CUSTOMARY LAND TENURE SYSTEM IN SOUTH-WESTERN NIGERIA
Land tenure system in the South Western Nigeria show
a marked variation and have also been subject to considerable change in the
course of present century under the influence of increasing population
densities and the spread of cocoa. The cocoa industry first develop in the Western
areas: Ilaro, Agege, Abeokuta, Ibadan and Ijebu. As the trees in these areas
have aged, the centre of production has gradually moved east to Ondo, Akure and
Owo and in some western areas kola has replaced cocoa entirely.
According
to Eades (1980), Land tenure is a question
of great complexity and only a very schematic account can be given
here. Three important points should be made
at the outset.
·
First a distinction has to be made between
the right to use land
and rights of full ownership,
particularly the right to alienate it. In many cases throughout Yorubaland, the
two do not coincide.
·
Second,
as land becomes more valuable, either because of its increasing scarcity
or its potential for cash crops, conflict
over access to, and control of, land will increase, and an increasing quantum
of rights will be asserted over it. As Lloyd (1962) remarks of Ondo land tenure, “while land has little scarcity
or commercial value it will be described as communal: but as soon as it becomes
valuable the descent groups currently using it will begin to claim amount to
full ownership”. In different areas of Yorubaland, ownership of land is
variously thought of as being vested in the ruler on behalf of the community,
as being vested in descent groups, or as being vested in individuals. In Ondo,
the position, according to Lloyd (1962), is that the ruler claims that all land
belongs to him on behalf of the community. An Ondo man may farm anywhere in the
kingdom provided that if he farms within one hour’s walk (3 - 4 miles) 0f subordinate
town, he must get the permission of “Oloja” (ruler) of the town ; he may not be
disturbed in his possession of land, but should he abandon it the land reverts
to the community. The Ondo rules may reflect Benin influence: in the Benin
Kingdom, land is vested in the community rather than in descent groups.
However, it appears that Ondo descent groups have asserted rights of ownership
over particular tracts of land, particularly on the perimeter of the capital
and in areas suitable for cocoa-planting, where they are demanding annual
payments (isakole) for the use of the land.
·
Thirdly, a sharp distinction as to be
drawn between the rights that a member of a kingdom can have in its land the
rights which can be acquired by an outsider.
In many cases, outsiders can become
tenants, but cannot claim rights
of ownership over land, and as the
scarcity of land increases, the more
rigidly this rule may be applied.
According
to Eades (1980), rights in land may be vested in a variety of social groups
which may be defined in political, residential or kinship terms, or a
combination of these. Residentially defined groups include communities,
quarters and villages, while groups based on kinship include lineages of
various depths and sizes, extended families and households. In the Ondo area,
for example, substantial rights remain vested in the community while in
Abeokuta, most land is held by individuals (Rowling, 1952; Lloyd, 1962). In
most areas the important unit of land ownership is the lineage, or idile. Criteria
for lineage membership are by no means
uniform, and in particular recognition of the validity of matrilateral links
(i.e. the mother's side), is variable. In general, while there is a fairly
strong patrilineal ideology, in practice kinship links of other kinds, as well
as co-residence, may form the basis for participation in lineage affairs and
access to land. Lloyd (1962) records of some areas that lineage land was
reallocated annually to members, and that in Ado Ekiti lineage members required
the permission of the lineage to plant permanent crops. In general, whether
land is obtained through membership of a community or lineage or through inheritance, the wider group exercises little
control over its use, and the individual is free to plant either food or tree
crops.
Descent
group control over land is more usual. This is the pattern in Ibadan, Ijebu
and Ekiti. Within the descent
group, land is allocated according to need. A farmer
can use land allocated to him and
can pass it on to his children, but usually he cannot alienate it without the
permission of the descent group as a whole. In the case of large descent groups
a process of partition has often taken place. The land is divided between segments
which can dispose of it without reference to the other segments and this
process of fragmentation has reached its fullest extent in Egba, where it is
common to have land rights vested in individual farmers (Lloyd, 1962).
In
Ibadan descent-group control of land has remained strong, despite the early
introduction of cocoa. In the 19th century the leading warriors and their followers
claimed large tracts of land, and they maintained control over them into the colonial
period, establishing a tradition of corporate ownership. On the introduction of
cocoa, hunters who acted as guides to Ibadan farmers looking for land in the
forest suitable for cocoa began to claim rights of ownership over it
themselves. Their ownership was marked by the initial gifts they received from
the farmers, and by annual payments of isakole thereafter. At first these
were nominal payments recognising ownership, rather than an economic rental. The
tenants could remain permanently, and pass their usufructuary rights on to
their children who continued to pay isakole
but they had no right to alienate the
land itself (Eades, 1980).
According
to Eades (1980), Land rights took a different form in Egba, where a free
market in land had developed
before 1880, before the arrival of cocoa. European concepts of ownership had
been introduced by the Saro repatriates to Abeokuta. After 1880 re-colonisation
of land abandoned during the 1820s was stimulated by the introduction of the
new crop, and the elders of the abandoned towns, now living in Abeokuta, began
to reallocate land to individual farmers in return for gifts. These transactions
came to be regarded as sales. Land sales became so common that steps had to be
taken to restrict them to members of the kingdom. With the division of Abeokuta
into townships and the complex political
institutions cross-cutting lines
of descent, powerful descent groups on
the Ibadan model did not emerge. Partitioning of land in each generation has
meant that some land has been inherited through
women as men without sons have passed on their holdings to their daughters.
Taken together, these factors have led to a situation in which farmers have widely scattered plots separated in some cases by 30 km or more.
Plots which a farmer is unable to use may be let to tenants, for food-crop cultivation
rather than cocoa-planting.
Individual
ownership may result from other processes. In a recent study of the
lfe-Ondo border area, Clarke (1979) found that individual tenure had developed
through individual colonization and appropriation of forest land from the 1930s
onwards, without a stage of descent group.
Non-members
of landowning groups may also obtain the use of land. Within the traditional
system, the granting of land to immigrants was merely an aspect of their
integration into the community. Where tribute was paid, this was a question of political,
rather than economic, significance. As scarcity has given land a value, relations
between the grantors and grantees of land have become more narrowly economic,
although the process has been an uneven one.
'Strangers'
(alejo) may obtain access to land in a number of different ways. Most critical
is the fact that grants of land do not necessarily include the right to plant
trees (Galletti 1955; Francis 1984). Thus Lloyd (1962) records of the Ijebu Ode
area is that while some strangers were granted land in perpetuity, these grants
were for food crops only and the land could not be transferred by the grantee. More common arrangement was for
strangers to be given land for a single crop cycle in exchange for a cash
payment to the head of the granting
group. No rights over existing trees were transferred, and the tenant was not
allowed to plant permanent crops. With the harvest of the last crop, the tenant
must pay a fresh fee for another plot of
fallow land. In other parts of Ijebu
the system differed: in Ijebu Igbo, land was granted to strangers by village
heads in exchange for annual payments, while in Iwoye payments were due to the chief. In Abeokuta
grants of fallow land included only the right to plant food crops, and
tenancies could be ended at the end of
any cropping cycle. An annual rent was payable in cash. In Ado Ekiti and Ijesha
too, grants of land for growing food crops only are distinguished from those
which include the right to plant trees (Lloyd, 1962; Francis, 1984).
These restrictions
notwithstanding, outsiders have been able
to obtain land for the cultivation of
economic trees from landowning groups. The terms of such arrangements varied from place to place. In
general, an initial payment was made when the land was granted and this was followed by annual payments to the landowner in cash or kind. These payments came to be known as isakole and to be enforceable in customary
courts. In the Ibadan area, lineages
with claims over extensive tracts of land, which often originated
in
hunters' rights, made grants to others of Ibadan origin in exchange for initial presents followed by annual payments of cash. In
other areas, an influx of migrant tenants from areas to the north accompanied
the spread of cocoa cultivation and perhaps facilitated the commercialisation
of land tenure. At Ife, the
typical rates of isakole on land for
cocoa cultivation were two quarters or a hundredweight of cocoa per year, and these
terms applied to natives and strangers alike. Similar arrangements evolved in the
Ijesha area, though here only immigrants were liable for isakole (Berry, 1975;
Francis, 1984). Lloyd (1962) recorded that in Ondo a newcomer had the same rights as a native.
However,
by the 1970's this system had broken down with the arrival of migrants and
substantial sums of isakole were being demanded from tenants. In general, the social
obligations and implications of tenancy have tended to diminish with time,
while the cost of obtaining rights in land has risen.
It was a very useful article. Kudos
ReplyDeleteIjebu east ogbere
ReplyDelete