Connect with us

Opinion

Binani, Buhari: Hurt, guilt and forgiveness

Published

4 years ago

on

 

President Muhammadu Buhari, on Friday, asked Nigerians who he might have hurt in his near-eight-year misrule, to forgive him. Similarly, a section of social media is asking for forgiveness for Aishatu Dahiru, popularly known as Binani. Dahiru is the woman who, before the April gubernatorial election re-run in Adamawa State, was considered a political exemplar and one who typified the assumed political purity of the female gender.

Very few narratives of the concept of hurt and forgiveness are as gripping as the grisly story of Father Michael Lapsley. As he walked into the sitting of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) that morning, Lapsley was a study in pain, sobering pain. What remained of his two arms were ugly stumps. In their place was a pair of equally ugly pincers. One of his two eyes had been gouged out too; his eardrum shattered. As he tottered into the hall, dead silence accompanied every one of his gaits. In April 1990, three months after Nelson Mandela’s release from his 27-year imprisonment, Lapsley received a letter in his Zimbabwean home. He never remained the same again. Encrypted in the letter was a bomb that shattered his life into smithereens.

He had been excited receiving the letters. These were his exact words as he narrated to the TRC: “It was a normal warm autumn day…April… when I became the focal point of all that is evil. I returned from a series of lectures in Canada. A pile of mail had accumulated on my desk, among others something with an ANC letterhead. The envelope stated that it contained theological magazines. While I was busy on the phone with someone, I started opening the manila envelope on the coffee table to my side. The first magazine was Afrikaans… that I put aside, I can’t read Afrikaans. The second was in English. I tore off the plastic and opened the magazine… and that was the mechanism that detonated the bomb… I felt how I was being blown into the air… throughout it all, I never lost my consciousness.”

Born Alan Michael Lapsley on June 2, 1949, in New Zealand, Lapsley, a white man, was ordained into the priesthood in Australia and arrived in Durban, South Africa, in 1973 to pursue his undergraduate studies. In the thick of apartheid’s repression, he was made chaplain in both black and white universities, and by 1976, he gave himself the task of speaking for schoolchildren shot and detained by apartheid police. In 1982, Lapsley escaped being killed in a police raid where 42 people were killed and thus ran to Zimbabwe

Antjie Krogg, the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) reporter, covered the TRC proceedings. Like our own Mathew Hassan-Kukah, Krogg crafted the tear-dripping narrations into an award-winning book entitled Country of my skull. In the book, Krog narrated the moment Lapsley entered the TRC better: “It is these stainless-steel pincers that Father Lapsley raised to take the oath before his submission…‘So help me God.’ But it is also these pincers that prevent him from wiping away his tears like other victims. When their stories are cut too close, victims often bury their faces in their hands and wipe their eyes with tissues. But how do you hold the fragile veil of tissue in such pincers? How do you complete the simple act of blowing your nose? Several times the pincers move towards his face in a reflex action – as if he wants to cover his face with his hands – and every moment flashes the inhumanity of South Africa’s past into the hall… hard, shiny, and sterile.”

Desmond Tutu, chairman of the TRC, put the Lapsley pain in a far sobering perspective. “There is always a special silence when Lapsley takes the Communion. First, you think people are nervous that he may knock the cup over with his pincers – but then it becomes absolutely quiet.”

As the searing pain whistled through his being, Lapsley was ready to forgive President F.W. de Klerk who, like Muhammadu Buhari, was at the helm of affairs when the hit squad did this irreparable damage of parcel-bombing him. “Someone had to type my name on the manila envelope; somebody made the bomb. I often ask the question, ‘What did these people tell their children that they did that day?’”

On forgiving the president and the architects of his lifelong incapacitation, he said: “I haven’t forgiven anyone, because I have no one to forgive. No one was charged with this crime, and so, for me, forgiveness is still an abstract concept. But if I knew that the people who sent my bomb were now in prison, then I’d happily unlock the gates – although I’d like to know that they weren’t going to make any more bombs. I believe in restorative justice and I believe in reparation. So, my attitude to the perpetrator is this: I’ll forgive them, but since I’ll never get my hands back, and will therefore always need someone to help me, they should pay that person’s wages. Not as a condition of forgiveness, but as part of reparation and restitution.”

So, Aishatu Dahiru is being touted as deserving of Nigerian people’s forgiveness. Dahiru had subjected herself to a bout of self-flagellation when she openly flirted with the endemic political disease of electoral corruption that has driven Nigeria back for decades. Let us, for a moment, did the allegation that she gave the sum of N2 billion to the now absconded Hudu Yususa-Ari, the Adamawa Resident Electoral Commissioner. You cannot but find Mrs. Dahiru complicit in the one-week Adamawa electoral debacle.

Within a few hours, Nigeria landed in a state of electoral dystopia. You could hear scornful laughter at Nigeria from across the globe. It was the kind of laughter Idi Amin Dada of Uganda provoked in the 1970s. Either out of psychopathic disorder or sheer bravado, Dada had balls made of steel and could look a bullet in the eye and bite it. In the Byzantine world of the 1970s, the unwritten cliche was, look towards Uganda. For the bizarre, the weird, and the outright grotesque of the world’s global manifestations of that time, Uganda provided ample surreal examples.

For instance, at the height of his assumed racial victory over erstwhile colonial lords, Dada sent love letters to the Queen Elizabeth II of England, asking for her hands in marriage. The mockery of the black man provoked by this infantile and derisive love missive was massive. The elephant-sized soldier, considered to be one of the most despotic rulers in human history, actually also wanted to be the King of Scotland. In his infamous memory, a film, entitled The Last King of Scotland was shot to permanently memorialize his infamy. A 2006 film that was directed by Kevin Macdonald, The Last King was an adaptation of a Peter Morgan and Jeremy Brock screenplay, product of a Giles Foden’s novel on Dada. It is a depiction of the Ugandan emperor from the prism of a fictional Scottish doctor. Dada also gave himself the title of “Conqueror of the British Empire.”

To further reinforce his buffoonery in power, Dada once sent a love-like telegram to the highly respected Julius Nyerere of Tanzania. He loved the Nwalimu – the Swahili cognomen given to Nyerere for his teachable spirit – he said. To demonstrate his love for him, if the Nwalimu was a woman, Dada said he would have gladly considered marrying him, not minding his grizzled head!

In concert with Yususa-Ari and some other infamous but unseen architects of darkness, Binani’s role in that attempted electoral heist can be likened to the popular Yoruba aphorism that the one who climbed the rafters to steal a drum of palm oil is not as complicit as one who received the loot. She was the planned receiver of the heist. When the erstwhile Amazon now went ahead to deliver an acceptance speech shortly after she was illegally declared the governor-elect by the REC, she promptly defined the mis-biology inherent in attributing electoral corruption only to the male gender. With the way things are now, it will amount to presidential folly and miscarriage of justice if Yususa-Ari and a few others are tried for electoral robbery and Binani is left out. Nigeria’s concept of forgiveness, I am sure, is not as elastic as to have enough room for a desperado for power as Binani.

So, President Buhari covets our forgiveness? At the occasion which marked his final outing as president on an Eid-el-Fitr day last Friday, Buhari asked Nigerians to forgive him at whatever point he might have hurt them. “All those that I have hurt, I ask that they pardon me. God gave me an incredible opportunity to serve the country. We are all humans, if I have hurt some people along the line of my service to the country, I ask that they pardon me. I think it is a good coincidence for me to say goodbye to you and thank you for tolerating me for almost eight years.”

At what point do we begin to interrogate the concept of forgiveness for Buhari? For which of his sins does he deserve forgiveness; his gross inactions or egregious misactions? While leaders, like all human beings, are capable of erring, last week’s open exchange of flaks between Buhari and the Benue governor, Samuel Ortom, should delineate the boundary of hurt, guilt, and forgiveness. Few states did not see themselves in the mirror a killing field that Nigeria became under Buhari in the last eight years. In separate attacks in the last month, over 100 people were killed by armed men in Benue state. Two newspapers, the Daily Trust and ThisDay newspapers wrote separate editorials that were scurrilous attacks on the president on the recent upsurge of killings in Benue.

In reply, Garba Shehu, Buhari’s media aide, claimed it was wrong to blame Buhari for the killings. Thousands have been killed and maimed in the last eight years of Buhari’s rule. Similar bloody scenarios of massacres and kidnappings occurred severally in Plateau, Southern Kaduna, Niger, Sokoto, and Katsina States, the latter being the home of the president. In all of them, multiple of thousands of people lost their lives. All we got from Buhari and his obsequious party were condolence messages.

I imagine how many Father Lapsleys Buhari birthed in his eight years of misrule, through his effeminate policies and masculine mids-policies. From Igangan in Oyo State to the Southeast and virtually all the zones of Nigeria, his lack of leadership was the death of many an enterprise and even lives. Just do statistical appraisals of Nigerians who died, got economically crippled, and maimed for life on account of his Naira change policy, for example, and the calamity of the Buhari years will surface.

Ortom’s reply to him is a reflection of the hurt that Buhari’s rule wreaked on Nigeria. He had said: “Buhari has empowered and emboldened the Fulani pastoralists in their expansionist agenda including killings. It is equally a known fact that President Buhari has failed woefully in securing Nigeria, and Benue State in particular.” Ortom then went ahead to lay the blame on the government for “complicity in the killings orchestrated against Benue people by the Fulani herdsmen as represented by Miyetti Allah Kautal, Fulani Nationality Movement, FUNAM and other Fulani socio-cultural groups.”

So, where do we begin to forgive Buhari? How appropriately can we delineate the province of the massive hurts he brought on the land in eight years? In propounding the theory of forgiveness, ideological purist, Jose Zalaquett, said that the first step to take is an acknowledgment of guilt. The same was acknowledged by Krog: “Perpetrators need to acknowledge the wrong they did. Why? It creates a communal starting point.”

It is not in the place of Buhari to ask for forgiveness while not acknowledging his guilt. According to German philosopher and social theorist, Jurgen Habermas, what the president tried to do by that blanket demand for forgiveness was to slither into what is called collective guilt. “Collective guilt does not exist. Whoever is guilty will have to answer individually,” he said. In any case, how do you assume guilt collectively when the perpetrators of the forgiveness which you seek are still roaming the streets and are yet to be apprehended? Again, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a Russian writer, prominent Soviet dissident, and outspoken critic of communism who raised global awareness of the existence of repression in the old Soviet Union, especially his Gulag system, has a rebuke for Buhari’s escapism: “By not dealing with past human rights violations, we are… ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.”

Let me quickly parody that heretical quip in Wole Soyinka’s The Man Died. Can someone tell Buhari to stop weeping by our rooftop, please? We do not need his last-minute platitude.

 

Celebrated columnist, Dr. Festus Adedayo writes from Ibadan, Oyo state

Related Topics:
Comments

Opinion

Oyo, Osun Petrol Price War: Why Fair Competition Should Matter 

Published

22 hours ago

on

October 22, 2026

By

The decision by some filling stations in Oyo and Osun states to sell petrol at lower prices than their competitors has brought renewed attention to pricing practices in Nigeria’s downstream petroleum sector and, more importantly, to what consumers stand to gain when competition is allowed to work.

Investigations and enquiries into petrol prices in the two states revealed differences in pump prices, with some independent petroleum marketers (IPM) selling Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), popularly known as petrol, for about ₦1,375 per litre, while some competing stations charged about ₦1,385 per litre.

Although the difference is just ₦10 per litre, the savings are meaningful for motorists, commercial transport operators, artisans, traders and other residents who depend on petrol to earn a living.

For a commercial driver buying 40 litres, for instance, the price difference amounts to ₦400. For small businesses that rely on petrol-powered generators, repeated purchases at lower prices could provide some relief amid the rising cost of living. Across thousands of consumers and multiple purchases, modest savings can become a substantial reduction in household and business expenses.

However, findings from the enquiries suggest that some independent marketers who had previously sold petrol at relatively lower prices later adjusted their pump prices to match those of competing stations.

The development has prompted questions about what influences pricing decisions in the two states and whether consumers are being allowed to benefit fully from competition among petroleum marketers.

Information obtained during engagements with some marketers, who spoke on condition of anonymity, also indicated that the leadership of the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) in the two states had expressed displeasure over the decision by some members to sell petrol below the prices charged by other filling stations.

The circumstances surrounding the reported position of the association’s leadership, however, require clarification from the relevant IPMAN officials. Their response is necessary to establish the facts, understand the basis of the reported concerns and give the association an opportunity to state its position.

THE CASE FOR FAIR COMPETITION

At the heart of the matter is a question that directly affects consumers: should a petroleum marketer who can legitimately sell petrol at a lower price be discouraged from doing so simply because competitors are charging more?

The answer should be guided by evidence, legality and consumer welfare. In a competitive market, businesses generally make pricing decisions based on their operating costs, supply arrangements, margins and commercial objectives. Where a marketer can sustainably offer a lower price while meeting all applicable regulatory, product-quality and safety requirements, consumers should be able to consider that option.

Fair competition is not merely a benefit to individual buyers. It creates pressure on businesses to control costs, improve efficiency and offer better value. A lower price from one marketer can encourage others to review their own costs and pricing decisions, potentially producing wider benefits for customers.

This does not mean that every low-priced offer is automatically sustainable or that marketers should ignore the economic realities of running their businesses. Differences in supply costs, transportation, location and other expenses may legitimately result in different pump prices.

The issue, therefore, is not whether every filling station should sell petrol at the same price. It is whether businesses can compete fairly, transparently and within the law, without undue pressure to abandon commercially viable prices that benefit consumers.

Any intervention that prevents legitimate price competition should be supported by clear evidence and a lawful, consumer-focused justification. Otherwise, the likely result is a narrower range of choices and less pressure on sellers to offer better prices.

THE BURDEN ON ORDINARY RESIDENTS

For many households and small businesses, petrol prices go beyond what appears on a filling station’s price board. Higher fuel costs can increase transportation fares, the cost of moving goods and the expense of running generators and other equipment.

Traders may have to spend more transporting their goods to markets, while commercial drivers face pressure from rising operating costs. Such expenses can eventually be passed on to consumers through higher prices for goods and services.

Against this background, any legitimate opportunity to reduce fuel expenses deserves serious attention.

Allowing genuine competition among petroleum marketers could offer some relief, particularly where consumers have access to reliable information about prices and can choose where to buy their fuel. The ability to compare prices is itself an important part of a functioning market.

At the same time, price differences should be examined in context. A lower pump price alone does not establish wrongdoing by competing stations, just as a higher price does not automatically amount to exploitation. Reliable evidence about supply costs, market conditions and the conduct of the parties concerned is needed to reach a fair conclusion.

The central point remains clear: where lower prices are lawful, sustainable and supported by quality and safety compliance, consumers should not be deprived of the benefit merely because uniformity is more convenient for sellers.

STAKEHOLDERS MUST CLARIFY THE ISSUES

The reported concerns over lower pump prices in Oyo and Osun call for open engagement among IPMAN leadership, independent marketers and other relevant stakeholders.

IPMAN officials in both states should be given the opportunity to explain whether any concerns were raised about members selling petrol below prevailing local prices and, if so, the reasons behind those concerns.

Independent marketers, on their part, should be prepared to explain how they arrive at their pump prices and demonstrate that their pricing practices are commercially sustainable and comply with relevant requirements.

The relevant regulatory authorities also have a role to play in ensuring that petroleum products meet quality and safety standards and that market participants operate within the applicable legal framework. They should also remain alert to any conduct that unlawfully restricts competition or misleads consumers.

No stakeholder should be condemned solely on the basis of an unverified allegation. Equally, concerns that could affect consumers’ access to competitively priced fuel should not be dismissed without proper examination.

A balanced approach requires both scrutiny and restraint: lower prices should be tested against evidence, while attempts to suppress legitimate competition should also face appropriate questions.

CONSUMERS SHOULD NOT BE LEFT OUT

Ultimately, the debate over petrol prices in Oyo and Osun should not become a contest between filling station owners. The interests of consumers must remain central.

Petroleum marketers need a business environment in which they can operate sustainably, recover legitimate costs and earn reasonable returns. Consumers, however, also deserve a marketplace where they can make informed choices and benefit from genuine competition.

If a filling station can lawfully and sustainably sell quality petrol at a lower price, that decision should be assessed on its merits rather than opposed simply because neighbouring stations charge more. Competition should not be treated as a problem merely because it exposes differences in pricing.

The way forward lies in transparency, fair competition and constructive engagement among stakeholders.

For residents struggling with the cost of transportation, food and other necessities, even modest savings matter. Ensuring that legitimate competition is allowed to work could help ease some of that pressure, while proper oversight can protect consumers from unsafe products and unsustainable practices.

The relevant question is whether all parties are prepared to put a fair and transparent marketplace ahead of unnecessary disputes over pricing. Consumers should not be asked to pay more simply to preserve uniformity where lawful competition can deliver better value.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Governor Seyi Makinde’s Media Chat: A Hundred And Twenty Minutes Of Trash Talk | By Sola Abegunde

Published

1 week ago

on

October 13, 2026

By

I knew that Governor Makinde would provide us with a hundred and twenty minutes of comic relief and at the same time, I knew he is bound to commit unforced errors which would further expose his shenanigans.

The outgoing Governor of Oyo state did not disappoint on both fronts.

Personally, I understand the need for him to have one final valedictory Media Chat.

The atmosphere might be too hot for him to even think of such luxury after the general election in 2027. So, if he’s got the opportunity now, why not take a shot at it?

I must however say that the Governor displayed his insensitivity right from the choice of the Studio the Chat was aired.

Shortly before the Media Chat commenced, I came across a release signed by the Chairman of the Nigeria Union of Journalist, NUJ, BCOS Chapel, Com. Ademola Balogun.

Com. Balogun was full of lamentations concerning the very terrible state of the Oyo state Broadcasting Corporations, BCOS.

He was of the very strong opinion that the BCOS should have meaningful opportunities to cover Government activities.

He also called on Governor Seyi Makinde to empower the BCOS to invest in modern studio, transmitting equipment, digital broadcasting facilities and online platforms.

Com. Ademola spoke extensively about Staff welfare and other issues.

Sadly, while Governor Seyi Makinde has been consistent in empowering a particular Radio station, the Broadcasting Corporations of Oyo state, BCOS has been dying slowly.

Unfortunately, I have no good news for Com. Ademola. His lamentations will definitely fall on stone deaf ears. It is too late for Governor Makinde to change his ways. I just pray that the Governor would not wake up one day and sold off whatever remains of the Corporation.

That is just by the way. Let me address Governor Makinde’s Media Chat for whatever it is worth. The Governor spent a whole two hours venting anger and spreading outright lies and half-truths.

I am surprised that Governor Makinde has not seen any reason for him to have a second thought about his awkward and reckless comments about the Law Profession.

I am saying this because, for the second time, his Deputy was sitting closely beside him and yet, he felt like it was humorous for him to take a dig at Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli, the All Progressives Congress, APC Gubernatorial candidate, regarding his misconceived failure as a Law practitioner.

He repeated the ignorant and reckless comments about Senator Alli, not being a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and for that reason, according to Governor Seyi Makinde, the Oyo South Senator is not an accomplished Legal Practitioner.

He had made that same reckless comments a couple of weeks ago and at that time also, the Deputy Governor was beside him!

The respectable man is an accomplished Lawyer of many years of experience, who had trained a lot of successful Lawyers.

I also wonder, how people like Dr. Nureni Adeniran and Olasunkanmi Olaleye, who are also Lawyers and have been working with Governor Seyi Makinde over the years would feel about those reckless comments coming from their Boss.

If you want to follow Governor Seyi Makinde’s reasoning, if you are a teacher and you did not rise to the status of a School Principal or Head teacher, then, you’re a failure.

If you are a Military Personnel and you didn’t rise to the position of a General, you’re a failure!

Any time I saw the Governor arguing in this regard, I always asked myself if he was actually himself, because, for me, only a drunkard is capable of reasoning in that manner, or, perhaps, some young elements who had taken so much banned substances.

I have carefully analyzed the 120 minutes Media Chat and I saw that Governor Seyi Makinde spent so much time treating two issues.

The first, being his frustration about his perceived betrayal by president Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the second being his failed attempt to rewrite the Constitution of Nigeria regarding the financial autonomy for Local Governments.

The birthday boy tried to work him through the crisis at the Circular Road, but it was obvious that the main reasons behind Governor Makinde’s Media Chat were grounded on his firm beliefs that Tinubu breached certain agreements with him and others in 2023 and his warped opinion about how the Local Governments should operate within our Federation.

Let’s start with Governor Seyi Makinde’s allegations against Tinubu.

According to him, in 2023, an agreement was signed between certain individuals, including himself.

He said there was an agreement that a Government of National Unity would be formed by president Tinubu after he won the presidential election of 2023 and that he and the Governor of Lagos state, Babajide Sanwo-Olu were signatories to that agreement.

According to him, president Tinubu was not a signatory to the agreement but he was informed after the agreement was signed!

He went further to say that on the strength of that agreement, he presented Bimbo Adekambi as a Ministerial nominee because the president had earlier told him that he wanted to appoint the Minister for Budget and Planing from Oyo state.

To his chagrin and disappointment, president Tinubu settled for Bayo Adelabu and asked him to own the nomination of the former Minister for power, a request he claimed he rejected.

He therefore concluded that all the Ministers nominated from the South West are from Bourdilon.

I have carefully analyzed this confession by Governor Seyi Makinde and I have a few questions for him.

Why is it that Governor Seyi Makinde is the only one complaining about a breached agreement?

Why did it take him all these long to come out with this fact?

What was the criteria for the nomination of Bimbo Adekambi? Did he just take a random decision to choose Adekambi without a prior relationship between the two of them or what?

How does Governor Seyi Makinde want to convince any right thinking person that he believed an agreement would be binding on Tinubu on the strength of Governor Sanwo-Olu’s alleged signature?

For me, that doesn’t make any sense, most especially, for an ” accomplished Engr” like Seyi Makinde!

I am surprised that Governor Makinde leaves out what he benefited from the alignment with Tinubu in 2023.

Remove the alignment with Tinubu in 2023, Seyi Makinde was a goner and the fact that he was able to secure a second term in office ought to have been enough for him.

I am also surprised that Governor Makinde didn’t understand that he was advertising his penchant for serial betrayal and greed when he was relating the events that shaped his re-election in 2023.

It was all about him and the decisions he took, not only affected the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP alone, it also affected certain candidates of his party during the first ballot in 2023.

Now, to the issue of Local Government Autonomy.

Governor Seyi Makinde is a very funny individual. He was very clear about his position on Local Government Autonomy in 2023.

His position was that he never even believed in their existence and I was amused when the birthday boy was saying that despite his position on Local Government Autonomy in 2023, he was still able to win in 31 Local Governments, signifying the fact that the people of Oyo state believed Governor Makinde’s explanations.

I am extremely happy that Governor Seyi Makinde has not changed his opinion on how Local Governments should operate within the Federating units.

He is still stuck on the fact that the 33 Local Governments in Oyo state should be appendages to the State Government, even, in spite of the Judgment of the Supreme Court granting them full financial autonomy.

I am shocked that Governor Seyi Makinde could attempt to confuse what happened between the Lagos state Government when Tinubu was Governor of the state and the Federal Government during Obasanjo’s period, with the illegalities he has been perpetuating with the resources 33 Local Governments.

There is a clear distinction between both scenarios.

In the case of Tinubu as Governor of Lagos state, the Lagos state Government created more Local Governments and the Federal Government was of the opinion that the state Government was wrong to have done so.

As a result of this misunderstanding, the Federal Government stopped the monthly allocations for the Local Governments in Lagos state and it led to a Judicial dispute.

In the end, the Supreme Court held that the Local Governments created by the Lagos state Government were incohate, but it faulted the Federal Government for withholding the monthly allocations belonging to the Local Governments in Lagos state.

Lagos state Government thereafter recognized and administered the newly created Local Governments as Local Government Development Areas and many states have since copied the template, including Oyo state.

In the present scenario, the president, through the Attorney general of the Federation approached the Supreme Court and sought to secure full financial autonomy for the 774 Local Governments and the Supreme Court agreed to the request.

I have been asking myself, why is it that Governor Seyi Makinde is having problems with that judgement?

The monthly allocations released to the 33 Local Governments are released against their names.

Is Governor Seyi Makinde saying that it is proper for a Governor to still be the supervisor for the 33 Local Governments?

How does the judgment of the Supreme Court translate to the Federal Government trying to take control of the 774 Local Governments?

Yorubas will always say that a dog can not stand watch over two different buildings. ( Aja kii roro, ko so ojule meji po).

I was also surprised to hear Governor Seyi Makinde talking about the fact that, instead of full financial autonomy for the Local Governments, he preferred to discuss about how the Local Governments could be empowered to survive without monthly allocations from Abuja.

Haba! Governor Makinde!! Gently now.

You are depriving the Local Governments of their entitlements and you except them to thrive. How would that happen?

Why didn’t we start with the state? Can Oyo state survive without monthly allocations?

I think everyone can now see that Bimbo Adekambi as Governor, would never allow the Local Governments to breathe.

On the other hand, Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli has promised to guarantee full financial autonomy for the 33 Local Governments and the implementation of the policy requires no rocket science. All it requires is the will.

There is an existing judgment of the Supreme Court which has outlined the steps to be taken by any willing state Government.

Sarafa Alli only needs to direct relevant stakeholders at the Local Governments to comply with the judgment and that is the end of the matter.

What is so difficult in that, if you are not covetous?

I might have to do this piece in series but I will like to warn the residents of the Circular Road.

You heard Governor Seyi Makinde. He is promising you nothing.

My only problem with him is his attempts to shift the blame of the chaos he orchestrated at the Circular Road on the late Governor Abiola Ajimobi.

He even said that that the Government of Ajimobi defrauded residents of the Circular Road!

Sometimes, people like Governor Seyi Makinde needs no one to enchant them. Their character is an enchantment on itself.

If you’re saying that the Governments of the late Ajimobi defrauded residents of the Circular Road, is Bimbo Adekambi not an integral part of that Government and that is before you begin to ask the Governor for proofs.

I enjoyed Governor Seyi Makinde’s valedictory Media Chat, while looking forward to the new era awaiting him next year.

My father used to tell us that the mouth of the liar does not ooze blood. ( Enu opuro kii seje).

By the way, I saw that Governor Seyi Makinde never mentioned anything about the report of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the abduction of Teachers and Pupils of Yawota and Esinele communities of Oriire Local Government.

How far now?

Sola Abegunde.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Re: Adekambi vs Alli: Dr. Olanrewaju’s Descent To Soliloquizing | Sola Abegunde

Published

3 weeks ago

on

October 1, 2026

By

 

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.

Continue Reading

Trending