Gani Adams of Arigidi-Akoko is the 15th Arẹ Ọna Kakanfo of Yorubaland. He was ordained by the late Ọba Adeyemi III, the Alaafin of Ọyọ. Oladoke Akintọla of Ogbomọsọ, Premier of the Western Region, was the 13th Arẹ. MK Abiọla of Abẹokuta, President-elect of Nigeria, was the 14th Arẹ. Gani Adams thus is in illustrious company.

Gani Adams gave an interview last week that was widely circulated online. Gani Adams apparently claimed he was being prevented from pursuing Fulani pests committing atrocities all over Yorubaland. Gani Adams said he watched with his arms folded as the Fulani ravaged Yorubaland because the Ọba and the Governors of the Yoruba States have not given him the relevant order. Gani Adams claimed that if the Oba or the Governors gave him the order today, he would rid the Yoruba forests of the Fulani pests within 6 months.

The fact is, as the only official with Yoruba-wide mandate, the Arẹ does not require instructions from anybody to act. In the Yoruba culture and tradition, the Arẹ was both the Field Marshall (highest Yoruba officer on the battlefield) and the Military Viceroy (Commander-in-chief of all Yoruba forces). Those roles automatically imposed 2 duties on the Arẹ, namely, the Duty of Care and the Duty to Act. Indeed, the Duty to Act is recognised under Section 288 of the Nigeria Criminal Code, which says: 

‘In any case in which it is lawful for any person to use force in any degree for the purpose of defending himself against an assault, it is lawful for any other person acting in good faith in his aid to use a like degree of force for the purpose of defending such first‐mentioned person.’

Indeed, the failure of the Arẹ to perform that Duty to Act is roundly condemned under Section 305 of the Nigeria Criminal Code, which says:

‘When a person undertakes to do any act, the omission to do which is or may be dangerous to human life or health, it is his duty to do that act; and he is held to have caused any consequences which result to the life or health of any person by reason of any omission to perform that duty.’

Gani Adams is thinking like everyone else is thinking; that somehow, Nigeria’s law prevents them from fighting back against the Fulani herdsmen killers. This is not so. Gani Adams immediately could start to work to rid the Yorubaland of the Fulani pests under Nigeria’s self-defence law.

1.    Nigeria’s 1999 Fulani Constitution guaranteed self-defence as a fundamental right.

 Section 33(2) of the constitution says:

‘A person shall not be regarded as having been deprived of his life in contravention of this section, if he dies as a result of the use, to such extent and in such circumstances as are permitted by the law, of such force as is reasonably necessary- (a) for the defence of any person from unlawful violence or for the defence of property;’

2.    Nigeria’s law permitted the Yoruba man to use force to protect or prevent harm to himself, his family and property. 

Nigeria Penal Code Section 59 says:  

'Nothing is an offence which is done in the lawful exercise of private defence.'

Nigeria Criminal Code Section 286 says:

‘When a person is unlawfully assaulted, and has not provoked the assault, it is lawful for him to use such force to the assailant as is reasonably necessary to make effectual defence against the assault:’

3.    Nigeria’s law permitted the Yoruba farmer to use force to defend his farmland, which was his property. 

Nigeria Criminal Code Section 81 says:

‘Any person who, in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace or reasonable apprehension of a breach of the peace, enters on land which is in actual and peaceable possession of another, is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for one year.’

Nigeria Criminal Code Section 292 says:

‘It is lawful for a person who is in peaceable possession of any land, structure, vessel or place, or who is entitled to the control or management of any land, structure, vessel, or place, and for any person acting by his authority, to use such force as is reasonably necessary in order to prevent any person from wrongfully entering upon such land, structure, vessel, or place, or in order to remove therefrom a person who wrongfully remains therein, provided that he does not do harm to such person.

It is lawful for a person who is in peaceable possession of any land, structure, vessel, or place, or who is entitled to the control or management of any land, structure, vessel, or place, and for any person acting by his authority, to use force in order to remove therefrom any person who conducts himself in a disorderly manner therein, provided that he does not do him harm.’

Cattle grazing on a farmland without the permission of the farmer is unlawful. In Suit No AB/26/66 (1969) the Abeokuta High Court said:

‘I do not accept the contention of Defendants that a custom exists which imposes an obligation on the owner of farm to fence his farm whilst the owner of cattle allows his cattle to wander like pests and cause damage. Such a custom if it exists, is unreasonable and I hold that it is repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience and therefore unenforceable…in that it is highly unreasonable to impose the burden of fencing a farm on the farmer without the corresponding obligation on the cattle owner to fence in his cattle. Sequence to that I banned open grazing for it is inimical to peace and tranquillity and the cattle owners must fence or ranch their animals for peace to reign in these communities.’

4.    Nigeria’s law permitted the Yoruba man to use lethal force against a felon, such as the Fulani herdsmen killer, who used or was intending to use lethal force himself to commit a crime. 

The court in Ita & Anor v State (2013) LPELR-21392(CA) held that:

‘A man is justified in using against an assailant a proportionate amount of force in defence of himself or other persons who he is under a duty to defend, where he considers his life or such persons lives to be in danger.’

The Fulani herdsmen killers carry arms to commit their atrocities in contravention of Nigeria’s laws.

Fire Arms Act (1990) provides: 

‘…no person shall have in his possession or under his control any firearm or ammunition except such person that has a license from the President or from the Inspector General of Police’.

Nigeria Criminal Code Section 80 says: 

‘Any person who goes armed in public without lawful occasion in such a manner as to cause terror to any person is guilty of a misdemeanour and is liable to imprisonment for two years and his arms may be forfeited.’

In a speech at the Maiden Convocation ceremony of Taraba State University in Jalingo, Taraba State, General Danjuma, a Former Minister of Defence, called on Nigerians to 

‘rise and defend themselves against the killers; you must rise to protect yourselves from these people; if you depend on the Armed Forces to protect you, you will all die‘.

In practical terms, what can the Yoruba man lawfully do? The operative legal word here is ‘apprehension’.  By ‘apprehension’ the law meant anxiety or fear that something bad will happen. Nigeria’s law empowered every Nigerian, if he so wished, to act on this premonition of impending evil. Under the doctrine of self-defence, the Yoruba man is permitted by law to,

               I.         attack Fulani herders and terrorists if on their way to, before they got to where they were going to cause damage to farm, property or village;

             II.         attack Fulani herders and terrorists with the assistance of others as a group; and

           III.         destroy cows that Fulani herders were intending to use as means of farm or property destruction.

The Yoruba man is under no legal obligation to retreat in the face of thread to his farmland or property by Fulani herders.