The development advocacy of the Asiwaju of Ijesaland, Asiwaju Olayinka Fasuyi, over the years has been shaped by a leadership philosophy built around five principles: leadership by example, vision, integrity, transparency and accountability.
These principles have been reflected in initiatives associated with his efforts to strengthen collective action, institutional cooperation, peace and socio-economic development across Ijesaland.
Two initiatives particularly illustrate this approach: the conception and establishment of the Ijesa Community Development Assembly (ICDA) and the Unity, Peace and Development Meetings of Traditional Rulers and Communities in Ijesaland.
ICDA: A Vision for Collective Development
Fasuyi’s conception of ICDA reflected his vision of moving Ijesaland’s development efforts beyond isolated individual and community initiatives towards a coordinated Pan-Ijesa platform.
The formal establishment and registration of ICDA with the Corporate Affairs Commission provided an institutional framework for coordinating development initiatives across the six Local Government Areas of Ijesaland. The platform brought together traditional rulers, community leaders, professionals, business leaders, youths, women, development organisations and Ijesas in the Diaspora.
It was vision translated into institution-building.
Rather than concentrating solely on immediate projects, the initiative sought to create a structure through which stakeholders could identify common challenges, mobilise resources, develop partnerships and pursue programmes with benefits extending beyond individual communities.
Its areas of focus include education, healthcare, youth empowerment, infrastructure, agriculture, economic development, technology and social welfare.
The approach also reflected leadership by example. The philosophy attributed to Fasuyi places emphasis on personal commitment, sacrifice and visible participation. His reported practice of being among the first, and often the highest, contributors to initiatives was intended to demonstrate the level of commitment expected from other stakeholders.
In this way, mobilisation was driven not only by appeals for support but also by personal example.
Integrity and Trust as Instruments of Mobilisation
The development of a Pan-Ijesa institution requires the confidence of diverse stakeholders.
The report therefore identifies integrity as a central element of Fasuyi’s leadership philosophy.
Integrity, as presented in the report, means consistency between words and actions, faithfulness to commitments and placing collective interests above personal interests. It is described as a practical foundation for building confidence and encouraging cooperation.
The report further states that, during his decade as Asiwaju, Fasuyi did not receive financial support from individuals, organisations or government, but relied on his personal resources in supporting initiatives. This is presented as an illustration of the financial independence and personal commitment associated with his approach.
Transparency: Giving Stakeholders Ownership
The same philosophy extended to the management of collective resources.
The report identifies transparency as another factor behind stakeholder confidence. Through consultation, open communication and clarity in the handling of resources, stakeholders were given an opportunity to understand and participate in the development process.
Specifically, the report states that no ICDA project funds were disbursed or spent without the approval of the general house.
Such an approach was intended to reduce suspicion, strengthen confidence and create a sense of collective ownership around projects and programmes.
Thus, transparency was not treated merely as disclosure; it became part of the mechanism for sustaining participation in collective development.
From Institution-Building to Rebuilding Unity Among Ijesa Traditional Rulers
Fasuyi’s development advocacy was not limited to economic and institutional development. It also recognised that sustainable development required healthy relationships among traditional institutions and communities.
This understanding informed the Unity, Peace and Development Meetings of Traditional Rulers and Communities in Ijesaland, initiated and convened by Fasuyi in 2019.
At the centre of the initiative was his conviction that “in the united entity, we are strong; in the divided body, we fall.”
He believed that the collective wisdom, authority and influence of Ijesaland’s Traditional Rulers could be better harnessed when they came together regularly to deliberate on matters affecting the land.
The initiative was therefore conceived not as another ceremonial gathering, but as a platform for dialogue, reconciliation, mutual understanding and collective action.
Four Distinct Roles: Conceptualisation, Initiative, Convening and Organisation
The record of the Unity Meetings identifies four distinct dimensions of Fasuyi’s contribution: conceptualisation, initiative, convening and organisation.
Conceptualisation
Fasuyi conceived the idea of bringing the Traditional Rulers of Ijesaland together in a structured and sustained forum where they could meet, exchange views and collectively address matters of common interest.
The concept was rooted in the belief that a stronger relationship among the traditional institutions would contribute to peace, cohesion and sustainable development across Ijesaland.
Initiative
Having conceived the idea, Fasuyi personally took the initiative to translate the vision into reality.
He embarked on extensive mobilisation across Ijesa Central, Ijesa North and Ijesa South, travelling from palace to palace and holding meetings with Traditional Rulers to explain the desirability, relevance and long-term benefits of regular Unity Meetings.
Rather than waiting for the monarchs to initiate the process, he personally carried the message to them, engaging them individually and seeking their support.
These palace-to-palace consultations laid the foundation for the eventual meetings.
Convening
Through sustained consultations, personal engagement and the commitment of his personal resources, Fasuyi helped secure the cooperation and provide the practical support necessary for the meetings to hold.
The resulting platform brought Traditional Rulers from different parts of Ijesaland together to interact directly, deliberate on matters of shared concern, foster mutual understanding and strengthen relationships within the traditional institution.
Organisation
Following the mobilisation, Fasuyi helped coordinate the participation of the Traditional Rulers and facilitate the arrangements necessary for the meetings to take place. His involvement extended to maintaining communication with the participating palaces. Today, Fasuyi can mention names and titles of more than a hundred Ijesaland traditional rulers offhand, aligning engagements and helping ensure that the gatherings were properly coordinated and conducted.
His organising role was therefore an extension of the original vision: he did not merely suggest that the monarchs should meet; he helped create the practical framework through which the idea could become a functioning and continuing platform.
The distinction is important. Fasuyi conceptualised the idea, initiated the mobilisation, convened the Traditional Rulers and played a hands-on role in organising the meetings.
A Personal Commitment to the Vision
Without making the financial dimension the central focus, Fasuyi personally shouldered the financial responsibilities associated with driving the initiative, further demonstrating his commitment to the unity of the traditional institution.
His approach was consistent with his broader philosophy of leadership by example: conceiving an idea, personally pursuing it, mobilising stakeholders and providing the practical support required to translate the vision into action.
The Ifewara Turning Point
The first major engagement, the Unity, Peace and Development Meeting of Traditional Rulers and Communities in Ijesaland, was held at Ifewara on March 19, 2019.
The meeting became an important turning point in the relationship among traditional rulers across Ijesaland.
According to the account of the initiative, it helped address the longstanding dichotomy commonly expressed through the distinctions of Ijesa North, Ijesa South and Central.
Before the initiative, relationships among some Traditional Rulers had reportedly been affected by grievances and misunderstandings. One manifestation was the reported reluctance of some Traditional Rulers to attend functions organised by the Owa Obokun Adimula and Paramount Ruler of Ijesaland.
The reasons for such absence were associated with various grievances and misgivings.
The significance of the Ifewara meeting was therefore not simply that Traditional Rulers gathered at the same venue. It provided a structured opportunity for differences to be discussed and relationships to be rebuilt.
The meeting created room for dialogue, understanding and reconciliation around the broader recognition that traditional institutions across Ijesaland share a common heritage and common development responsibilities.
When Traditional Rulers Met One Another
One of the striking dimensions of the Unity Meetings was the opportunity they created for Traditional Rulers to interact directly.
The account records that some Traditional Rulers in Ijesaland were meeting one another for the first time during the Unity Meetings.
This illustrated the depth of the relational gap the initiative sought to bridge. Traditional Rulers belonging to the same broader cultural and historical community could occupy positions in geographically close areas while having limited opportunities for direct interaction.
The Unity Meetings created a physical and institutional space in which previously distant relationships could begin to develop.
Introductions became conversations; conversations created understanding; and understanding provided a basis for renewed relationships and cooperation.
One United Ijesaland
A central theme of the initiative was the promotion of the idea of One United Ijesaland.
The meetings encouraged Traditional Rulers and communities to look beyond geographical and historical distinctions and place greater emphasis on their shared heritage and common aspirations.
The initiative particularly sought to move the conversation away from the traditional North versus South and Central divide towards a broader understanding of Ijesaland as one cultural and development community.
The Ifewara meeting consequently provided a platform for discussions around peace, reconciliation, forgiveness and cooperation among traditional institutions.
This represented an important dimension of development advocacy. While ICDA sought to create an institutional mechanism for coordinating development, the Unity Meetings sought to strengthen the relationships and trust necessary for such collective development to succeed.
Renewed Relationship with the Owa’s Institution
The reported improvement in relationships with the Owa’s institution formed an important part of the process.
The earlier reluctance of some Traditional Rulers to attend functions organised by the Owa Obokun Adimula was reportedly linked to unresolved grievances.
By creating an inclusive platform for conversation, the Unity Meetings provided an avenue through which differences could be addressed and relationships repaired.
The broader objective was greater cooperation among the traditional institutions and renewed recognition of the Owa Obokun Adimula’s role as the Paramount Ruler of Ijesaland.
The initiative therefore addressed not merely a social relationship issue but an important potential obstacle to collective action across the region.
The Diaspora Ripple Effect
The reported influence of the Unity initiative was not confined to Ijesaland.
According to the account, the improved atmosphere of unity among traditional institutions at home also had a ripple effect among Ijesa people in the diaspora.
Some Ijesas living outside Nigeria who had previously maintained little or no relationship with one another reportedly began to reconnect and relate more freely.
The underlying logic was that renewed relationships at home could strengthen the broader sense of shared identity among Ijesas wherever they lived.
Thus, the initiative was seen as creating a wider chain of connection:
Traditional Rulers reconnecting at home → stronger community relationships → greater interaction among Ijesas in the diaspora → a broader sense of One United Ijesaland.
The potential development value of such a network lies in the expansion of relationships, expertise, partnerships and resources available to Ijesaland.
From Unity to Development
The Unity Meetings reflected Fasuyi’s broader understanding that development is not limited to roads, schools, hospitals or other physical infrastructure.
Development also involves creating the relationships, trust and cooperation required to mobilise people around common objectives.
A divided community may possess considerable resources but struggle to deploy them collectively. Conversely, a community whose traditional institutions communicate and cooperate has a stronger foundation for identifying common challenges, mobilising resources and pursuing shared solutions.
This is where the Unity Meetings complemented the philosophy behind ICDA.
ICDA addressed the question of how development could be coordinated; the Unity Meetings addressed the question of how relationships could be strengthened to make collective action possible.
Together, the two initiatives reflected a common development philosophy: build institutions, strengthen relationships, mobilise people and create structures through which collective resources can be directed towards shared objectives.
Sustaining the Dialogue
The unity initiative was followed by a second major engagement in Ijebu-Jesa on November 6, 2019.
The Second Unity, Peace and Development Meeting of Traditional Rulers in Ijesaland sustained the dialogue initiated at Ifewara and provided another opportunity for Traditional Rulers and stakeholders to strengthen relationships, improve communication and renew their commitment to peace and development.
The continuation of the engagement also reflected the principle of accountability to purpose.
Accountability, in this context, goes beyond accounting for money. It involves accepting responsibility for commitments, measuring outcomes and ensuring that initiatives generate value beyond their initial launch.
The continuation of the Unity Meetings after the first gathering was therefore consistent with an approach that regarded development as an ongoing responsibility rather than a one-off event.
Five Principles, One Development Philosophy
The ICDA initiative and the Unity, Peace and Development Meetings demonstrate how the five principles associated with Fasuyi’s leadership philosophy operated together.
Leadership by example provided the personal commitment required to mobilise people and convene stakeholders.
Vision provided the direction, whether through the creation of an enduring Pan-Ijesa development platform or the promotion of a more united Ijesaland.
Integrity helped establish credibility and trust.
Transparency encouraged stakeholder confidence and collective ownership.
Accountability provided the discipline required to sustain responsibility for commitments, resources and results.
The two initiatives were different in purpose but complementary in effect.
ICDA provided an institutional mechanism for coordinated development, while the Unity, Peace and Development Meetings provided a platform for rebuilding relationships among traditional institutions and communities.
Together, they reflected a broader proposition at the heart of Fasuyi’s development advocacy: Ijesaland’s progress requires not only projects and resources, but also visionary leadership, trusted institutions, transparent processes, peaceful relationships and collective responsibility.
In this context, the Unity initiative occupies a distinctive place in the 10 Years of Service: Compendium of Impact and Integrity in Ijesaland. Its significance lies not merely in the meetings that were held, but in the relationships it sought to rebuild, the divisions it sought to bridge and the foundation it helped create for a more connected and collaborative Ijesaland.
No comments:
Post a Comment