©Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization
Igbo leadership – the Servant Leadership Model:
“OHACRACY”
(Towards a Renaissance of the Igbo Nations Worldwide)
“IN IGBO SOCIETY POWER BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE. Ndi Igbo elect their own leaders and tell their leaders what to do and how to lead them. Ndi Igbo have never accepted “rulers”, not even when the British imposed warrant chiefs on them.”
Leadership Series
Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization
“The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?”
The Servant as Leader
Robert K. Greenleaf
Servant Leadership Model:
We will consider how the ‘Western World’ view the Servant-Leadership model (a model that we can say was coined or came into being in 1970 by Robert K. Greenleaf) before we consider OHACRACY.
Ohacracy is the Igbo model of ‘Servant-Leadership’ that is thousands of years old. This model continues to withstand the test of time even as we the children of those geniuses that gave the world, Democracy, Rule of Law, Civilization, and One God, continue to turn our backs on their philosophy, tradition and culture; even as we thoughtlessly ignore the damage being done to our way of life, a way of life that is built on truth, the rule of law, respect for other people’s way of life, respect for mother earth and all living and nonliving things, spirituality and etc.,).
The Igbo must reconsider the mad and all encompassing embrace of all things Western in our continuing struggle to out western the ‘Western Civilization’, to our continuing and eminent descent to self destruction!
Ohacracy has been practiced for thousands of years in most Igbo villages and towns and has continued to flourish until 1970 after the defeat of Biafra in a GENOCAUSTAL (genocidal and holocaustal) war to wipe the Igbo off the face of Earth, the brutality and inhumanity which is yet to be rivaled in the modern world (in fact this became the model for other genocides in Africa: Rwanda, Sudan, Liberia, Sierra Leone, etc) – the massacre of civilians, the plucking out of eyes and the cutting off of male genitals, the cutting off of fingers and limbs, the raping of girls and women, the cutting open of the stomachs of pregnant women and the bludgeoning to death of the fetuses, the skinning alive of males, the setting on fire and burning to death of families, the complete and total blockade and the starving to death of more than two million children, women and men, etc., by the time this madness was over more than one quarter (three million) of the Igbo population had been wiped off the face of the earth.
The Nigerian victors, yet unsatisfied with their inhumane treatment and crimes against humanity, then set out to: implement a marginalization policy whose effect even today continue to felt by the Igbo all over Nigeria, especially in Igbo Land; introduce ‘autonomous communities’ – a back door way to finally introduce and make sure feudalism takes root in Igbo land; impose traitors and spineless fools as leaders over the Igbo, in an all out effort to destroy the Igbo way of life.
It is our hope that this treatise on Ohacracy, the Igbo model on ‘Servant-Leadership’ will help swing the pendulum back to a retrace of the path blazed by our fore-parents, a path built on truth (Eziokwu bu Ndu – Truth = Life), culture, tradition and philosophy, a path solidly imbedded in their Omenana (way of life), with of course, modern day modifications, if necessary.
Salvation for Igbo is a re-embrace of the ‘Servant-Leadership’ model.
Character:
Character has always been considered one of the most important qualities of any leader and has taken an added importance since the re-invention of ‘Servant-Leadership’ model in 1970 by Robert K. Greenleaf.
Larry C. Spears, Chief Executive Officer (The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership) in the titled work,
“On Character and Servant-Leadership: Ten Characteristics of Effective, Caring Leaders”, had this to say:
“Our fundamental understanding of character has much to do with the essential traits exhibited by a person. In recent years there has been a growing interest in the nature of character and character education, based upon a belief that positive character traits can be both taught and learned. Many people today are familiar with the Character Counts! (sm) program of the Josephson Institute of Ethics. That program has been adopted by a number of schools and communities nationwide and teaches core values, which they call “Six Pillars of Character.” Those six particular character values are: trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship.”
He continues:
“The literature on leadership includes a number of different listings of character traits as practiced by leaders. I particularly like Warren Bennis’s short list as contained in his book, On Becoming a Leader, in which he identifies, “vision, inspiration, empathy and trustworthiness” as key characteristics of effective leaders. (p. 140). Much of the leadership literature includes as an implicit assumption the belief that positive characteristics can-and-should be encouraged and practiced by leaders. Robert Greenleaf, the originator of the term, “servant-leadership”, is someone who thought and wrote a great deal about the nature of servant-leadership and character.”
In Robert Greenleaf definition of Servant Leadership:
“The servant-leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. The best test is: do those served grow as persons: do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society; will they benefit, or, at least, not be further deprived?”
Larry C. Spears continues:
“With that definition in 1970, retired AT&T executive Robert K. Greenleaf (1904-1990) coined the term servant-leadership and launched a quiet revolution in the way in which we view and practice leadership. Three decades later the concept of servant-leadership is increasingly viewed as an ideal leadership form to which untold numbers of people and organizations aspire. In fact, we are witnessing today an unparalleled explosion of interest in, and practice of, servant-leadership.
We are experiencing a rapid shift in many businesses and not-for-profit organizations–away from the more traditional autocratic and hierarchical models of leadership and toward servant-leadership as a way of being in relationship with others. Servant-leadership seeks to involve others in decision making, is strongly based in ethical and caring behavior, and it enhances the personal growth of workers while improving the caring and quality of organizational life.
The words servant and leader are usually thought of as being opposites. In deliberately bringing those words together in a meaningful way, Robert Greenleaf gave birth to the paradoxical term “servant-leadership.” In the years since then, many of today’s most creative thinkers are writing and speaking about servant-leadership as an emerging leadership paradigm for the twenty-first century. The list is long and includes: James Autry, Warren Bennis, Peter Block, John Carver, Stephen Covey, Max DePree, Joseph Jaworski, James Kouzes, Larraine Matusak, Parker Palmer, M. Scott Peck, Peter
With that definition in 1970, retired AT&T executive Robert K. Greenleaf (1904-1990) coined the term servant-leadership and launched a quiet revolution in the way in which we view and practice leadership. Three decades later the concept of servant-leadership is increasingly viewed as an ideal leadership form to which untold numbers of people and organizations aspire. In fact, we are witnessing today an unparalleled explosion of interest in, and practice of, servant-leadership.
We are experiencing a rapid shift in many businesses and not-for-profit organizations–away from the more traditional autocratic and hierarchical models of leadership and toward servant-leadership as a way of being in relationship with others. Servant-leadership seeks to involve others in decision making, is strongly based in ethical and caring behavior, and it enhances the personal growth of workers while improving the caring and quality of organizational life.
The words servant and leader are usually thought of as being opposites. In deliberately bringing those words together in a meaningful way, Robert Greenleaf gave birth to the paradoxical term “servant-leadership.” In the years since then, many of today’s most creative thinkers are writing and speaking about servant-leadership as an emerging leadership paradigm for the twenty-first century. The list is long and includes: James Autry, Warren Bennis, Peter Block, John Carver, Stephen Covey, Max DePree, Joseph Jaworski, James Kouzes, Larraine Matusak, Parker Palmer, M. Scott Peck, Peter”
He then considers some of the characteristics of Servant-Leadership:
“Listening: Leaders have traditionally been valued for their communication and decision making skills. Although these are also important skills for the servant-leader, they need to be reinforced by a deep commitment to listening intently to others. The servant-leader seeks to identify the will of a group and helps to clarify that will. He or she listens receptively to what is being said and unsaid. Listening also encompasses getting in touch with one’s own inner voice. Listening, coupled with periods of reflection, are essential to the growth and well being of the servant-leader.
Empathy: The servant-leader strives to understand and empathize with others. People need to be accepted and recognized for their special and unique spirits. One assumes the good intentions of co-workers and colleagues and does not reject them as people, even when one may be forced to refuse to accept certain behaviors or performance. The most successful servant-leaders are those who have become skilled empathetic listeners.
Healing: The healing of relationships is a powerful force for transformation and integration. One of the great strengths of servant-leadership is the potential for healing one’s self and one’s relationship to others. Many people have broken spirits and have suffered from a variety of emotional hurts. Although this is a part of being human, servant-leaders recognize that they have an opportunity to help make whole those with whom they come in contact. In his essay, The Servant as Leader, Greenleaf writes, “There is something subtle communicated to one who is being served and led if, implicit in the compact between servant-leader and led, is the understanding that the search for wholeness is something they share.”
Awareness: General awareness, and especially self-awareness, strengthens the servant-leader. Awareness helps one in understanding issues involving ethics, power and values. It lends itself to being able to view most situations from a more integrated, holistic position. As Greenleaf observed: “Awareness is not a giver of solace–it is just the opposite. It is a disturber and an awakener. Able leaders are usually sharply awake and reasonably disturbed. They are not seekers after solace. They have their own inner serenity.”
Persuasion: Another characteristic of servant-leaders is reliance on persuasion, rather than on one’s positional authority, in making decisions within an organization. The servant-leader seeks to convince others, rather than coerce compliance. This particular element offers one of the clearest distinctions between the traditional authoritarian model and that of servant-leadership. The servant-leader is effective at building consensus within groups. This emphasis on persuasion over coercion finds its roots in the beliefs of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)–the denominational body to which Robert Greenleaf belonged.
Conceptualization: Servant-leaders seek to nurture their abilities to dream great dreams. The ability to look at a problem or an organization from a conceptualizing perspective means that one must think beyond day-to-day realities. For many leaders, this is a characteristic that requires discipline and practice. The traditional leader is consumed by the need to achieve short-term operational goals. The leader who wishes to also be a servant-leader must stretch his or her thinking to encompass broader-based conceptual thinking. Within organizations, conceptualization is, by its very nature, the proper role of boards of trustees or directors. Unfortunately, boards can sometimes become involved in the day-to-day operations–something that should always be discouraged–and, thus, fail to provide the visionary concept for an institution.
Trustees need to be mostly conceptual in their orientation, staffs need to be mostly operational in their perspective, and the most effective executive leaders probably need to develop both perspectives within themselves. Servant-leaders are called to seek a delicate balance between conceptual thinking and a day-to-day operational approach.
Foresight: Closely related to conceptualization, the ability to foresee the likely outcome of a situation is hard to define, but easier to identify. One knows foresight when one experiences it. Foresight is a characteristic that enables the servant-leader to understand the lessons from the past, the realities of the present, and the likely consequence of a decision for the future. It is also deeply rooted within the intuitive mind. Foresight remains a largely unexplored area in leadership studies, but one most deserving of careful attention.
Stewardship: Peter Block (author of Stewardship and The Empowered Manager) has defined stewardship as “holding something in trust for another.” Robert Greenleaf’s view of all institutions was one in which CEO’s, staffs, and trustees all played significant roles in holding their institutions in trust for the greater good of society. Servant-leadership, like stewardship, assumes first and foremost a commitment to serving the needs of others. It also emphasizes the use of openness and persuasion, rather than control.
Commitment to the growth of people:
Servant-leaders believe that people have an intrinsic value beyond their tangible contributions as workers. As such, the servant-leader is deeply committed to the growth of each and every individual within his or her organization. The servant-leader recognizes the tremendous responsibility to do everything in his or her power to nurture the personal and professional growth of employees and colleagues. In practice, this can include (but is not limited to) concrete actions such as making funds available for personal and professional development, taking a personal interest in the ideas and suggestions from everyone, encouraging worker involvement in decision-making, and actively assisting laid-off employees to find other positions.
Building community:
The servant-leader senses that much has been lost in recent human history as a result of the shift from local communities to large institutions as the primary shaper of human lives. This awareness causes the servant-leader to seek to identify some means for building community among those who work within a given institution. Servant-leadership suggests that true community can be created among those who work in businesses and other institutions. Greenleaf said, “All that is needed to rebuild community as a viable life form for large numbers of people is for enough servant-leaders to show the way, not by mass movements, but by each servant-leader demonstrating his or her unlimited liability for a quite specific community-related group.”
References
Bennis, W. (1989). On Becoming a Leader. Reading , MA : Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Inc.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1977). Servant-Leadership: A Journey Into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness. Mahwah , NJ : Paulist Press.
Hillman, J. (1996). The Soul’s Code: In Search of Character and Calling. New York : Random House.
Josephson, M. & Hanson, W. (Eds.). (1998). The Power of Character. San Francisco : Jossey Bass.
Kellerman, B. & Matusak, L. (Eds.). (2000). Cutting Edge: Leadership 2000. College Park : James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership.
Spears, L.C. (Ed.). (1998). Insights on Leadership: Service, Stewardship, Spirit and Servant-Leadership. New York : John Wiley & Sons.
Zohar, D. (1997). Rewiring the Corporate Brain. San Francisco : Berrett-Koehler.
This article first appeared in Concepts & Connections (Vol. 8, Issue 3, 2000), a newsletter of the National Clearninghouse for Leadership Programs, located at the University of Maryland .”
****
The similarities of both models (Western and Igbo) has been eloquently treated above by Larry C. Spears (the full article and his references, including other books on Servant-Leadership are recommended).
How then is the Western-world’s ‘Servant-Leadership Model’ different from OHACRACY, the Igbo model of Servant-Leadership?
Leadership in the current civilization or Western Civilization is based on one individual, be it king/queen, emperor/empress, president or prime-minister, etc. The quality of the government either rises or falls from the character of this individual. Since it is very rare to find an individual that has all the above defined characteristics of a good leader, this flaw or pyramidal structural defect is fatal and has led to the continuing failure of most world governments to cater to the welfare of their peoples or to build a better world.
Ohacracy solves this problem with its collective approach to leadership. There is no one leader, but a collection of leaders, with an appointed ‘spokesperson’ for them. The spokesperson is nothing but a mouth piece, an eloquent speaker who can convey the wishes of OHA (the people), after the inverse pyramidal consultation with OHA.
If Ohacracy is such a great system, why have Igbo Leaders going back as far as Maazi Azikiwe, refused to implement it in the Igbo national arena?
This refusal by the Igbo to implement OHACRACY (The Igbo model of ‘Servant-Leadership’) in national government can be explained by the unquenchable taste of Igbo leaders and intelligentsia to belong, and their complete and total belief in and a complete and total embrace of all things Western. This complete embrace of all things western coupled with the immense EGO of the Igbo have continued to cloud their judgment, most importantly, humbleness a quality demanded and praised by our ancestors is no longer the forte of the Igbo.
There have been Igbo leaders that have bucked this trend, Maazi Ojike, Maazi Ibiam, Maazi Opkara, to name a few.
Ohacracy demands that those who aspire to serve understand that they are servants, and serve at the pleasure of OHA (the people). A servant does not elevate him/herself above those they serve. All titles must be shunned, if an explanation is required, a simple “I cannot elevate myself above those I serve” will do. After retirement from service, these titles can then be accepted.
Would the sojourn of Igbo in Nigeria have been any different if this system had been implemented before Igbo agreed to be part of Nigeria ?
Yes, it would have been different. It is important that it be pointed out that the GENOCAUST (genocide and holocaust) against Igbo started as far back as the 1940s.
Maazi Azikiwe was a great dreamer and an intellectual giant, but no matter his intellectual ability, there was no way for him to cover all the possibilities or different permutations alone and without bias, for example, being able to differentiate his great dreams from reality. Zik allowed his dreams to cloud his judgment and most importantly reality. He ignored the writings on the wall, and was ready to sacrifice the lives of thousands of his Igbo nation for a pie in the sky. He forgot that he is Igbo first before any other thing. He paid no attention to the warning of our fore-parents that ‘beauty starts at home’. He dared to try not only the unachievable but the impossible, the bringing together of two diametrically different types of governance, one that elevated it’s leadership to gods – Feudalism, and the other that considered its leaders as servants of the people – Ohacracy, something had to give. As we continue to see, the lives of millions of people, and the near destruction of nations and their way of life is the price we continue to pay for that decision!
The implementation of ohacracy (the Igbo model of Servant-leadership) would have solved this monumental omission by Maazi Azikiwe, he would have been the spokesperson of a council, who would have carefully examined the implications of going into a marriage with partners with nothing in common.
Would Biafra have been any different if this system had been implemented in Biafra ?
Of course, it would have been different. Maazi Ojukwu would have been the spokesperson of just the military council of which he was a member of.
The administrative part of Biafra would have fallen under a different council which would also have elected or selected a spokesperson.
The implications of just this change would have been immense. Today we will be talking about an African miracle, a world power that would have changed the face of Africa , and brought sanity and pride to this once great continent and to all blacks everywhere.
Igbo leadership – the Servant-Leadership Model: OHACRACY
“IN IGBO SOCIETY POWER BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE. Ndiigbo elect their own leaders and tell their leaders what to do and how to lead them. Ndi Igbo have never accepted “rulers”, not even when the British imposed warrant chiefs on them.
Describing the political philosophy and organization of the Igbo, Cronje in his book ‘The World and Nigeria ’ stated as follows:
“In the East indirect rule failed altogether. There were no big chiefs, emirates or empires, which could be adapted to the needs of British administrators. The Eastern people lived in village groups administered by councils which were presided over by senior men who held office by virtue of their personal ability as much as by age or lineage” [Cronje, S. 1972, The World and Nigeria, Sidgwick and Jackson, London]
Reporting on the position, status and influence of chiefs and natural rulers in the Eastern Region of Nigeria, G. I. Jones stated as follows:
“ …the community particularly in the Ibo(Igbo) area is not prepared to surrender its legislative authority to any chiefs, elders or other traditional office holders…”
Individualism and Communitarism:
Philosophically, Ndi Igbo maintain a very delicate balance between INDIVIDUALISM and COMMUNITARISM.
Very early in the socialization process the Igbo child is taught that he is the master of his destiny. He learns that success in any task, which he or she undertakes, is his responsibility and that he will equally take personal responsibility for any failures. He is instructed to strive for excellence, success and status and is taught that his status in society will be the result of his personal achievement and not the result of any ascription.
In a rather paradoxical way Igbo Society also emphasizes COMMUNITAL relationship.
When they organize themselves into age grades, they undertake community projects such as building roads, hospitals, civic centers, health clinics etc. All these are meant to emphasize to the individual the indispensability of the group, the community to their survival. The community is not seen as just a collection of individuals. It is seen as a unique relationship in which the survival and happiness of the individual is intricately interwoven with the survival and happiness of the community to which the individual belongs.
Beginning with the family and extending outward to Umunne (extended family), Umunna (kindred), Village (Ogbe) and town (Obodo, Ala), Igbo society is seen not as a collection of individuals each with his own rights and liberties in an atomistic manner but rather as collections of individuals in groups that systematically and progressively become enlarged. The structure can be likened to concentric circles that expand outward in a systematic manner, the larger circles containing the smaller circles and yet allowing them to maintain their identities and structures and at the same time using the identities and structures of the smaller circles to maintain the integrity and strength of the larger circles in a rather symbolic manner. Just as symbiotic relationship in living organisms requires careful maintenance of this delicate balance for the survival of each organism, Igbo society require careful maintenance of this delicate balance for her survival. The importance of group affiliation in Igbo philosophy and worldview is captured in Igbo proverbs and idioms. For example, “Ofu osisi adi eme ofia.” [A tree does not make a forest.] “Ofu onye nie onwe ya aka ya aputagi ukwu aputa.” [If a person buries himself, one of his hands or legs must show above ground.] “Onye gbara umu nna ya mgba isi n’ebu ya aja aja” [He who wrestles with his kindred folk will have his hair covered with sand.] “Onye kwulu so ya, ijiji atagbue ya.” [Even flies will devour him who stands alone.]
How is this apparent contradiction between individualism and communitarism resolved? Individualism provides the philosophical base for individual achievement and the strive towards excellence, while communitarism acts as a counterweight to the temptation so often abundant in selfish, survivalist, individualistic, ascendancy-inspired activities (survival of the fittest philosophy) to trample upon and possibly destroy others including relatives and friends in the scramble to get to the top.
Because an individual sees himself as an integral part of the community, he or she feels obligated to protect the welfare, integrity and honor of that community by not engaging in any acts that will be prejudicial to the good of the community, and by doing those things that will promote the welfare and survival of the community. The community on the other hand spreads its wings of protection and care over the individual, but wastes no time in calling an erring member of the community to order. On rare occasions it imposes such harsh sanction as ostracism or even banishment on an erring or recalcitrant member. This socialization enables an Igbo child early in life to develop the all-important principle of self-control in their daily activities. The delicate balance serves two purposes:
1.) It preserves the integrity of the community by shielding it from external and internal intrigues and acts of sabotage aimed at destroying that integrity.
2.) It protects the individual from destructive behaviors of other people as well as their own propensity towards self-destructive or community-destructive activities.
Thus the community protects and preserves the individual just as the individual protects and preserves the community.
Representation:
For example, if an Umunna (an extended family) is involved in a negotiation, consultation or conflict resolution with other groups at the level of the village or town (Ogbe, Ama, Obodo), the diokpa becomes the spokesperson for his Umunna. Consultation with members of his Umunna will precede all-important decisions that he will render. If he is requested to render an opinion on the spot by the Obodo (Town), or if he suspects that the opinion he is about to render will be regarded unfavorably by his Umunna, or if he is faced with a totally new development, that he was not prepared for, he will immediately request leave of the Obodo to consult with his Umunna through a procedure called “igba izu or izuzu”, before rending the opinion. During the izu, which is usually done standing up in a circle a good distance away from the Assembly, all the members of the Umunna will have an opportunity to air their views on the issue at hand.
The discussion goes on for a few minutes and quickly they arrive at a consensus on what their leader should present as their view. When they get back to the assembly the diokpa or some other person delegated to present their view renders their opinion as clearly as he can. He will usually end by looking back at his Umunna who may be standing or sitting behind him, and intoning in a clear voice: “Okwa nu ya ibe anyi nu” or “okwa ihe unu kwuru” (is this what you resolved?). And all the members will answer in unison, “iyaa obu ya” (yes it is).
The diokpa maintains his authority, power and status by virtue of his credibility, good judgement and excellent performance. He does not expose his umunna to ridicule by engaging in corruption, immorality, or injustice. He does not let the Umunna suffer humiliation, injury, injustice or other form of disability at community deliberations. He will do anything and everything within legal limits to protect the interest, rights and privileges of the Umunna and to ensure that their voice is not lost at the Community Assembly. If he does this, his Umunna will be very proud of him even when they lose a case. If for any reason the diokpa consistently exposes the Umunna to ridicule, injustice, humiliation, injury or other forms of disability, the power and authority given to him could be taken away by the Umunna and handed over to another person, who the Umunna believes is capable of protecting their interest. Usually, it will be the next oldest person, but sometimes it could be a younger person who may have proved his capacity to represent the Umunna effectively. If the diokpa commits a minor infraction, or engages in behavior unexpected of his elevated status, the Umunna will reprimand him respectfully.
This same procedure of representation is repeated at the level of the Town Union or Community Assembly. Each town is made up of several villages. The Town Union government is made up of officers elected from all the villages. Each village elects a stipulated number of representatives to the Town government. In electing the representatives to the town government, each village makes deliberate effort to have at least one representative from each Umunna where possible. These representatives know that it is their responsibility to project and protect the interest of the village at the level of the Town government. They take this responsibility very seriously aware that if they fail to project the views of the village, they will not only be recalled but may also face severe socio-psychological sanction such as shaming or even economic sanction such as a fine. In addition to representing their village, they are aware that they are ambassadors of their Umunna.
Therefore they strive very hard to avoid any actions that could portray their Umunna in bad light e.g. taking bribes, being a drunk. Because of the importance, which Ndi Igbo attach to the “representative” function or duty, they adopt very stringent parameters in choosing these representatives. Such parameters include demonstrated wisdom, knowledge, honesty, oratory, and other achievement characteristics like bravery, wealth, titles, and valor in battle. It is important to emphasize that unlike what happens in Western democracies where money and affluence seem to be the determining characteristics for election to representative office, in Igbo culture, the value or quality of a person is not determined in dollar and cents or naira and kobo. It is determined by the individual performance on the assigned task. Therefore money and material possession do not constitute supreme parameters in selecting an individual to represent his Umunna or Village.
Because an individual’s wealth or financial status does not play an overwhelming role in determining an individual’s suitability for election to representative office, the group the individual is representing does not feel overawed or intimidated to recall the representative any time they conclude that he is not living up to their expectation. In a similar way, the deference and respect accorded an elder in the socio-political arrangement in Igbo Society is not seen as willy-nilly obedience to the elder. No. The elder strives at all times to earn, maintain and therefore retain this respect through exemplary conduct at all times. Failure to do so might result in loss of respect, status and withdrawal of this authority by the group.”
Leadership Series
By Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization
Conclusion (Message from the Ancients):
The common thread from this study can be summarized as follows:
1. “Nku di namba na eyelu mba nri – The foundation of each system is built on the culture, tradition and history of the people”.
2. Odi be ndi – The philosophical basis of the world view of the citizens.
3. Uwa Awughi Otu – An outright rejection of the “ONE SIZE FITS ALL” Mentality is obvious.
“The ancient lgbo contemplated this phenomenon of worldview and concluded that there is no universal worldview. Uwa Awughi Otu! Different men, different worldviews! One man, one worldview!” Maazi Osuagwu
4. Igbo leadership concept totally rejects Ndi Ochichi (Rulership), but embraces Ndi Ndu hence unwavering courage based upon knowledge of self, culture, philosophy and tradition (mara onwe gi).
5. Keen sense of wisdom (vision, outright imagination, mastery of details), justice and self-control. You must be armed with “Ofo na Ogu”, “Ezi okwu bu Ndu”, without the spirit of fairness, love, equity, and justice, self-control; leadership transforms to rulership.
6. There must exist a cooperative spirit, willingness to assume full responsibility and above all sacrifice, humility and selflessness.
7. Must at all times be servant of the people, more emphasis on deeds, less emphasis on titles; the competent leader requires no “title” to give him the respect of OHA.
The present chaotic nature of the modern African states and organizations built on “ONE SIZE FITS ALL” vindicates [3].
VISION:
IGBO CULTURE: Establishment of IGBO house in every city where there are Ndi Igbo.
To actively research, document and practice IGBO culture and tradition.
IGBO EDUCATION: Establishment of IGBO schools in every city where there are Ndi Igbo,
with a strong emphasis in speaking, reading and writing IGBO language.
IGBO FAMILY: Re-establishment and emphasizing the IGBO family values and the upbringing of our children in IGBO ways.
IGBO LANGUAGE: Establishment of IGBO newspapers, radio, television and cinema, theater,
Internet and other communications services.
IGBO LEADERSHIP: Re-establishment of the True and Time Tested Collective Leadership
models with the Elder-statesman/stateswoman as the highest achievable
position, a position that can only be attained through a life long service to
Ndi IGBO.
IGBO MONEY: Promotion of the strong economic financial growth and success of Ndi IGBO worldwide with emphasis in establishing and developing IGBO banks, companies, industries, real estate, etc.
IGBO NATION: Establishment of the Republic of Biafara based on Igbo culture, tradition and philosophy.
Committee on Information
Ekwe Nche Research Institute/Organization
P. O. B
Chi
Phone: 773-206-9401
Website:www.ekwenche.org
E-mail:
ekwenche@hotmail.com
Subject: Open Letter to Mazi Kanu
OPEN LETTER TO MAZI NNAMDI KANU
THE DIRECTOR RADIO BIAFRA
SUPREME LEADER
INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA(IPOB)
Umuahia, Abia State
Nigeria.
Dear Mazi,
It is a great pleasure to reach your esteemed self through this medium. It became necessary at this critical time of the year when governorship electioneering campaign is set to commence in my darling state Anambra. I could not have reached you through no other means than the open letter having failed largely due to the high walls erected by over zealous inner caucus members of your group IPOB. I was also denied your telephone contact by disciples and apostles with Baltic claims of guards almost always in the habit of shielding you away from suspected people of opposite stance.
Mazi, I sincerely write you this minute, firstly, to congratulate you on your dogged effort to give Ndigbo a true sense of belonging in the burgeoning political irrelevance since 2015 general elections, unfortunate era of political blunder witnessing majority of our people who believed Dr Goodluck Jonathan was Azikiwe of the erroneous moment. when all the eggs laid in one rickety basket got smashed and the catastrophic aftermath.
Through unpatriotically orchestrated media onslaught against the Federal Government of Nigeria, Mazi you have overwhelmingly succeeded in rejuvenating the centurion call to end the brazen marginalization of the Southeastern Nigerian. Now, powers that be are looking eastwards and paying greater attention to our needs, yearnings and aspirations as legitimate constituent members of the federation. Events of the moment have objectively rekindled the fire of brotherhood once lost amongst Ndigbo, that it appears we are speaking undoubtedly in coordinated voices of late.
Much as I would like to continue pouring sincere encomium on your recent profound achievements as an activists(because I don’t know you as a separatist) permit me to beckon your attention and redirect your focus on issues capable of erasing the hard earned and wildly celebrated accolades enrooted in the struggle to better the lives of the people of Igbo origin.
while in London championing the Radio Biafra activities, Mazi your stint in broadcast greatly influenced the thoughts and lifestyle of your audience who quickly keyed into your laudable project and rendered massive support in kind and cash for the IPOB cause. Critics had posited that It was vulgarity and hate speeches on Radio Biafra that shutdown Igbo elites and revered intellectuals interest in the IPOB cause. This was evident when you were thrown into jail, awaiting trials.
Mazi, I remember with nostalgia in 2013 when the Radio Biafra transmitter meant for Enugu was procured and you were shopping for the Director, you got connected to me through one Lady Rita Anigbogu your former deputy (now Leader of MOBIN) who was a strong member of Igbo cultural ambassadors in Lagos. Severally, you engaged me on phone urging me to get in involved in Radio Biafra activities, even proposed that I handled the Enugu Station, which I declined after listening to your live broadcast via links you sent. Obviously, I was quite uncomfortable with your confrontational mannerisms as carelessly exhibited on air.
Unarguably, the self- determination gospel was clear but the approach and methodology was uncouthly, the style archaic, and the struggle a hard buy. Soon, it became a battle for survival, the long arm of the law was visited on you, and co travellers. Many of us though not comfortable with your style began to cry out for your freedom. I still recollect and vividly too a YouTube video that went viral demanding for your release. Yes I had to make the demand to persuade a fast tracked litigation processes (see Anambra APC GUBER ASPIRANT CALLS FOR MAZI NNAMDI KANU RELEASE on YouTube). Eventually, you were released on stringent bail conditions as it were, but you have thrown caution in the wind and relapsed into your stereotyped style of agitation.
Mazi, you should know by now that Ndigbo have risen in demand for equity and freedom from the firm grip of injustices meted on the region by past and present political leadership in Nigeria. Also, You should know that Ndigbo cannot settle for another civil war because we are yet to recover from the last mortal combat that sucked innocent bloods. You should know that in politics, it is better to dialogue than to fight.
Demanding for ‘Referendum’ that is presently not enshrined in the Nigeria constitution cannot be attained without due dialogue, and enduring intellectual gymnastics cum political persuasions. You should know by now that the crowd you are talking to at every rally cannot lobby for the attainment of the set goals. They know nothing more than ‘give us Biafra. Yes they sleep it, walk it, talk it and eat it but cannot provoke strategical and tactical means of achieving it.
You should know that majority of your fans who now claim IPOB membership need to be given the right orientation for it has become clear to everyone that they are ignorant of what referendum is and the procedural approach. You should know that character attributes and dispositions of your fans and fanatic followers are getting issues hugely complicated. It’s high time you called them to order and let them know what you know.
Mazi, when you told your fans and fanatic followers to boycott elections in Anambra, and they went about town shouting “no election does that not tell you what lies ahead is defeat against the original plan, against the struggle , against the dream of a better Nation devoid of injustices, inequities, and unfairness. Don’t you think your strategy this time will set you against the rights of people supposedly being fought for? Don’t you think your inability to step down from the emperor stool and dialogue with relevant Igbo associations, think thanks ,elder state men, Leaders of thoughts, seasoned legal luminaries, traditional rulers, clergymen, would give a clearer direction?
Truth be told , your fans and fanatic followers need to be enlightened on the best and surest way to make the dream of a better nation possible. It is not late to call them to order and explain better in the language they understand. No one is more Igbo than the other. No one is more BIAFRAN in spirit than the other. There is no family in Igbo land without a scar of Nigeria/Biafra Civil war. Call your ardent followers to order. Civil disobedience is mostly better observed and or practised by civil minds!
I hope that this letter will get to you before the commencement of electioneering campaigns in Anambra this September. I’m quite optimistic your fans and unrepentant followers have their benefactors in the race for Guber seat. Surely, they will do the needful to remain relevant, in the general scheme of things.
God bless you for reading this letter from a core BIAFRAN in Nigeria.
Regards
Comr Eze Harris Chuma
Ogene Ndigbo
Ezeomenani
Pls share until it gets to Mazi NNAMDI KANU!
On Jul 31, 2017 03:13, “Ugochukwu” <
ugoae@fastmail.com> wrote:
When he was the governor of Abia State, he did nothing. The city of Aba was a huge trash dumpster under him, after him, and still today. If you really want a present-day typical Igbo intellectual, do no look further than Dr Orji Uzor Kalu. Notice the prefix to him name: Dr.
This man is representative of an Igbo since 1980 – more noise, more ego, more mouth, and nothing to show for the prefix next to his name. It is always about their self-interest at the expense of the collective. Even a 5 year old child in Western world can think and reason better than some of these useless “intellectuals”
=====================
Biafra is not possible, says Orji Uzor Kalu
LOKOJA – Former governor of Abia State, Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu has said that the agitation for Biafra country by the Igbos cannot be made possible now, calling on the Igbo to rather channeled their energy for Igbo to become President of Nigeria.
Kalu said rather than despite energy for secession they should up their political ante and play politics of inclusion which can earn the Igbo the nation’s president sooner. He also take a swipe on Governor Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti state over his comment in a recent interview that he (Kalu) was misleading the Igbo to embrace the All Progressive Congress, and also on his (Fayose) comments on President Muhammed Buhari.
Dr. Kalu made this statement in Lokoja on Saturday while delivering a lecture at an Igbo gathering for the inauguration of Igbo Support Group for Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State, which he titled: “Mainstreaming Igbo in Nigeria Politics”.
He said, “We must fix Nigeria to work for all inclusive of all aspiration of all. We (Igbo) have made progress but it is not yet Uhuru for us. This is not the time to pop champagne but a time for conscious reflection on the road we have passed, where we are and where we intend to be in the years ahead.
“As Igbos, we must stop listening to people who says Biafra is possible. If we want Biafra we must first ensure that referendum is included in the constitutional review. “Nigeria should be thinking
“Nigeria should be thinking of annexing other Africa country rather than dividing it. China is 2 billion and not talking about secession. But Nigeria with less than 200 million populace is talking secession.”
On the recent quit notice giving to Igbo by the Arewa youth, Kalu said, “Recently, we have witnessed a rise in ethnic activism. A lot of people have expressed fears that Nigeria may be coming to an end. Well in politics, you have to entertain all manner of fears while working on possibilities. However, because of that fears, we have seen a ‘quit notice’ order from some northern youth groups. I will focus on the possibilities. And the first is that a United Nigeria is an easier possibility than a balkanized country. I see a more united country rising from the ashes of hate and fear.
“However, the issues raised have causes some to wonder if the Igbo have leaders. Of course, Igbo’s leaders are talking and dialoguing. In politics, you often dialogue more than you talk. So in managing a diverse country like Nigeria, you need to dialogue and communicate rightly. That way you will be able to manage tension. In this regard, I want to specially thank the leadership of Ohaneze Ndigbo led by Chief John Nnia Nwodo for the matured way they handle the quit notice.
“People are naturally attached to their religion, customs, and tradition. People take offence at the abuse of their religion, customs and tradition. This is because any such abuse is considered an affront. I am not sure of any Igbo man who will like a non-Igbo resident in his village transgressing the custom of his people. If you will not like that, don’t do it to another person. That is the golden rule. If you do just that, the source of friction and trouble will be defeated.
“I believe the Igbo are in a better position to understand that all politics, like they say, is local. It therefore suggest that the Igbo must see the need to align properly and seek strategic partnership of other interest groups and political blocs to achieve whatever developmental ideas that they have; such as the shoot for the presidency.
“In politics, you market yourself and make yourself a strategic ally. It is when you achieve this that you put your cards on the table. If the Igbo work themselves into a very strategic political partner, while not putting their eggs into one basket, we can then put the cards on the table before our partners to determine what we get for and what they get from us. We cannot however do that when we remain antagonistic to one another. We cannot achieve it when we scare everyone away with hate. We cannot achieve it if we think its Igbo and Igbo alone. We must build necessary networks. We must build alliances across political divide. This are very important so that our own stories can be told and heard too. If we don’t build such alliances, we may not be able to market our demands.”
On Governor Ayodele Fayose, he said, “I call on my friend, Governor Ayodele Fayose to focus his criticism of President Muhammed Buhari on his performance rather than his health or family issues. When I was a governor I was at logger head with former president Olusegun Obasanjo but it was purely on government activities. I never went personal. Fayose should take a cue too.
“His (Fayose) recent interview in the Interview Magazine where he said I was deceiving the Igbo’s into joining APC is uncalled for. I’m taking the Igbo to the central stage of politics and decision taking. I was a founder of PDP, if PDP were to be a company, I would own 90 percent. PDP Balkanized Nigeria. PDP cannot come back to power. So I advised Fayose to stop hate speeches. It is distractive, bad, not brotherly and against the spirit of brotherhood. We must not allow our country just like the Rwanda genocide to thread the path of hate speeches.”
He however concluded that Igbo can no longer be ignore in the politics of Nigeria, just that the Igbo has not seen themselves so, “Igbo can no longer be ignored or shove aside. If Igbo stop paying taxes in Lagos, the IGR of Lagos will drop by 60 percent, because 70 percent of manufacturing and commercial activities in Lagos is owned or control by Igbo. Igbo must find a new political discourse, show interest in how in the past their areas were developed on personal contributions without federal or state interest.”
Source:
