The southern governors ban on open grazing is a legal decision informed by security threats
Among the many resolutions passed by the Southern Governors Forum (SGF) which met recently at Asaba, Delta State, the presidency has deemed it fit to react only to the item dealing with the ban on open grazing. Although Forum Chairman, Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State has dismissed Presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu as a rogue official who works for other interests rather than that of his principal, it needs to be underlined that the unanimous resolve by southern governors to ban open cattle grazing is a direct response to the increasing widespread security threats posed by armed and criminal herdsmen in all their states.
However, in an undiluted regurgitation of the earlier contention of the Attorney General and Justice Minister, Abubakar Malami, the presidency is questioning the very legality and constitutionality of the governors’ position on this matter. Meanwhile, in an earlier statement couched in ethnic baiting, Malami not only declared the resolution a constitutional breach, he likened it to a ban on sale of motor spare parts by northern governors.
Ordinarily, the constitution guarantees every Nigerian the right to travel around, live in and ply their trade in any and every part of the federation. This provision is of course subject to the corollary assumption that every Nigerian will exercise the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the constitution in a manner that neither abridges the rights and freedoms of other citizens nor flouts the laws of the states in which they chose to reside. But there is no section of the constitution that confers the same rights of freedom of movement and residence on animals, be they cattle, goats, or dogs. As articles of trade or plain merchandise, animals accompanying persons or accompanied by persons do not automatically have the same citizen rights conferred on them. The matter of open grazing pertains to cattle, not their herders, as the latter do not graze!
The current situation in which some herdsmen (mostly identified as non-Nigerians) have been known to traverse the length and breadth of the country with their herds to cause multiple discomfort to farmers and other innocent citizens cannot be excused under any known law of the land. Even in a normal life situation, the rights which the law confers on human beings are not transferable to animals like cattle, dogs, or even other ordinary pets. A man who in the exercise of his rights of freedom of movement and domicile allows his animals to breach the safety, freedom and security of other citizens becomes liable for such transgressions.
A situation in which herdsmen under the guise of escorting their cattle through state territories endanger the lives and livelihood of farmers, road users or innocent people in playgrounds cannot be tolerated by any responsible set of governors. Similarly, a situation in which the purported escort of cattle in search of grazing grounds leads herdsmen to destroy farms, invade local communities, and take up residence in forest reserves without any titles of occupancy from the relevant state authorities can only breed confusion and free-for-all armed confrontations. We are already seeing the worst episodes in states like Benue, Plateau, Enugu and parts of Oyo and Delta.
From police documented incidents of multiple crimes like kidnapping, armed robbery, invasions of farms, rape and armed illegal occupation of forests and farmlands in most southern states in the last six years, most of these cases have been linked to a new type of armed herdsmen. Therefore, the Asaba declaration on the intention of the southern governors to ban open grazing is a perfectly legal decision informed by a desperate security threat in their respective states.
To be concluded tomorrow.
