‘Creation of new emirates an assault on our culture’, Sanusi defends Kano unity

The Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II, delved into the controversies surrounding his removal by the previous government and his subsequent reinstatement by the current administration on Saturday.

This is as he attributed it to the current administration’s recognition of the importance of traditional institutions in governance.

He reaffirmed his commitment to continuing his work on social reforms and supporting the welfare of Kano people.

However, he maintained that he was not afraid of being removed again and that he only wished that the Emirate should remain one.

The monarch disclosed this and many more in an interview with Saturday Sun.

He asserted that the current issues stem from divisions manufactured by the previous government of Abdullah Ganduje).

This is as he added that the people of Kano, a largely homogeneous society, never asked to be divided into new emirates.

When asked how he intended to manage the post-reinstatement crises, Sanusi said, “You ask about managing the fallout. You see, this was something created and manufactured by the previous government. The people of Kano never asked to be divided. In parts of this country, you have had emirates and kingdoms created, and you can understand that.

He said, “If you go to Kaduna State, at one time, you had everything under Zaria. But you had huge Christian minorities, different ethnic groups, and chiefdoms were created for them. It makes sense if they felt that they did not want to be under the emirate system or under what they saw as a self-denial system.

“But Kano is a largely homogeneous society. If you see the Christians in Kano, they are part of us. They don’t say they want to leave us. They’re not asking for a different system. Nobody. If you go to Tudun Wada, we have Christians. You go to Rano; we have Christians. We had an issue in Rogo. You may remember that there was an issue. People went and burnt the church. I went there, took out my own personal money, and rebuilt the church.

“So, we are one people. Nobody asked for new emirates. So, what we are dealing with is a situation where somebody divides us. And actually, when you create these things, some people get some privileges. They didn’t ask for it, but they’ve enjoyed it for four years.”

Sanusi asked how the people who have enjoyed what they do not deserve for years now will react.

He continued, “Now, when they lose it, it’s a problem. But the problem is not what has happened today. It is what happened four years ago. If it had not been done, we would not be in this situation today.

“We are one family; we are one people. Somebody comes and divides us up. Even in this family, he takes one emirate and gives it to a part of the family.

“Now, when people enjoy it for four years and you take it away from them, it becomes a problem.

“The Yolawa; the family of Madakin; the Jobawa; the family of the Makama. These are kingmakers. You now take two of the four kingmaker families, Madakin and Makama, and say they should go and report, not to Kano, but to an emirate that you created in Bichi. Something that was run by a village head who was a district head. How? You make a law and say, these are the kingmakers in Kano.

“We have had four traditional kingmakers in all our history. Because you like a particular individual, you just decided, as a governor, that we now have five kingmakers. Out of nowhere, you created a kingmaker position for an individual.”

The monarch further stated that the situation in Kano is not about him personally, but about Kano’s history and culture.

Sanusi insisted that the creation of new emirates disrupted the community.

“You’re dealing with Kano. You’re not dealing with me. It’s not about me as a person. It’s about our history and our culture. How does he become a kingmaker? The other kingmakers, the other four, how did their families become kingmakers? When they went and waged the Jihad, when they came and risked their lives, and when they reached this agreement, those four chose the emir.

“We are not superior to them. We’re all part of the Jihad. And they agreed that, for peace, we don’t want to have three, four, or five ruling houses; we’ll allow you to produce the emir, but we will decide who becomes the emir. These are the four.

“So even in those emirates that they created, what they had done was destroy the people. But we who appoint them as district heads know the families from which we select the district head.

“I am making this point so you understand that this is not about me versus somebody. This was an entire assault on a system.

“Even if you want to do it, if it had been well motivated, if you sat down with us to discuss, with people of Rano or people of Gaya, if genuinely they say they wanted an Emirate and the government said we want to do an Emirate, there’s a way of doing it. You sit down, you look at the history. Okay, who are the ruling families? How do you do it? What is the process? And you do it in line with our custom and tradition,” the monarch enthused.

He also faulted the law to bring about creation.

“Kano Emirate was not created by the Nigerian Constitution. The Emirate existed before Nigeria.

“The Kano Emirate existed before the Sokoto Jihad. Even Uthman Danfodio did not create the Kano Emirate. The emirate was there. All that happened was that some of his disciples waged a Jihad and conquered Kano. But Kano was in existence.

“You will never find a law in the Nigerian Constitution or any law that created the Kano Emirate,” he declared.

Meanwhile, the monarch also explained why he did not challenge his removal in court.

He noted that this was due to his belief that being chosen as an Emir was God’s decision, and if God decided it was time to leave, so be it.

Answering the question, he said, “I didn’t challenge it for a number of reasons. I have told you that I don’t have a fundamental right to be an emir. I am one of hundreds of princes. God chose me.

“And if God says I should leave, for me, I take it that God knows better than me why I had to leave. Okay, let’s say I go to court.

“Let me even say this; I just got a letter that said I had been dethroned for insubordination. I had never been queried for insubordination. The details of the insubordination were not given. I had not been given any chance to defend myself.

“So, it was clear that the state and the federal governments had both decided that it was time for me to go. Okay?

“So, let’s even assume that the court said I should come back. Do you think I was looking forward to working with that government? Would I have been happy as an Emir in the last three years working with that government?”