Oyo State Workshop Resolutions on the Promotion of Community Dialogue, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding for Share and Tsaragi Communities

  • Country/entity
    Nigeria
  • Region
    Africa (excl MENA)
  • Agreement name
    Oyo State Workshop Resolutions on the Promotion of Community Dialogue, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding for Share and Tsaragi Communities
  • Date
    1 Jun 2017
  • Agreement status
    Multiparty signed/agreed
  • Interim arrangement
    Yes
  • Agreement/conflict level
    Intrastate/local conflict ()
  • Stage
    Framework/substantive - partial
  • Conflict nature
    Inter-group
  • Peace process
    Nigeria - local agreements
  • Parties
    -
  • Third parties
    -
  • Description
    This agreement contains commitments to consolidate peace following a workshop between the Share and Tsaragi communities. The agreement is from page 8-10 following a summary of the workshop proceedings.

Local agreement properties

  • Process type
    Formal structured process
  • Rationale
    There is a clear history of clashes in the area between the communities, most recently with violence towards the end of 2015 and in 2016, derailing established processes in the area. There is a clear practice of attempts at reconciliation in this highly localised example. The dialogue in this instance is supported by the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The Yoruba, Hausa, Odua Peoples’ Congress, Nupe hunters, Arewa were also drawn upon as local actors with experience in local processes to support the two sides in the dialogue. Further research also suggests that present at the workshop, encouraged by the international actors listed was the state governor, police commissioner and traditional heads of the two communities. They also convened community leaders including elders, elites, women, and youth associations.
  • Is there a documented link to a national peace process?
    No
  • Link to national process: articulated rationale
    While there is reference to the State and Government attempting to support and reinitiate formal and informal processes in the area between the communities, there is no direct reference to the national process.
  • Name of Locale
    Ilorin
  • Nature Of Locale
    Smaller
  • GPS Lat/Long (DD)
    8.484256, 4.536828
  • Participant type
    Domestic religious organisation/leader or other elder
    Local community/civilian group(s)/civil society organisations
  • Mediator, facilitator or similar
    Mediator or similar referred to
    Mediator (references)
    On the basis that the resolutions are part of the workshop, the text states on page 1, that the workshop was organised by the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
    Type of mediator/facilitator/similar
    International or transnational actor

Local issues

  • Ritual/prayer and process (including use of scripture)
    Page 3, 1.0 Background, ... The communities have now separated markets, places of worship, schools, etc, unlike as in the past

    Page 5, 3.1 Opening Ceremony, ... He said this time is the right time to talk peace due to the Ramadan fast.

    Page 6, 3.1 Opening Ceremony, ... Declaring the workshop open, the Executive Governor of Kwara state Alhaji (Dr) Abdulfatah Ahmed represented by Deacon Leke Ogungbe, Deputy Chief of Staff, began his speech with a biblical quotation “as much as it lies on you, live in peace with all men”

    Page 6, 3.1 Opening Ceremony, ... God has created you to live together in that environment and so shall it remain”, he concluded. He then declared the workshop open.

    Page 7, 4.0 Key Comments, Satan visited us in Share and Tsaragi and brought conflict but now God in His infinite power has put in place a process to restore peace and we are thankful

    Page 7, 4.0 Key Comments, ... The landmarks of Tsaragi and Share are one. God joined the two communities together so nothing will separate us.
  • Grievance List
    Page 2, 1.0 Background, ... this conflict can be classified as a local social conflict (Azar, 1990). This is because of the enormous threats to human lives and stability, and large scale human suffering the conflict portends. The conflict also had structural, economic, political and resource implications

    Page 2, 1.0 Background, ... recently on August 4, 2016 a young man alleged to have been of Share extraction shot and killed five farmers of Tsaragi extraction which heated up the polity in the state and stalled both formal and informal peace processes being made by both the government and elites on both sides of the conflict. So far, the Share-Tsaragi communal conflict have resulted in the loss of many lives and the destruction of properties worth millions of naira.

    Page 3, 1.0 Background, ... Mutual suspicion, hatred and animosity are trailing the crisis, and the elites and youths on both sides are inflaming the embers of the crisis. Groups are still nursing the pains and feeling hurt of the crisis. The communities have now separated markets, places of worship, schools, etc, unlike as in the past. The conflict has been characterized by episodic clashes leading to killings and destruction of valuables on both sides.

    Page 4, 3.1 Opening Ceremony, ... ProJ. Oshita Oshita represented by Barr, Gabriel Jiya decried the rise of violent conflicts and clashes in Nigeria ranging from boundary conflicts to farmers-herders conflicts and intercommunal clashes among others. According to him, almost every region in Nigeria has one form of conflict or the other. In many instances, these conflicts often lead to violent confrontations and clashes between parties

    Page 7, 4.0 Key Comments, ... The economy of the two communities have suffered since the beginning of the crisis

    Page 8, 5.0 Findings, At the end of the workshop, the following were the key findings and lessons learnt:
    - The negative impacts of the cycle of violence in the affected areas caused by boundary dispute has been worsened by elite conspiracy, stiff competition and undue favouritism. All these has eroded social fabrics in the communities.
    - Both communities have experienced loss of lives, wanton destruction of public and private properties i.e cars, houses, farmlands, churches, schools, health centres, mosques.
    - The orgy of violence persists because the two communities have not determined to pursue sustainable peace through tolerance, developing early warning and response systems and engaging in direct dialogue and negotiation to resolve the conflict.
    - Despite past efforts such as Judicial Panels of Enquiry, Court Injunctions, and interventions by third parties, the conflict continues to linger.

    Page 9, 6.0 Resolutions, 8. Participants resolved to work for peace against the backdrop of massive destructions and loss of lives occasioned by the conflict which has not benefitted anyone.
    9. Participants identified unemployment as part of the causative factors in the conflict
  • Cattle rustling/banditry

    No specific mention.

  • Social cover

    No specific mention.

REPORT OF A 3-DAY WORKSHOP ON THE PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY

DIALOGUE, CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND PEACEBUILDING FOR SHARE AN TSARAGI COMMUNITIES ORGANISED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR PEACE AND

CONFLICT RESOLUTION (IPCR) AND THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT

PROGRAMME (UNDP) HELD AT KAKANFO INN AND CONFERENCE CENTRE IBADAN FROM 30TH MAY TO JUNE, 2017.

6.0 Resolutions

After careful deliberations, participants resolved as follows:

1. Participants resolved to immediately set up a nine member steering committee to translate decisions at the workshop into action.

2. Participants resolved to commemorate Share-Tsaragi Peace Day on November 11th of every year.

3. Participants resolved to establish Share-Tsaragi Peace and Development Forum and design a community Development Plan.

4. The Community Development Plan is to be unveiled on the International Day of Peace (21st, September, 2017).

5. Participants resolved to set up Share-Tsaragi Peace and Development Fund.

The Fund is to be launched to kick-start peace building and development projects in the affected communities.

6. Participants called on IPCR, UNDP and other development partners to consider follow-up activities such as monitoring, evaluation, dialogue and other forms of support to the communities

7. Participants encouraged establishment of early warning and response systems to prevent outbreak of violence.

8. Participants resolved to work for peace against the backdrop of massive destructions and loss of lives occasioned by the conflict which has not benefitted anyone.

9. Participants identified unemployment as part of the causative factors in the conflict, thus advised government to create jobs and support new peace processes initiated by participant, IPCR and UNDP.

10. Participants thanked UNDP and IPCR for organising the workshop and pledged to be peacebuilders in their communities.

6.0 Setting up of an Interim Committee of Share-Tsaragi Peace Development Committee:

Participants agreed to have a nine member committee.

One person each from the palace, representative of market women, youths and religious leaders.

A non-governmental organisation member will be integrated into the committee to make the number nine.

The members are as follows:

Share community:

l. Alhaji Ganiyu Ajibola

2. Chief Adedotun T. Philips

3. Madam Iyabo Maleek

4. Alhaji Ganiyu Bolaji

Tsaragi community

1. Mohammed Kudu Ndako

2. Deacon Joseph Shaaba

3. Mohammed S. Umar

4. Shaaba Alhaji Mariam

NGO Representative in the Committee

l. Pastor Ade Bodunde

7.0 Conclusion

Realising the dangers of violent conflicts, participants from the two communities committed themselves to genuinely work for peace in their communities.

Furthermore, the workshop training enhanced the capacity of participants for conflict management, mediation and negotiation through dialogue as well as equipped them to speak on tolerance and peaceful coexistence among their community members.

8.0 Recommendations

Deriving from issues identified in the course of the workshop, the following recommendations are made:

1. Advocacy and awareness campaigns as further necessary or follow-up actions should be undertaken by IPCR.

A visit should be paid to the governor of Kwara state and the Share-Tsaragi communities

2. IPCR should organise a Peace Rally for the communities

3. IPCR leadership should also pay a courtesy visit to the President of the Nigerian Senate in view of his interest in poultry value chain.

Share-Tsaragi is the gateway to the Shonga farms where a multi-million naira poultry project is prop for implementation by the Kwara state government through the Shonga Farms Holdings Limited.

Crisis in Share Tsaragi will negatively impact on the agricultural business in Shonga and its environs.

4. IPCR and UNDP should closely monitor the peace process so as to use it as a success case study model and look out for the possibility of practical intervention of this nature in other parts of country