By Sonnie Ekwowusi
The Lagos State Police Command has recently arrested a 65-year-old man, Chibuike Azubike, who claims to be the “Obi of Lagos.” The self-acclaimed Igbo monarch in Lagos was arrested alongside three others – Chief Chibuzor Ani, 57; Chief Martins Nwaodika, 65; and Mr. Ikechukwu Franklin Nnadi, 41 – for attempting to unveil a prototype of a purported ₦1.5 billion “Palace of the Obi of Lagos State” in Amuwo Odofin, Lagos. According to the police, the group had planned to hold an unlawful installation ceremony to unveil the ₦1.5 billion prototype palace for the self-proclaimed king.
The police stated that it sealed off the venue of the purported installation to prevent any breach of peace and to protect unsuspecting members of the public.
At the time of this writing, Mr. Azubike and the three others were still being held at the Lagos State Police Command Headquarters in Ikeja. This reflects Nigeria’s appalling criminal justice system, where criminal suspects are often abandoned in custody or correctional centres without bail or trial, contrary to the law.
The continued detention of Azubike and the three others without bail or trial is illegal and unconstitutional. Section 35 (1)(c)(3)(4) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution stipulates that every person is entitled to personal liberty, and that anyone arrested or detained upon reasonable suspicion of having committed a criminal offence shall be informed in writing, within twenty-four hours, in a language he understands, of the facts and grounds for his arrest or detention, and shall be brought before a court of law within a reasonable time.
Following this constitutional provision, the Lagos State Police should either charge Azubike and the three others in court or grant them bail forthwith, since the alleged offence is a bailable one. Keeping them in custody amounts to a violation of their fundamental right to freedom.
By calling himself the “Obi of Lagos,” Azubike has merely exercised his right to freedom of expression. By virtue of Section 39 (1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution, every person in Nigeria is entitled to freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold opinions, and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference. Therefore, by presenting himself as the “Obi of Lagos,” Mr. Azubike and the three others could argue that they are exercising their right to freedom of expression and the right to hold an opinion, as enshrined in Section 39 (1)(2) of the 1999 Constitution.
However, the freedom of expression guaranteed under Section 39 is not absolute. It is curtailed under Section 45(1) of the same Constitution, which provides that nothing in Section 39 shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society:
(a) In the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, or public health.
Therefore, the police may be justified in detaining Azubike and the three others in order to prevent a breach of public order or peace.
However, it is important to note that it is commonplace in Nigeria for ethnic communities to install cultural leaders outside their homelands and territories. The titles of these cultural leaders (whether Oba, Obi, or Emir) are symbolic and cultural. These cultural leaders do not claim to be paramount traditional rulers of their host communities. By taking such titles, they merely serve as custodians of culture and representatives of their respective communities in host territories; they do not usurp or dethrone the traditional rulers of their host communities.
For instance, according Dr. Ope Banwo in his incisive piece with the title: The hypocrisy of giving Igbos a bad name over “Obi of Lagos” title – If Oba Yoruba in Enugu exists, why not Obi of Lagos for Igbos? Yoruba communities across Nigeria routinely install their own traditional heads, often called Oba Yoruba or Sarkin Yoruba outside Yorubaland. These Obas or Sarkin Yoruba represent the Yoruba community, settle disputes, and serve as cultural custodians—not sovereign rulers over the host indigenous communities. Today, there are: Oba Yoruba of Kano – HRM Dr. Murtala Alimi Otisese (Vice Chairman, Council of Yoruba Obas in Northern Nigeria); Oba Yoruba of Enugu – Alhaji Abdulazeez Adebayo (installed August 2024); Oba Yoruba of Awka, Anambra – Alhaji Abdul Olahan “Ezechinedu” (third Oba of Awka, coronated November 2022); Oba Yoruba of Sokoto – Alhaji Abdulfatai Olayiwola Coker; Oba Yoruba of Zaria (Kaduna State) – Barr. Ishaq Bello; Oba Yoruba of Funtua (Katsina State) – Alhaji Murtala Sani Adeleke (Chairman, Yoruba Obas Council, 19 Northern States + FCT); and Oba Yoruba of Abuja (FCT) – Oba Dr. Olusegun Salau (Chairman, Yoruba Traditional Council, FCT).
I agree with Dr. Ope Banwo. If Yoruba Obas are fully integrated and recognized by their host communities and live peaceably with the Hausa, Igbo, and other groups without being arrested or detained, why arrest Azubike for taking the title of “Obi of Lagos”? What is good for the goose is also good for the gander. If it is legitimate for Yorubas in Kano, Enugu, Sokoto, Awka, Abuja, Funtua, and Zaria to have their own Obas, why can’t the Igbos in Lagos have their own Obi to represent their interests?
In any case, Lagos was built through the collective taxation of people from different divides. Lagos has always been cosmopolitan—from the influence of the Benin Kingdom to the Awori and Ijebu settlers, the Brazilian returnees, and the colonial powers. More importantly, the 1999 Constitution guarantees every Nigerian the right to live, own property, and vote in any part of the country.
That said, what is lawful may not necessarily be expedient. Considering that the proclamation of Igbo kingdoms outside Igboland is currently mired in unhealthy controversies—and, in fact, has generated hatred against Igbos as seen in South Africa and Ghana—Mr. Azubike should have exercised prudence and refrained from publicly announcing himself as the “Obi” of Lagos, knowing fully well that such a declaration could offend sensibilities and stoke acrimony, resentment, and bitterness.
More importantly, it is a well-known fact that Igbo titles such as Eze Ndigbo or Obi are often bastardized or grossly abused by some desperate Igbo men seeking cheap popularity and political relevance and favor outside Igboland. Masquerading under self-imposed titles, some of these men speak carelessly, behave badly, embarrass, and indeed betray the Igbo people in public.
Two days ago I met one of them at a public function in Lagos. Dressed in an overflowing, richly embroidered isi agu gown with a beaded crown adorned with eagle feathers (ugwu agu), symbolizing authority and valor, I reached out to him to greet him out of curiosity. Initially, he was reluctant to return the greeting, but after I introduced myself, he looked at me contemptuously and said: “I am so-and-so, the Eze Ndigbo of Lagos.” The akupe (hand fan) in his right hand, decorated with eagle feathers, had the bold inscription: ‘Eze Ndigbo, Lagos.’
Anyway, before taking my leave, I was tempted to tell him that Ohanaeze Ndigbo has banned the use of the title Eze Ndigbo outside Igboland, but I later changed my mind. I left, nodding my head in wonder and silently repeating the aspiration: “vanity of vanities; all is vanity”.
It is regrettable that certain Igbo persons living outside Igboland impose these titles upon themselves without proper traditional sanction, thereby diluting their cultural significance. For example, before declaring himself the “Obi of Lagos,” Mr. Azubike neither followed the proper procedures for crowning an Obi nor obtained the blessing of the apex Igbo socio-cultural organization, Ohanaeze Ndigbo.
No wonder Ohanaeze Ndigbo, in collaboration with the Council of Traditional Rulers in the South East, has recently banned the use of the titles Eze Ndigbo or Obi outside Igboland. Instead, Ohanaeze Ndigbo has officially approved the title Onyendu Ndigbo (Leader of the Igbo People) as the recognized designation for Igbo leaders residing outside Igboland or in the diaspora.
The rationale is that titles such as Eze Ndigbo or Obi are sacred, deeply rooted in Igbo tradition, and reserved for leaders who have undergone ancestral rites and coronation within their native communities. These titles are not honorary or symbolic awards to be taken outside Igboland—they signify rulership over a defined Igbo territory and come with spiritual responsibilities, including holding the sacred Ofo of the people. That is why Ohanaeze Ndigbo has banned their use outside Igboland. It also explains why Igbo traditional rulers and leaders from twelve South-West and South-South states outside Igboland have disowned Mr. Azubike, who claimed the title of “Obi of Lagos” and even planned to celebrate new yam and Ofala festivals.
Beyond issuing statements from time to time, Ohanaeze Ndigbo and Igbo traditional rulers should take effective and concrete steps in the coming months to ensure that Igbo titles are no longer trivialized, commercialized, or mocked. Igbo titles are living symbols of a resilient culture. Treating them with reverence is not just about respect—it is about preserving the dignity of a people whose history has often been misunderstood and undermined.
Trivializing, commercializing, or mocking Igbo titles such as Obi is deeply problematic because these titles are not merely ceremonial—they are pillars of cultural identity, authority, and heritage in Igboland. Traditional rulers and titled men and women still play active roles in conflict resolution, land matters, and cultural preservation. To trivialize Igbo titles would not only undermine their legitimacy, especially among younger generations, but also erode the age-long integrity and reputation of the Igbo people.
The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.
