“If this is a fight for Benue, then everyone who represents Benue must speak. If it is a Federal Government policy, let those who support or oppose it say so openly”.
BY ELIJAH TERDOO IKPANOR
The controversy surrounding the Federal Government’s proposed pilot ranching programme in Benue State has unfortunately taken an increasingly political and misleading dimension. Rather than interrogating the policy from the standpoint of constitutional responsibility, land ownership, security, agriculture and the legitimate interests of the people of Benue, some voices have chosen to place the entire burden of the controversy on Governor Hyacinth Alia. This approach is neither fair nor intellectually honest.
The fundamental question that should be asked is why Governor Alia is being accused of preparing to surrender Benue land to Fulani herdsmen over a policy initiated at the Federal Government level, while Benue’s representatives at the National Assembly, leaders of the ruling party and other political stakeholders have remained comparatively silent. If the issue is genuinely about protecting Benue land, then the responsibility to speak should not belong to the Governor alone. The defense of Benue’s territorial integrity and agricultural interests is a collective responsibility that should engage every elected representative and political stakeholder in the state.
Personally, I believe I have both the moral standing and the personal history to speak about the proposed pilot ranching programme in Benue State. I am not approaching this issue as a detached commentator, nor am I speaking today because it has suddenly become politically convenient.
For years, I have been part of a group of Benue people who stood firmly against the invasion, occupation and attempted control of our ancestral land by armed Fulani herdsmen. We marched through the streets of Makurdi and Abuja, raised our voices in protest, and demanded an end to the killings, destruction of farms, displacement of communities and policies of the Federal Government that, in our considered view, appeared to undermine the rights and security of our people. It is precisely because of that history that I believe I should speak about the proposed pilot ranching programme now being discussed for Benue State and its politicization. My position is, and will remain, simple: Benue land must be protected, Benue people must be protected, and any policy on ranching must serve the interests of the people whose land is involved.
Nevertheless, for Governor Alia, there is a fundamental distinction between a Federal Government policy proposal and a personal policy of the Governor of Benue State. The fact that Benue has been identified as one of the states being considered for a pilot ranching programme does not, by itself, establish that Governor Alia has offered Benue land to Fulani herdsmen. Neither does it justify the increasingly popular political narrative that the Governor is personally negotiating away the ancestral lands of the people of Benue. Such a serious allegation requires evidence, not speculation. If Governor Alia has indeed offered land, the public deserves to know where the land is, who owns it, what instrument was used for the allocation, who the beneficiaries are and what conditions govern the arrangement. Until such evidence is presented, it is unfair to transform a Federal Government initiative into a personal policy of the Governor.
Governor Alia is the Governor of Benue State, but he is not the Federal Government of Nigeria. National policies concerning agriculture, livestock development, food security and ranching involve federal institutions and federal political actors. If there is disagreement with such a policy, the appropriate response should be to interrogate the policy itself and engage the Federal Government directly. It is therefore curious that a federal policy suddenly becomes an “Alia policy” simply because Benue has been listed among the states considered for its implementation. If the policy is unacceptable, why are the loudest critics not demanding a clear position from the Federal Government? Why are they not demanding that the National Assembly members representing Benue explain their positions? Why is Governor Alia being singled out?
These questions become even more important when one considers the silence of Benue’s representatives at the National Assembly. Benue has elected senators and members of the House of Representatives whose constitutional responsibilities include legislation, oversight and holding the Federal Government accountable. If a Federal Government policy is perceived to threaten the interests of Benue, the National Assembly is one of the most important platforms through which such a policy should be interrogated. Yet, instead of a coordinated and clearly articulated position from Benue’s federal legislators, the political conversation appears to have been reduced largely to what Governor Alia should or should not say. Where are the senators and members of the House of Representatives? Have they endorsed the proposal? Have they rejected it? Have they demanded clarification from the Federal Government? Have they consulted their constituents? Have they requested details concerning the proposed locations, ownership arrangements and beneficiaries of the proposed ranches? The people of Benue deserve to hear their representatives.
Also, the silence of the major political stakeholders within the ruling party from Benue State is equally difficult to understand. What is particularly troubling is when such political actors choose the safer route of scapegoating Governor Alia. By directing public anger exclusively at the Governor, they can appear to be defending Benue while avoiding a direct confrontation with the Federal Government.
Let us know that defending Benue’s land does not require inventing facts about Governor Alia or attributing to him decisions he has not made. One can oppose a Federal Government policy without falsely representing it as a personal initiative of the Governor. One can demand safeguards without accusing the Governor of surrendering the state. One can insist that Benue land must remain protected without turning a complex national policy question into a political weapon against an individual.
Governor Alia should not be made the sole spokesman for every political institution in Benue. He cannot answer on behalf of senators who have chosen not to speak. He cannot answer for members of the House of Representatives. He cannot answer for party leaders who have remained silent, nor can he answer for federal officials from the State.
The most important question, therefore, should not simply be whether Governor Alia is “giving Benue land to Fulani herdsmen.” The more responsible question should be whether there is an actual land allocation by the state government.
Until the above question is answered with facts and evidence, branding Governor Hyacinth Alia as a Governor who intends to surrender Benue land remains an allegation rather than an established fact. The political class must, therefore, resist the temptation to turn a complex Federal Government policy into another avenue for political scapegoating.
The land of Benue belongs to its people, and protecting that land is a collective responsibility. It is therefore unfair to make Governor Hyacinth Alia the sole target of criticism over a Federal Government policy while those who have the constitutional, political and institutional responsibility to interrogate that policy remain largely silent.
If this is a fight for Benue, then everyone who represents Benue must speak. If it is a Federal Government policy, let those who support or oppose it say so openly. And if politicians seeking the votes of Benue people truly believe the state’s land is at risk, they owe the electorate more than carefully calculated rhetoric and theatrics. They owe them a clear position, courage and accountability. Governor Alia should not be made the scapegoat for everybody else’s silence.
…Dr. Elijah Terdoo Ikpanor writes from Tsar – Mbaduku, Vandeikya LGA, Benue State
