As deliberations intensify over the succession to the Awujale stool, a socio-pressure group, the Ijebu Ode Coalition for Due Process (ICDP), says the law is neither vague nor open to improvisation. What exists, the group insists, is a settled legal framework that must guide the kingmakers without sentiment or manoeuvre.
“The only lawful instrument for selecting a holder of a vacant ruling house chieftaincy in Ogun State is the declaration in force,” the ICDP said in a statement. “This is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of law.”
For the Awujale of Ijebuland, that instrument is unambiguous. It is the Declaration made under Section 4(2) of the Chiefs Law of 1957, which regulates the customary law governing selection to the Awujale stool. According to the ICDP, this declaration remains the sole and binding authority.
The group points out that the 1957 declaration is comprehensive, setting out five critical pillars: the recognised ruling houses, the order of rotation, eligibility to be proposed as candidates, the composition of the 13 kingmakers, and the procedure for nomination by family heads and submission to the kingmakers.
At the heart of current disputes, the ICDP argues, is Section 3 of the declaration, which clearly defines who may be proposed as a candidate. “It states plainly that candidates must be members of the ruling house and of the male line,” the group said. “Female-line succession is permitted only where no eligible male-line candidate exists, and even then under strictly defined conditions.”
“This hereditary requirement,” the ICDP warned, “is what prevents chieftaincy from becoming an open marketplace where anyone can walk in and demand selection.”
Addressing claims that the Ogun State Chieftaincy Law of 2021 altered this position, the coalition dismissed such interpretations as misleading. “The 2021 law does not repeal, dilute or rewrite the declaration,” the ICDP said. “On the contrary, it reinforces it.”
Citing Section 10 of the 2021 law, the group stressed that once a declaration is registered, “the matters stated in it are deemed to be the customary law regulating selection to the exclusion of any other usage or rule.” In legal terms, the ICDP explained, this phrase establishes total exclusivity. “Nothing else can be added, subtracted or substituted,” the statement said.
The coalition further referenced Section 11(4), which bars any amendment to a declaration during an interregnum unless all ruling houses agree in writing. “You cannot move the goalposts during the match,” the ICDP remarked.
Sections 15 and 16 of the 2021 law, often cited by those arguing for broader eligibility, were also addressed. “Section 15(1)(b)(iii) says the person must be a descendant of a previous holder,” the ICDP noted. “It does not override the declaration. The declaration already defines who ‘the person’ is, giving priority to the male line.”
According to the group, the 2021 law merely provides procedural guidance on how declarations are to be applied. “It guides usage; it does not reject, subtract from, or add to the declaration,” the ICDP said.
In practical terms, the coalition’s message to stakeholders was blunt. “Every family head must print out the declaration and follow it to the letter,” the statement said. “The same applies to the 13 kingmakers. This is the customary law of the land, deemed so by statute.”
The ICDP concluded with a warning against selective reading of the law. “Any attempt to misinterpret Section 15 to justify predetermined outcomes is mischief,” it said. “If there is no mischief, then the position is simple: the 1957 Ijebu Ode declaration is in effect, and the 2021 Ogun State law confirms that it must be followed.”
Until a new declaration is lawfully made, or the law itself is rewritten to vacate existing declarations, the coalition insists the path is clear. “The declaration is absolute,” the ICDP said. “And the law demands obedience to it.”
