The unexpected outcome of the recently held Alue Do Cultural Festival in Ozoro, Delta State, highlights the dangers of discriminatory cultural practices. Regarded as a fertility ceremony, the festival is an age-long tradition celebrated primarily by the Uruamudhu community within Ozoro Kingdom of Isoko North Local Government Area, Delta State.

The Alue Do Festival is intended to invoke blessings of children upon married couples experiencing difficulties with childbirth. This belief is demonstrated by dragging and pouring sand on consenting childless couples. The practitioners maintained that the festival is a recreational and reawakening ceremony devoid of any questionable practices. However, the turn of events during this year’s edition of the festival is disturbing.

Usually a local ceremony, the recent festival attracted national attention after videos circulated online showing harassment of women, including attempts to forcibly strip, grope, and humiliate them. This distressing development has predictably received vehement criticisms from well-meaning groups and individuals.

Condemning the alleged sexual and physical misconduct, the First ladies, Oluremi Tinubu, stressed that no tradition or custom should be used as a pretext to abuse or violate the rights of women and girls. This position was echoed by a former Minister of Education and Founder of the School of Politics, Policy and Governance, Dr Obiageli Ezekwesili. She further charged law enforcement authorities to urgently arrest and prosecute perpetrators of the criminal act, to deter recurrence. In the same vein, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) described the incident as a national disgrace and a gross violation of the victims’ fundamental rights.

Although the Delta State Police Command has commenced investigations and arrested several suspects in connection with the incident, no official rape complaints have been lodged by the victims. According to the Police, preliminary findings suggest the sexual harassment was perpetrated by criminal elements exploiting the festival and was not part of the cultural practices.

Condemning the alleged misconduct and acts of harassment, the Ozoro Palace reaffirmed that such behaviour is contrary to the kingdom’s values. The monarch dismissed claims that acts involving the sexual abuse of women are part of the festival. He questioned the basis of the allegations, insisting that in over two decades on the throne, he has never witnessed or been aware of such incidents in the community.

Sexual assault is not an acceptable part of any culture. Accordingly, it is inconceivable that any community will condone it in any form. This is why the incident deserves a thorough and dispassionate investigation to verify conflicting claims on the origin of the alleged misconduct. Was it an isolated incident, as asserted, or was there a conspiracy of silence before the incident? This poser is partly inspired by the continued silence of the victims.  Did the issue only become a public discourse because it was captured on camera?

While the alleged sexual assault may be alien to the festival, the fact that women and girls were sexually abused during the event remains the real issue, as depicted in videos showing some community youths in questionable and unrestrained acts. There is no evidence in the public domain to show that the event organisers and adherents of the tradition made any concrete effort to ward off the perpetrators. Nothing suggests that the victims were defended or protected by either the traditional or security institutions.

Indisputably, an inherent flaw in the tradition paved the way for the perverts to strike. By the rules of the tradition, women and girls are mandated to remain indoors during specific hours. Was there prior notification or community-wide sensitisation on this rule? It would seem that the women and girls, unaware of any restriction against their movement, went about their normal businesses. Regrettably, some became entrapped in the web of harassment they did not anticipate. A festivity intended to engender fertility became a brazen demonstration of crudity and cruelty due to a communication gap. The discrimination aspect of the tradition appeared to have inadvertently set the motion for the eventual (unjustifiable) sexual assault.

Customary practices with strict movement restrictions are commonplace in many parts of Nigeria. Interestingly, perceived violations of these restrictions usually attract severe consequences. In the instant matter, the fact that women and girls were outdoors during the festival is uncontroverted. Therefore, it is pertinent to query whether there are traditionally prescribed penalties for such violations in the Uruamudhu community. If affirmative, what is the nature of the penalties? And were they enforced against the (purported) violators this year?

Cases abound where traditionalists subject others to inhumane treatments, including inflicting bodily harm, for supposedly disregarding certain traditional regulations. Ironically, these practices are considered cultural, but traditional institutions lack legal powers to impose movement restrictions or to compel compliance. Nevertheless, a conflict of interest could have been safely averted if traditional institutions had adequately sensitised the community concerned about the cultural event requiring such restrictions.

Any cultural practice that restricts free movement and also penalises any breach thereof constitutes a breach of the fundamental rights of personal liberty, freedom of movement, personal dignity, and equality, where it is deemed discriminatory. It may also constitute a criminal offence where enforcement entails physical or sexual assault.

Customary practices may vary from place to place, but they share a common feature of dynamism. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the custodians of traditions to conduct a periodic review of cultural practices. Customs and traditions must conform to relevant laws, public policy, and public decency.

Without gainsaying, customary practices that confer inferior status on, or discriminate against, any person based on gender, religion, ethnicity, etc., are potential weapons of oppression and lawlessness. Not only are such practices unconstitutional, but they are also repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience.