatic but entirely constitutional. The Nigerian Constitution in Section 8(1) empowers creation of states where specific political and procedural thresholds are met, including local government resolutions, referenda, and legislative approval. Section 14(2)(b) provides: “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” The perpetual conflict, displacement, and insecurity facing Fulani pastoralists are constitutional red flags warranting urgent and tailored governmental intervention. Section 17(3)(a): “The State shall direct its policy towards ensuring that all citizens have the opportunity for securing adequate means of livelihood.”
3. Pastoralism, which is the traditional livelihood of Fulani herders, must be protected and supported by law and policy. The Land Use Act, 1978 in Section 1, provides, “All lands in the territory of each State in the Federation are vested in the Governor.” This Act entrenches sedentary landholding systems, marginalizing nomadic communities whose way of life does not align with state-based land control. It fuels displacement and conflict. Hence my proposal as the last resort in efforts towards achieving peace and improving security.
4. There are some case law authorities endorsing federal flexibility and plural solutions to prevailing challenges. Nigeria’s jurisprudence supports tailored federal solutions for local, ethnic, and livelihood-based challenges. In AG Bendel v. AG Federation (1982) 3 NCLR 1, the Supreme Court underscored federalism’s need for adaptability to regional needs. Creating Fulani states aligns with this doctrine of adaptive federalism. In AG Lagos State v. AG Federation (2003) 12 NWLR (Pt. 833) 1. The Court emphasized decentralization as a key feature of Nigerian federalism. A uniform national policy (e.g., open grazing bans) without alternatives violates this federal principle.
5. Persistent failures of current remedies demand radical rethinking. Despite several efforts, herder-farmer clashes continue. The following have been tried without success: (a). Open Grazing Bans: These criminalize Fulani lifestyles without viable alternatives, leading to escalation of resentment and lawlessness. (b). National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP, 2019): A noble idea, yet poorly implemented, inconsistently funded, and lacking community buy-in or legal backing. The problem is, Fulani herders are functionally stateless, lacking a homeland where their culture and livelihood are recognized and protected. Hence, a viable solution is to create special states (or constitutionally protected territories) dedicated to: (1). Fulani cultural autonomy, (2). Legal and secure pastoralism, (3). Community policing and conflict resolution, and (4). Integrated into Nigeria’s constitutional order
6. Philosophical and Practical Justifications For the Proposal to Create Special States: Peter Drucker said, “If you want something new, you have to stop doing something old.” Barack Obama said, “Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time.” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.” My proposal is not about ethnic favoritism but REALISM and conflict resolution. Nigeria’s history shows that peace is sustained where people have a sense of belonging, identity, and security. Without these, alienation breeds extremism.
7. Comparative Global Illustrations Supporting The Proposal For Special States: Several countries have implemented similar models: (1). Ethiopia’s Federal States are defined along ethnic lines to protect minority identities and prevent inter-ethnic conflict. (2). India’s Nagaland and Mizoram were created for specific tribal groups to preserve culture and avoid national fragmentation. (3). South Sudan broke away from Sudan due to ethnic marginalization, after failed attempts at accommodation. Nigeria must act before a preventable crisis spirals into irreversible disintegration.
8. Creating the special states is a constitutional and moral Imperative. There’s a legal maxim, that “The law must not only follow logic but must also respond to reality.” The consistent bloodshed from the herder-farmer conflict is a national emergency. The creation of Fulani states or constitutionally protected territories is not a luxury; it is a practical, peaceful, and constitutional necessity. This approach will: (a) De-escalate ethnic tensions; (b). Promote federal equity; (c). Protect a legitimate and lawful livelihood; (d). Foster long-term national unity. “The REALITY is: if we want different results, we must do things differently.” Let us stop patching up a bleeding wound with outdated bandages. Let us treat the cause, not just the symptoms, of national instability. Creating special Fulani states is not ethnic indulgence; it is strategic inclusion. May God give our leaders practical wisdom to do what is the best for our country under the prevailing circumstances.
   Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
   Long live Peace, Unity, and Justice.
   Respectfully,
   Sylvester Udemezue (udems),
   Proctor, The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law and Justice (TRM) [A nongovernmental, nonaligned, nonprofit public-interest law advocacy group]
   Tel: 08021365545, 08109024556.
   Email: TheRealityMinister@Gmail.Com.
   (09 June 2025)

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.