Opinion
Lai Mohammed’s subterfuge by moonlight
Published
5 years agoon
Last week, as Minister of Information and Orientation, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, was engrossed in his theatrics on television over the Lagos EndSARS panel report; I was wrapped in sobriety as I listened to Manchester-based UK pop group of artists called the Hollies. Renowned for being one of Britain’s leading musical groups of the 1960s and into the mid 1970s, especially with their unique and distinctive blend of a three-part vocal harmony style, Hollies’ renown got catapulted to the zenith through their highly evocative song entitled He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother.
The song was composed by Bobby Scott and Bob Russell. Russell, born April, 1914, was an American songwriter and lyricist who died of lymphoma in Beverly Hills, in 1970, shortly after the song was released in 1969. With Elton John in the background fiddling with the piano and Alan Clarke, the lead vocalist tugging the base of the world’s empathy, the Hollies badgered the world to care for the other person, with their lyrics piercing into the global subconscious. For their superlative performance all through the ages, the Hollies were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2010.
He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother has a multiplicity of themes, ranging from human rights, trials and tribulations, human empathy and sobriety at the sight of a dying fellow man. Among others, the track goes thus: The road is long//With many a winding turn//That leads us to who knows where//Who knows where//But I’m strong//Strong enough to carry him//He ain’t heavy, he’s my brother//So, on we go//His welfare is of my concern//No burden is he to bear//We’ll get there//For I know//He would not encumber me//He ain’t heavy, he’s my brother//If I’m laden at all//I’m laden with sadness//That everyone’s heart//Isn’t filled with the gladness//Of love for one another//It’s a long, long road//From which there is no return//While we’re on the way to there…
He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother was borne out of the pain and anguish, as well as the camaraderie felt by soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War. In wars, soldiers saw their fellow brothers shot and bleeding. At that point, they had two choices: flee for dear life or stay back to carry them on the shoulder to safety, preparatory to a first aid being administered on them. The song is the narrative of an emotionally or physically stronger person, who without complaints provides succor to a traumatized other, either a countryman in distress, in pain or discomfort. The one who is down is at the end of their tethers, without the will to continue on the journey. Hollies lament that our emotive composition as human beings is not balanced as not everyone is ready to offer comfort to the broken hearted. This, the Hollies represented, inter alia, thus: “If I’m laden at all, I’m laden with sadness, that everyone’s heart is filled with a gladness of love for one another.”
Again, listening to Mohammed waffling as he read from his prepared speech, my mind flipped over to Chief Tom Ikimi, Nigeria’s notorious military despot, Sani Abacha’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. Like Mohammed, Ikimi’s heart was made of tar and coal, cold without life. He shawled Abacha with a duvet of beatitudes reserved only for angels. In Auckland, New Zealand in 1995, while the blood of environmental rights activist, Ken Saro-Wiwa, was yet hot as he jerked for the last of his breath in the hands of Abacha’s hangmen, Ikimi sought to place Abacha among the pantheon of the gods. Saro-Wiwa, he told the world, was a devil reincarnate. As the world is horrified that State apparatus could be deployed to murder peacefully protesting youths, the world was equally aghast in 1995 that Buhari could judicially murder Saro-Wiwa, even when Abacha, in a 1994 meeting with Late South African President Nelson Mandela in Abuja, had promised Madiba, conveyed to him through General Oladipo Diya, that even if the kangaroo judicial panel found him guilty, he would extend the prerogative of mercy to the Ogoni-born activist.
With peacock pomposity jutting out of his octopus stature, Ikimi stood on television beamed live to Nigerians and the international community, to criminalize the hanged activist. Today, Ikimi, architect and politician, is a victim of history, tossed inside the trash receptacle of the time. While I am not privy to how the blood of Saro-Wiwa may be tormenting him today, 26 years after, I am convinced that even when he must have departed this earthly space, his progenies will feel the heat of that nestling shoulder he gave despotism to fester in our land.
The first impression you get from Lai Mohammed at that press conference ground is a man who took unqualified pleasure in gloating at the dead. Unlike the Hollies’ soldier who offered comfort to the wounded, Lai Mohammed mocked the blood that was spilled at the Lekki Toll Gate and like Ikimi, gave a wooly embrace to murderers cloaked in the gabardine of the Nigerian state. Rather than the panel report, Mohammed and those who authored the speech he read stand condemned forever for tormenting the memories of the people who the system they work for, killed. It is disheartening that officials of the Nigerian state, unlike that imaginary valiant soldier in the Hollies’ song, do not stand by the tax payers who pay for the untrammeled comfort and wealth they scoop from the Nigerian state. Like a blood-overfed bed bug that they are, these officials luster in their wickedness.
Mohammed was just the federal government version of other legmen earlier sent out by a combination of the federal and Lagos State governments, with the instruction to water the ground preparatory to a White Paper that is diametrically opposed to the recommendations of the panel. Mohammed and his earlier lackeys dwelt extensively and incongruously on supposed technical errors in the report but which, in the main, do not detract from the gravamen of the report.
What is key is the role played on that grisly night by men of the Nigerian Army, whose presence at the Toll Gate on that day is no longer a matter for conjecture. Lagos State governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu himself had confirmed that he extended invitation to them. Incontrovertible footages obtained that night and thereafter also confirmed that the soldiers were there. Initially, there was an attempt to Unknown Soldier-ise the bloodthirsty detachment sent to the Toll Gate that night, until Sanwo-Olu, perhaps hastily but in defence of hapless Nigerian youths felled in the melee, confirmed that the soldiers were not ghosts and he called for their presence. The buck-passing, from the then Chief of Army Staff, Tukur Buratai, down to the Lagos military command, confirmed this attempt to dissolve the culprits into the inky night.
Now, granted that the forensic analyst who examined the bullets found at the locus in quo claimed that the bullets were not military-grade (high-velocity) live ammunition because, in the words of Lai, “had the military personnel deliberately fired directly at the protesters; there would have been significantly more fatalities and catastrophic injuries recorded,” the question then is, who fired the shots that killed that night? Could the soldiers, aware of the havoc they were coming to perpetrate, have armed themselves with non-military rifles? Because, if the soldiers didn’t kill those who, even by government’s admission, were killed, who and what then killed them?
Again, even from the angle of Lai Mohammed’s “credible evidence” of the Forensic Pathologist, Prof. John Obafunwa, to wit that “only three of the bodies on which post mortem were conducted were from Lekki and only one had gunshot injury,” we will like to know, was it blank bullets that killed these two victims? This gives the probability that most of the victims who were killed were the human casualty evidence reportedly whisked away by the soldiers and whose bodies may never be seen again.
You will agree with me that Nigerians are totally hemmed in, in the hands of their rulers who peremptorily bring out all manner of subterfuge, lies and deceits in the administration of the space called Nigeria. The soldiers claimed to have shot blank cartridges. How many of those spent cartridge were found the second day, especially when the panel members paid their maiden visit to the locus in quo? With reported frenetic attempt made by government to muffle evidence by deploying those who mopped off blood the second day and with soldiers reportedly carting away human casualty evidence, there was the probability that the bulk of evidence that would have showcased the Nigerian state’s guilt of massacre must have been washed or whisked away.
This is why Lai Mohammed’s incredulity at the panel’s submission is itself incredulous. He was aghast at the panel’s claim that trucks with brushes underneath were whisked to the Lekki Toll Gate “in the morning of Oct. 21 2020 to clean up bloodstains and other evidence, but still found bullet casings at the same site when it visited on October 20, 2020.” To me, it is infantile to reason that though “soldiers picked up bullet casings from Lekki Toll Gate on the night of October 20, 2020,” yet submit that there could not have been evidence of bullet casings found at the same locus in quo on October 21, 2020. This is because, if found to be true that the state attempted to tamper with evidence, it must have been done in a hurry before dawn on October 21, 2020, in the process of which there was the probability that, like every murderer in a crime scene, no matter how small it may be and regardless of how smart they may think they are, they always leave even if a scintilla of lead for investigators.
As to Lai Mohammed’s bother that some names of casualties appended to the report by the panel bore no surname and many family members have not come forward to identify their killed members in the Lekki Toll Gate disaster, for anyone who lives in Nigeria raising such disagreement, the person is either being mischievous or full of grisly dis-ingenuity. The Minister had said that “the panel was silent on the family members of those reportedly killed, merely insinuating they were afraid to testify. Even goats have owners who will look for them if they do not return home, not to talk of human beings. Where are the family members?”
The truth is that, governments after governments have reduced Nigerians to mere pieces of wood, worse than Mohammed’s goat allusion. Our identity as human beings has been dehumanized. Till today, I am sure many dead in the Ikoyi 21-storey building collapse are yet to be identified or names put to them. This is because we and our governments in particular, are a people who disdain statistics and data. There are hundreds of people who live in Lagos today whose families do not know their whereabouts. That they might have strayed into the Lekki Toll Gate incident is not unlikely. For Lai Mohammed to now make an issue of this is the highest form of official gerrymandering.
The Minister’s wonder why the panel’s report did not cover cases of police personnel brutally murdered or “the massive destruction of police stations, vehicles,” is valid. However, I recall that the panel called for memorandum and submissions by people who were affected by the crises, calling on them to supply evidence. Though the panel was judicial, it was not an investigative panel nor was it a panel of omnipotent and omniscient characters. It could not have been going to every home to find out if anyone suffered casualty at Lekki or any other part of Lagos, or whoever’s “businesses were attacked and destroyed during the protest in Lagos.” Lai Mohammed just used this set of victims as an opportunity to escalate his window of dissent and thus widen his dragnet of fault-finding.
Admitted, the panel report, like every human scrutiny, is not infallible. However, it would be the height of descent into the arena for a minister like Lai Mohammed, notorious for hubris and mendacity to be allowed to fester his calling by attacking the integrity of the panel members who were appointed by the Lagos State government, in the first instance, on account of their sparkling credentials. The Minister’s usage of gutter language to demonize the panel, though in sync with his character, is too heavy for men and women who sacrificed time and energy for the people. As I said earlier, I give kudos to Governor Sanwo-Olu and will reserve this applause for him until the White Paper is issued by his government. It is very un-Nigerian for a government to set up a panel and not teleguide its operations. It is apparent that Sanwo-Olu didn’t.
In the rush to throw the baby out with the bathwater, Mohammed and the State were not bothered by the recommendations of the panel for urgent governmental engagement with the youth and the upward review of the welfare of the Nigeria Police. They were busy trying to wipe away blood stains that ensconce their apparels.
I am convinced that, owls and vultures like Mohammed and the state apparatus used to murder defenceless Nigerians were afraid that if the report finds teeth, grits and buy-in of the international community, it may signify their journey to The Hague, the Netherlands to have their day in the International Criminal Court (ICC).
No matter how long the cadaver-loving soldiers who pulled the trigger that caused the massacre at the Lekki Toll Gate and their governmental accomplices, attempt to pull the wools over the eyes of the people, the truth is just but a mile away. When it opens the shutters and enters, there will be weeping, wailing, mourning and gnashing of the teeth by those who made attempts to muffle it, using the instrumentality of the State.
Celebrated columnist, Dr. Festus Adedayo writes
You may like
Opinion
Re: Adekambi vs Alli: Dr. Olanrewaju’s Descent To Soliloquizing | Sola Abegunde
Published
4 days agoon
October 1, 2026By
Mega Icon
I have read Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju’s piece titled ” Adekambi vs Alli: Between Substance And Sensationalism” and it offers me a lot of entertainment.
Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju is a seasoned Journalist no doubt. Very brilliant mind, but, he needs a lecture on politics and governance.
No matter how educated or professional you could be, if you lack basic knowledge about raw politics and governance at different tiers of Government, you are bound to struggle like a fish out of the water each time you attempt to defend certain positions.
Very obviously, Dr. Olanrewaju doesn’t know how a Local Government should operate on a normal situation, even, before the Judgment of the Supreme Court obtained by president Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
I will refer Dr. Olanrewaju to a document titled ” Financial Memorandum for Local Governments”.
That document speaks to how funds belonging to the Local Governments could be legally spent.
It will also provide accurate information about the roles and powers of the Local Government Chairmen, Head of Local Government Administration, the Finance and General Purposes Committee, F&GPC, how approvals for funds, projects and how contracts are signed at the Local Government level.
Had it been that Dr. Olanrewaju had proper information, I am sure that he wouldn’t have advertised his ignorance the way he did, in the argument about Financial autonomy for Local Governments which Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is promising.
He would also have known that his Principal, Governor Seyi Makinde had been engaged in criminal activities in the manner he had been withdrawing and spending resources belonging to the 33 Local Governments illegally since 2019.
Perhaps I need to repeat this for emphasis sake. There is no Law that empowers a state Governor to withdraw money belonging to the Local Governments for the execution of projects on behalf of the Local Governments.
The fact that the monthly allocations for the 33 Local Governments would have to drop on a joint account does not confer any authority on a state Governor to illegally withdraw and spend same.
It is the responsibility of the F&GPC for each of the Local Governments to identify projects it wants to execute, approve funds for same and if the funds are beyond the approving limits of the F&GPC, it will seek approval from the Governor through the office of the Commissioner for Local Governments.
If the project would be executed as a contract, it is the sole responsibility of the HLGA to sign the contract agreement.
That is what Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is saying. That he would not make illegal withdrawals from the Local Governments funds. That he will allow the F&GPC for the 33 Local Governments to function without hinderance. That he will allow the Career officers to do their duties assigned to them by Law.
If Governor Seyi Makinde doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments and he is not hiding this fact and Sarafa Alli is saying, I believe in a functional and free Local Government, where is the sensationalism in that?
Truth hurts. Dr. Olanrewaju can not, through his essay, which I consider an afterthought, rewrite the fact that, his Principal publicly declared that he doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments, not to talk of allowing them to function freely.
I am surprised that Dr. Olanrewaju is of the opinion that Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is not saying what he would do differently.
I know that the Special Adviser on Media to Governor Seyi Makinde is not deaf. Neither is he blind or dumb. He is only being hypocritical.
How else does the Allied People’s Movement, APM and its Gubernatorial candidate want the All Progressives Congress, APC Gubernatorial candidate to say what he is going to do differently?
On this issue of Financial autonomy for Local Governments, Sarafadeen Alli is saying, contrary to the illegalities of the past seven years plus, he will not concern himself with the responsibilities that are ordinarily that of the Local Governments.
On Education, he has declared that he will ensure that we go back to the 30 Pupils per classroom policy of the former Governor, Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja, now, H. I . M, Oba Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja.
He said he will revive the Broadcasting Corporations of Oyo state, BCOS which is gasping for breath under Governor Seyi Makinde.
He was emphatic about the fact that he would set up a Committee to review the crisis created at the Circular Road by Governor Seyi Makinde within 72 hours when he is elected as the Governor of Oyo state.
He said he would review the sales and handing over of our Farm Settlements to Estate Developers amongst other promises.
On these issues, what are the clear positions taken by Adekambi?
If Dr. Olanrewaju wants us to believe his cock and bull stories about the performance of the 33 Local Governments under Seyi Makinde, I challenge him to ask his Principal to publish the statement of income and expenditures for the 33 Local Governments in the past seven years plus.
He should give us a breakdown of the total figure of the monthly allocations received on behalf of the 33 Local Governments, the breakdown of salaries and allowances paid, the number of projects executed, identities of the contractors who handled projects, the contract agreements, total figure of the Internally Generated Revenues, IGR received by the Local Governments and the VAT.
In the absence of these vital information, which I am certain they will never dare to make public, I want to humbly suggest that Dr. Olanrewaju should go and update his knowledge about how certain things are done.
Opinion
Ladoja @82: When the ladder becomes too tall and Makinde’s sin of ingratitude | By Ayinla Joseph
Published
1 week agoon
September 28, 2026The Yoruba say, when a man forgets the ladder that took him to the top of the iroko tree, the fall that awaits him will be narrated as a proverb.
On Thursday, Ibadan stood still for its king. Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja clocked 82. Not 82 years of mere age, but 82 years of bruises, battles, betrayals and benediction. A former Senator. A former Governor. An elder statesman who, like Oduduwa, returned as king. The following day, Friday, Oba Ladoja also clocked one year on the throne of his forefathers.
Ibadan celebrated him. Nigeria celebrated him. The Presidency sent greetings. Former governors knelt. Serving governors bowed. The Alaafin of Oyo paid tribute. The Soun of Ogbomoso poured libation of words. Even the Aseyin, far in Iseyin, bought a full page in a national daily to say: our father lives.
But in Agodi Government House, there was silence. Cold, deliberate, imperial silence.
Governor Seyi Makinde did not felicitate his king. No advert. No statement. No courtesy of any sort extended. Nothing. His protégé, Bimbo Adekanmbi, toed the same line of contempt. For 48 hours, Ibadan people waited for a word that never came, until shame forced a whisper.
We must ask: what manner of politics is this?
In 2019, it was this same Ladoja who held Makinde’s hand when Makinde had no hand to hold. It was Ladoja who coordinated the coalition, who gathered the angry, the broken and the hopeful, and stitched them into a garment called victory for a man who had never won anything before. Without Ladoja, there would have been no Omituntun in 2019. And the man knows it.
Philosophers call it the Paradox of Power. Machiavelli warned about it in “The Prince”: that power acquired through the mercy of others must be sustained by gratitude, otherwise it consumes itself. Plato called such rulers philosopher-kings who failed philosophy. Men who know how to win power but not how to carry it.
History is littered with them.
Emperor Nero of Rome who burnt the city that made him emperor. King Rehoboam in the Bible who told the elders who made him king: “My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s waist.” Emperor Commodus who thought Rome was his father’s farm and turned the palace into a circus until the circus swallowed him.
Seyi Makinde governs like them — as an emperor, not as an Omoluabi. A man who believes loyalty must flow upwards to him, but must never flow downwards from him. He rides on the shoulders of giants and then complains that the giants are too tall.
Today it is Ladoja he snubs. Yesterday it was the Alaafin. The day before, the Soun. Tomorrow, which Oba will taste his disdain? He has transferred his personal hatred for the Olubadan stool into a war against all royal stools in Oyo State. That is not politics. That is poison.
And what shall we say of Bimbo Adekanmbi, his political son, who has learnt this ignoble art of ingratitude so perfectly? The Yoruba say, “the child who says his mother will not sleep, he too will not sleep.” To watch a man seeking to be governor practise contempt for the throne he seeks to govern is a disaster foretold.
Oyo people know Omituntun 2.0 for what it is — a poisonous pill coated with sweet advertisement. If 2.0 can openly humiliate an 82-year-old first-class monarch who made him, what will Omituntun 3.0, headed by his anointed, do? It will be the unkindest cut of all. It will be the complete desecration of the Omoluabi ethos that Ibadan and Oyo hold sacred.
Seyi Makinde will be remembered. Not for the roads that crack before commissioning. Not for the parks that lead to nowhere. He will be remembered as the governor who rode on the backs of eminent men and made every one of them regret that they ever lent him their shoulders.
Ladoja at 82 needs no advert from Agodi to be great. The king’s greatness is not conferred by the governor. But the governor’s smallness is exposed by how he treats his king.
Oyo people, shine your eyes. This affliction must not rise a second time.
Opinion
Makinde Deserves No Sympathy: He Brought His Present Predicament Upon Himself
Published
2 weeks agoon
September 23, 2026In response to my brother, Shuaib Idris, who wrote the piece titled “Seyi Makinde Deserves Our Sympathy,” I submit that Seyi Makinde does not deserve our sympathy. How do you sympathise with somebody who brought political calamity upon himself?
There is a point in every political journey when a leader must pause, look around and ask himself a difficult question: How did I get here? For Governor Seyi Makinde, that moment has long arrived.
Much has been written and said about the governor’s increasingly combative public interventions, his exchanges with political opponents and his determination to market the candidacy of his preferred successor. Some have interpreted these developments as signs of pressure surrounding him. But sympathy, in this circumstance, may be misplaced.
If Governor Makinde is under pressure today, much of that pressure is self-inflicted. If his administration is now being subjected to increasingly intense scrutiny, he cannot reasonably blame those asking the questions. And if political opponents have become emboldened enough to challenge his record openly, he should perhaps examine the decisions and conduct that have created the circumstances in which those challenges are now flourishing.
The governor’s recent political conduct provides ample illustration.
At the 70th birthday celebration of Bishop Francis Wale Oke, the governor reportedly used his appearance to introduce Bimbo Adekanmbi, the APM governorship candidate whom he supports. Adekanmbi’s emergence as the APM candidate is not in dispute; the party adopted him as its consensus candidate in May.
Two things continue to haunt him: his subpar performance in office and what critics describe as his imposition of Adekanmbi and Open Salawu, new entrants into his team, on his “first eleven.”
The question, therefore, is not whether Governor Makinde has the right to support a candidate. He does. The question is why a governor who repeatedly speaks of his administration’s achievements appears increasingly eager to make the 2027 succession contest a personal project.
A governor nearing the end of his tenure should ordinarily be concerned about preserving the dignity of the office, defending his record with facts and allowing his preferred candidate to present his own credentials. Indeed, Adekanmbi himself has publicly said he would not be a political stooge and that he would take responsibility for his own decisions if elected. That is political rhetoric. However, everything about Adekanmbi, according to his critics, points to the possibility of his being a stooge waiting to be planted to do Makinde’s bidding after the latter leaves office in 2027.
Yet Governor Makinde has increasingly inserted himself into the political conversation surrounding his successor. That creates an unavoidable question: if Adekanmbi is sufficiently qualified and politically prepared to succeed him, why does the governor so frequently feel compelled to fight the successor’s battles himself?
This is where the argument about pressure becomes particularly relevant. Political pressure does not simply descend from heaven. It can be generated by the choices of the politician himself.
Consider the recent exchange with Senator Sharafadeen Alli over the legal profession. Governor Makinde reportedly questioned Alli’s experience as a lawyer, arguing that he had never entered a courtroom. Alli’s campaign organisation subsequently responded by detailing his legal background and professional experience.
There is nothing wrong with political candidates examining one another’s records. That is part of democratic competition. But reducing a lawyer’s professional identity to courtroom appearances is a curious line of attack, particularly when the political argument ought ultimately to be about competence, experience, policy and public record.
A lawyer can practise in several areas of the profession without making litigation the centre of his career. Administrative work, corporate practice, legal consultancy, governance and institutional management are among the possible avenues available to members of the profession.
The larger point, however, is this: when an incumbent administration turns the professional credentials of an opponent into a central campaign issue, it invites its own record to be placed under the microscope. So, why does he need to be sympathised with over what he brought upon himself?
The response from Alli’s camp has shifted attention towards questions about Makinde’s own record as an engineer and governor, particularly the controversy surrounding diesel-powered streetlights and the renovation of the Lekan Salami Stadium. Those are now matters of public political debate, with competing claims about expenditure and performance. How do you sympathise with someone who threw a stone and received a Scud missile?
This is the unavoidable consequence of political combat: once you open the door to scrutiny of another man’s credentials, you should expect yours to be examined with equal intensity. Governor Makinde cannot reasonably demand immunity from the same standard he applies to others.
The same principle applies to his much-advertised “first eleven.” If the governor describes his administration as being driven by a carefully assembled team of exceptional people, the public is entitled to ask what became of that team when the question of succession arose. Why was the search for a successor extended beyond this celebrated first eleven?
A football coach who constantly boasts about his first eleven naturally invites the question of who among that eleven can step forward when the captain leaves the field. If none is selected, his team’s fans will ask why. That is not persecution. It is accountability.
There is another issue the governor should confront: political loyalty. Governor Makinde did not arrive at the Government House in 2019 in isolation. His political journey involved alliances with people and groups who contributed to the coalition that eventually produced his victory. The political history of that period is well known and should not be rewritten simply because former allies and associates are now on different sides of the political divide.
The problem with “use and discard” politics is that yesterday’s ally eventually becomes tomorrow’s witness. People who helped build a political structure do not disappear simply because their usefulness has expired. And when they begin speaking, the politician who once relied on them may find himself answering questions he never anticipated.
That appears to be part of the political atmosphere surrounding Governor Makinde today. His confrontation with traditional institutions is another matter that requires careful reflection. Whatever one’s political affiliation, Yoruba traditional institutions occupy a distinctive place in the cultural architecture of Oyo State. Political disagreement with individual traditional rulers is legitimate; treating the institution itself with disdain is entirely wrong, and it raises questions about Makinde’s Omoluabi values.
A governor may disagree with a monarch’s political preference. He may even believe traditional rulers should remain politically neutral. But the language employed in expressing that disagreement matters.
The office of governor carries enormous constitutional authority, but it also carries a moral obligation to exercise restraint. A governor should not need to be reminded that words spoken from Government House do not remain personal words. They acquire the weight of the office. That is why some of Governor Makinde’s recent public exchanges have generated such controversy.
The irony is that political power is temporary, while institutions and relationships often outlive individual office holders. The governor should know this better than most.
He is approaching the end of his constitutionally permitted tenure in Oyo State. The political question before him is therefore not how to remain governor indefinitely, but what legacy he will leave behind. Will he be remembered primarily for the projects executed under his administration? For the policies introduced? For the institutions strengthened? Or increasingly for the political battles fought during the final phase of his tenure? The last question is what will occupy people’s minds most after Makinde has left office.
The most consequential political mistake an incumbent can make is to interpret every criticism as persecution and every opponent as an enemy. Criticism is not necessarily hatred. Opposition is not necessarily sabotage. Questions about public expenditure are not necessarily attacks on a person. And scrutiny of an administration is not evidence of an organised conspiracy.
A mature government answers questions. A confident administration publishes records. A secure political movement allows its candidate to speak. And a governor who believes his record speaks for itself should have little reason to spend every available political moment speaking for his preferred successor.
That is why sympathy for Governor Makinde is evidently misplaced. The political pressure surrounding him today is not simply something that happened to him. It is also the product of political decisions, alliances, rhetoric and strategies that he and his political associates have consciously pursued.
He chose his successor. He chose his political platform. He chose to engage his opponents. He chose to make their records a subject of public debate. He chose to defend his administration through increasingly political exchanges. Those choices have consequences.
The electorate is now watching. And when the people begin to ask questions, the appropriate response from a governor is not to complain about pressure. It is to provide answers. Oyo people do not owe any politician sympathy for the consequences of his political choices. They owe themselves something far more important: a careful examination of every candidate, every record, every promise and every claim before making their decision in 2027.
MEGAICON TV
LAUTECH Strike: Alli Campaign Organisation Knocks Makinde Over Doctors’ Plight
Teachers’ Day: Alli Pledges Teachers’ Welfare Overhaul Within 100 Days
2027: Prominent Oke-Ogun youth leader dumps APM, joins APC with supporters
Trending
-
Politics2 weeks agoAPM Rally: APC Tackles Makinde Over Use of ‘CAF-Rejected’ ₦5.5bn Stadium
-
Politics4 weeks agoOyo won’t become real estate company, says Alli
-
News3 weeks agoOyo South: Oseni Approves N100m for Ibadan Community Road Rehabilitation
-
Politics4 weeks agoOyo 2027: Alli appoints Oladele, Olaosebikan, Tunji media directors