By Jimmy Abia
You have often heard it said that “women are not allowed to own property among Igbos” or “women cannot inherit property in Igbo custom”
But these narratives are incorrect.
Why is it important that we interrogate this narrative ? Firstly, because the wrong narrative emboldens exploitation. Where people think the law gives them the right to exploit another they are more emboldened to do so. Secondly, it weakens the resolve to protect a right, where one thinks the right is absent in the first place. Thirdly, it is simply misleading and largely false and people need to know the true position on the issue, especially in this information age
There is really no Igbo custom that stipulates that women CANNOT inherit or own property.
When we talk about property it includes intangible personal property (e.g. shares) chattels (movable property e.g. like money, vehicles, livestock, business assets), land & houses (immovable property).
When discussing the issue most commenters and writers often limit the discourse to landed property and then further erroneously extrapolate the already wrong narrative to cover every other type of property. That is a defective way to approach academic discourse.
Firstly, on acquisition or ownership: Among Igbos anyone can OWN property and can acquire property, including land, chattels and intangible property. Research data published by Statisense [see reproduced below] shows that women ownership of landed property is highest in the South East when compared to other regions of Nigeria.
This sounds ironical considering the popular but erroneous narrative in the public space. If women among a certain group own more property than their counterparts elsewhere, it certainly cannot be the correct narrative that the same group prohibit women ownership.
Having dealt with acquisition and ownership, let’s now talk about inheritance rights
First, Igbo customs on inheritance is not uniform. It differs from community to community. For instance among certain Igbo subgroups – such as parts of Afikpo and Ohafia women could hold land through lineage structures or as part of dual-gender (matrilineal and patrilineal) systems.
In some communities the restrictive custom that applied was limited to land “ownership”. The ownership of every other property (like movable property) could devolve to anyone regardless of gender and such movable property was generally meant to be shared equally. Where the deceased is a woman her personal property devolves to her female children or the last child.
Traditionally, especially in the olden days and even until now in some communities, most land were held communally and an individuals (male or female) only took lease of land for use e.g. for farming only for a period and with the consent of the community and after then it reverts back to the community. This communal land is called “ancestral land.” The woman typically is entitled to this lease from her birth place and her matrimonial place, unlike the males who are entitled to such only in their birthplace.
The only land most people individually owned personally was the land that housed the family homestead (the Ani Obi). Upon the demise of a man the “Ani Obi” goes to the first son “Okpara” not even to his other male siblings.
In the era when this applied, it was for a good reason – the homestead was to be held in trust by the first son for the entire family, including other males and the women, who might sometimes need to be home because they were not married or got divorced. Notably also any landed property a man acquired during his lifetime outside his immediate community could also be inherited by his wife or any of his children, regardless of gender.
But even the custom relating to restrictive ownership of ancestral land and Ani Obi has been abolished by court decisions in communities where it applied. Even if for good reason historically, these restrictions which I have argued are not as extensive and also not general in application as often touted and sometimes misapplied, have now been removed. In a long line of cases including MOJEKWU Vs MOJEKWU these restrictions has been put to rest. So women can now inherit any kind of property including land and the Ani Obi (homestead) even in communities that had restrictive custom to inheritance.
So if anyone tells you that she is disinherited, it is not a question of custom, but either her own family issue or her inability to utilise the law to protect her right.
Today many people leave a Will and in it devolve assets to women. Using publicly known examples: the late Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu willed choice properties to his wife and daughters. The late Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu willed a house to his adopted daughter. Many Igbo men also do gift major property intervivos (during their lifetime) sometimes at the wedding of their daughter, or at other times during their lifetime. We have seen several videos of families doing this, for the avoidance of doubt.
Even in intestate succession (where one dies without a Will) the probate registry does not restrict the rights of women to apply for letters of administration to administer property. Thus, legally women can be beneficiaries, executors, administrators or trustees of an estate.
Again, succession is generally interpreted according to a deceased man’s personal law, particularly in matters of intestate succession (dying without a will) and for movable property. Personal law refers to the law and custom governing family relations, inheritance, and marriage to which an individual was subject at the time of death. Most Igbos get married under the Marriage Act this their personal law will be interpreted with regard to this, and this also preserves equal right of women to property.
It is necessary that people understand their rights under the law and where necessary utilise the right channels to address them rather than blame it on what the customs do not stipulate or on non existent or abolished customs.
When it comes to property fights it is often a question of the balance of power, not custom or law, not even about gender in many cases – just a stronger surviving person in the family (or even outside the family) trying to oppress the weaker person who either doesn’t know his rights or is incapable of enforcing it, and it happens in every clime. Even the males are not left out of the possibility of becoming victims, especially if they were too young or naive or impecunious.
We have even seen instances among non Igbo groups where male and female members of a family complained of another taking the lion share of inheritance assets and preventing other family members including males from either getting or getting as much as himself.
For instance, Kola Abiola’s male siblings have publicly alleged such regarding their fathers properties. We have also seen a case like that of the late legal icons F.R.A Williams where the brothers made such allegations against each other, leading to a protracted court case. We have also seen Mohbads father fighting late Mohbads widow over his assets.
So it is important that we note again that women Igbo women are not legally debarred from acquiring, owning, or inheriting property. If a woman is being disinherited today, let’s be honest it is not about custom. It is either:
a family issue, or a situation where she is unable (or unwilling) to enforce her legal rights, because the law is already on her side. Also, let’s stop pretending property disputes are about gender alone. In many cases, it’s about power – who is stronger, louder, more connected, or more aggressive. Men also get pushed aside, and this is also not limited to Igbos.
The real issue with property rights is power vs vulnerability. Let’s stop misrepresenting culture and start focusing on enforcing rights and addressing injustice where it actually exists.
-Abia, a lawyer, writes from Lagos – abiajimmy@yahoo.com
