Opinion
Aregbesola, political treachery and the Ijebu-Jesa sermon
Published
5 years agoon
Chinua Achebe’s Tortoise folktale in his highly celebrated Things Fall Apart, among other motifs, excoriates an act of betrayal as evil. In having Ekwefi, one of his characters, narrate the proverbial cunning and treachery of the Tortoise to her daughter Ezinma, Achebe attempted to paint a moral canvass suggestive of the fact that traitors always take fatal leaps that eventually lead to their unraveling. Like the tortoise, they break their shell carapace.
This is Ekwefi’s narration: There once lived a very avaricious Tortoise whose greed knew no bounds and which eventually became its tragic flaw. One day, with the general awareness that birds were planning a huge feast in the sky, Tortoise met the Chief of Birds and pleaded with him to get his bird colleagues to make him partake of the feast. But the wings with which he would fly became a challenge. After pleading passionately with them, reluctantly, the birds agreed to each donate feathers to him so that he could be able to fly heavenwards and partake of the feast. On getting to the feast venue, Tortoise’s tragic flaw then took the best of him as he announced to all in attendance that his name had changed to “All of us.”
Unsuspecting of his manipulative motive by then, by the time the meals arrived for “all of you” and Tortoise cornered them to himself so that he could take them back to earth, his name being “All of us,” his cunning dawned on all of the birds. Miffed by this colossal deceit and selfish greed, the birds demanded that he returned their feathers to them. Left all alone, Tortoise pleaded to be done the last favour: the birds should help tell his wife to arrange soft cushions for him so that when he leapt earthwards, his fall would not be fatal. Conversely however, the birds told Tortoise’s wife to arrange a pile of stones, upon which he fell and which broke its shell till this day.
To Achebe, the above folklore was a symbolic foretelling of the calamity that awaited Okonkwo for partaking in the killing of Ikemefuna. While the Tortoise’s tragic flaw was greed, Okonkwo’s was pride and incestuous betrayal of the filial bond that existed between a father and the sonship of a foster surrogacy. Remember that grisly, gripping forewarning to Okonkwo by Ogbuefi Ezeudu, the oldest man in Okonkwo’s clan of Umuofia: “That boy calls you father. Do not bear a hand in his death.” This is because acts of betrayal rankle the spleen of society. It is why society approximates a link between treachery, avarice for power and the fit of epilepsy. They all seize their victim all of a sudden. The common thread that runs through them is that, when victims are in its fit, shame takes flight.
On Monday February 14, 2022, a known surrogate of Bola Ahmed Tinubu, two-term governor of Lagos State and presidential aspirant on the platform of the APC, former Osun State governor and Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, leapt into negative reckoning for mordantly attacking his benefactor. The bile, the magisterial arrogance and the Godlike sense of irreplaceability that dripped out of the address delivered by Aregbesola in Yoruba at a political gathering in Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State instantly gained traction on the social media, which gave readers the latitude to label him a traitor.
This has provoked the need for an examination of the concept of betrayal, what it means to betray and who a betrayer is. By definition, betrayal is an act of breaking or violation of a presumptive contract, trust and confidence. This rupturing of a written or unwritten contract produces a moral and psychological conflict. The person who betrays an ideal, a country or a person is commonly referred to as a traitor or betrayer.
There have been several acts of betrayal in history. When betrayers strike, their actions provoke a constellation of negative behaviours, thoughts, and feelings among their victims and society. In Yorubaland for instance, an act of betrayal is not only excoriated, betrayers are ostracized.
In Nigerian politics, where a stupendously wealthy political patron hands over power to a client, there have been claims and counter claims of betrayals. These have provoked the moral or otherwise in betrayal. In other words, when a political patron, who most times subverts the process, loots resources to benefit a client, does his client have a moral right to remain true to their agreement? Does anyone have to abide by the ethos of written, unwritten, sworn or unsworn agreement between a client and the patron?
Political betrayal became an issue during the First Republic between Nnamdi Azikiwe, KO Mbadiwe, RBK Okafor and JOJ Okezie, as well as between Obafemi Awolowo and S. L. Akintola. During the Nigerian Fourth Republic, the tiff between Jim Nwobodo and Chimaroke Nnamani after the 1999 Enugu gubernatorial elections also became a subject of discourse. So also the 2003 tiff between Chris Uba, the barely literate but stupendously wealthy Anambra businessman and Chris Ngige, which exposed the destructive phenomenon, as well as revealing the sacral importance of traditional African oath in the service of abidance to agreements. The Uba-Ngige issue shows the phenomenon of abidance to political oaths as being sustained by recourse to African traditional medicine, whereby the godfather and godson go before grooves of renowned destructive shrines to swear oaths of allegiance. Ubah had financed the election of Ngige to be governor of Anambra, pulling him by the nape of his trousers to the Okija shrine to swear by an oath of abidance, at about 2 a.m. At midnight, a naked Ngige performed the rituals which involved dead bodies, his dangling member revealing the shame of godfatherism.
In Lagos, there was also the Tinubu-Raji Fashola experiment. What many saw, for almost four years, was matrimony worthy of an example. Not until the re-election campaign of Fashola in 2011 did the cracks begin to be noticeable, revealing a godfather/godson relationship as the proverbial seeds in a walnut pod, ostensibly in the distribution of the largesse of power. In many other states at this time, the matrimonies became a bedlam almost immediately. In Enugu, for instance, Sullivan Chime was still a governor-elect when he started to undo all that his mentor did. He spent eight years trying to pull down the Ebeano house that midwifed him. Orji Kalu suffered same fate in Abia, where his erstwhile chief of staff, T. A. Orji, who was in the EFCC custody while his election was taking place, eventually emerged governor. Orji spent his years in government firing ballistic missiles at Kalu who spent billions of state funds to skew the process in his favour.
The above political treachery has been replicated in virtually all the states, even in the 2015 elections where the anointed godsons, having mutated to become godfathers themselves, attempted to foist their own godsons too as successors. In Anambra, Peter Obi, while shopping for a godson, sidestepped the generally accepted skewer-minded political class, and walked into the supposedly sane banking hall as he searched for an urbane, corporate world executive. He got Willie Obiano. Less than a year after, the strange, somber-looking Obiano had transmuted from the gentleman who couldn’t hurt a fly into a stone-hearted political pall-bearer who strenuously presided over Obi’s political funeral. Same was replicated in Kano where Umar Ganduje, erstwhile Rabiu Kwankwaso’s lickspittle, became a hydra-headed monster who seeks to swallow his ex-boss. The rift between Emmanuel Uduaghan and his cousin, James Ibori was also alleged to be an act of betrayal.
At Ijebu-jesa, from the word go, Aregbesola did not leave anyone in doubt that he was embarking on an institutional insurrection. The speech began with a pugnacious howl you will find in a fight-baiting Alsatian dog. His APC faction in Osun, he began in the dexterous weave of bile, was the core Afenifere – a progressive group that genuinely loves the people, Awolowo’s group, Bola Ige’s group and “Baba Akande’s group, before he partly left us.” It is a known fact that Akande currently daily picks flowers in Tinubu’s garden.
“We followed and served this leader with all our might. In fact, our loyalty to him had caused some people to start wondering if we were no longer Muslims… Sadly, we didn’t know that while we wished him well, he didn’t think good of us. However, because we placed him higher than where he ordinarily should be, he started to think he is our god….By the time my successor was handed over to me around July or May 2018, I was told, ‘Rauf, this is the ideal successor that would stand by you. He would further showcase your efforts. He would not betray you; he would not dim the light of your glory’. That was what the person, who handed him over to me said. If the person is listening to me, it would resonate with him, if he said so or not. But, did he do as he was vouched for? And when he reneged on these promises, did the person, who handed him over to me draw his attention to these failings? Anyway, isn’t the person the one we now see today?” Aregbesola had waffled endlessly (all bold italics mine).
With the above, the question remains, is there morality; or should there be morality, in political patron-client relationship? This reminds one of that famous statement from Fashola which articulates the moral dilemma of the godson to his godfather. Fashola, apparently at a critical juncture of a loyalty intersection, had, prayer-like, supplicated, “may our loyalty never be tested.” In flagellating Aregbesola, so many tales have been told about how he literally emerged from the gutters and is today a man of political reckoning, courtesy Tinubu. The Lagos landlord was said to have spent billions of naira to install this erstwhile lickspittle of his as governor of Osun, rising from being a Personal Assistant to him for about few months after the January 1999 election, to being Commissioner for Works, seconded to Osun where he served two-terms as governor and currently, minister. The godfather also allowed the Minister to grow a hydra-headed political base in the Alimoso area of Lagos. So why was Aregbesola making an issue of “serving ‘this person’” with the whole of his might, against someone who gave him this colossal uplift?
Aregbesola’s followers however say that the support was vicarious, that the cache of political favour was mutual and that the godfather was the ultimate beneficiary. For instance, they said that the former governor, known for his eclectic spirituality, was allegedly Tinubu’s marabout and spiritual Man Friday. More importantly, Aregbesola was also said to have been planted in Osun as an agent, ajele in Yoruba. If this then is so, the agent ought to know that he was not sent out by the godfather so that he could become another godfather. The Yoruba will say that a farmhand does not plant plantain or kolanut. If he does so, he would be seen as a farm grabber because as the Yoruba say again, if the beard of a labourer is as long as the distance of Bourdilon to Ebira land, his master remains his master forever. So, knowing the self as the roots of his so-called push to the top and perhaps the subversion of societal norm that went into the process of his push up by the patron, can it be said that Aregbesola and other political godsons who dealt treacherously with their patrons, were/are guilty of a moral subversion?
What will seem to be an answer to this knotty moral dilemma is that ancient Western aphorism which says that there should be honour even among thieves. It was lusciously propounded by Salawa Abeni, the self-styled Queen of Waka music who, in one of her songs, sang: “I have partaken in spending from proceeds of your wealth so I am barred from joining in abusing you.” What that means is that, no matter how amoral the proceeds of wealth of the patron that sustains the ascendancy of the client is, the moment the client decides to close their eyes to the immorality behind the acquisition, they are barred from moralizing their treachery against the patron. This convicts Aregbesola and other political godsons in allegation of rank treachery. In the case of the Minister of Interior, like the Tortoise at the feast in the sky, he became the “All of us,” manifesting a triad of audacious greed for power at the expense of his godfather, ultra political selfishness and assuming the ultimate power of God or Fredrich Nietsche’s Superman.
No matter the pains, discomfort and acts of betrayal a political client suffers in the hands of his patron, escalating the disagreement to the absurd level that Aregbesola did in Ijebu-Jesa was treasonous. Apparently, having been privileged to be in the inner caucus of his patron, the Minister, ipso facto, sees himself as having transmuted to the same level with the godfather. Which is a fatal flaw in the laws of power. The consensus of mind between him and his Ijebu-Jesa political gathering bred that ad-lib reference to “those who are now urinating on themselves” by one of his cohorts. By refraining from immediately censoring the author of the ad-lib, it will appear to suggest what lawyers call consensus ad idem between him and the author of the quip.
Now, Aregbesola has met the first level of his waterloo, his candidate having recorded a colossal loss in the Osun APC primary held on Saturday. When traitors exhibit their treachery, there is often room for mending of fences between them and the patron. However, the scar may never heal enough to be totally off being seen. Tinubu’s political odyssey is said to be replete with a baffling path of forgiving traitors. However, that Ijebu-Jesa misadventure, for Aregbesola, and his loss of face and gradual decimation in Osun politics, may be a signal to a gradual nunc-dimitis of his political relevance, preparatory to a political well that is beginning to run dry. His loss today in the Osun gubernatorial primary will seem to be the beginning of a long dip into political abyss. The problem with treachery is that, it provokes and legitimizes future intra-group treachery against the traitor himself too. When this happens, the traitor will remember the ancient aphorism which says, you never miss the water till the well runs dry. When the Tinubu well runs dry, the traitor’s treachery would have run its full throttle and he will begin to miss his water.
Dr. Festus Adedayo, a Journalist, Lawyer and Columnist writes from Ibadan, Oyo State
You may like
Opinion
G-WAGON: Dare Adeleke, A Liar’ll Steal; Why’re You Desperate To Conceal The Truth? | Maroof Asudemade
Published
1 week agoon
November 6, 2026By
Mega IconI have read Dare Adeleke’s rather vacuous response to my article on Governor Seyi Makinde’s presentation of a brand-new Mercedes-Benz G-Wagon 500 to the President-General of the Central Council of Ibadan Indigenes (CCII), Barrister Sulaimon Ajeniyi Ajewole. Unfortunately, beneath the insults, name-calling on my person and his apparent eye-service desperation to impress his political benefactor, there is hardly any substance worth engaging.
Adeleke devoted considerable space to calling me a drunken, lowly writer. Yet, in all his verbal gymnastics, he conspicuously failed to address the fundamental questions raised in my article. Has Governor Makinde paid the statutory salaries and entitlements of the Olubadan of Ibadanland, Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja, and the Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Akeem Owoade, since their ascension to the respective thrones? Has his administration provided them with official vehicles, as expected under the applicable government arrangements? These were the issues Adeleke ought to address not my personality.
If he had any credible answers to these questions, he would have provided them. Instead, he chose to exhibit his wrakness as an intellectually exhausted defender. He resorted to abusing the messenger when he couldn’t dismantle the message.
However, there is one particularly interesting aspect of Dare Adeleke’s response that deserves immediate correction. He lied that Governor Makinde spent N1 billion on the completion of the Olubadan Palace. Is he sure he’s not addicted to stealing as a liar? The financial contributions towards the completion of the palace came from multiple sources, including the 11 local governments in Ibadanland, each of which contributed N50 million, amounting to N550 million.
Governor Makinde contributed N250 million. The governor’s contribution was N250 million, not N1 billion! Why would Adeleke inflate the governor’s contribution from N250 million to N1 billion? Is he so desperate to manufacture an impressive record for his political principal that figures have become expendable? Or does he imagine that exaggerating the governor’s generosity will make the unanswered questions of ridiculing our royal fathers disappear?
The 11 local governments of Ibadanland have a responsibility towards the Olubadan institution. Their contributions towards the palace should not be presented as a personal sacrifice by Governor Makinde. They are contributions made by public institutions to an institution that belongs to the people of Ibadanland.
Even more disturbing is Adeleke’s inane argument that because Makinde contributed money towards completing the Olubadan Palace, the governor deserves appreciation rather than criticism. This argument betrays a shocking failure of Adeleke to distinguish between governmental responsibilities and statutory obligations.
Let us even assume, for the sake of argument, that Makinde personally spent N1 billion on the palace. How does constructing or completing a building discharge the government’s obligation to pay the statutory salaries and entitlements of the Olubadan and the Alaafin? How does a palace building become a substitute for official vehicles? Are these royal fathers supposed to live in beautiful palaces while their statutory entitlements remain unpaid?
By Adeleke’s ‘logic’, Governor Makinde could build a magnificent headquarters for the Nigeria Labour Congress and subsequently refuse to pay workers their salaries, expecting the labour movement to applaud him for his generosity. Would that be acceptable? Could the government substitute office buildings for workers’ wages? Dare Adeleke is glaringly a peripheral thinker!
A building is a capital project. Salaries and official entitlements are separate obligations. Since Adeleke knew he could not understand this elementary distinction, he should have smelt his argument before presenting it to the public. His defence is not only logically defective; it is intellectually sour.
More importantly, the completion of the Olubadan Palace was not the subject of my article. I did not dispute the governor’s contribution. I questioned the apparent contradiction between his extravagant generosity towards the CCII President-General and the allegations of neglect concerning the official entitlements of the Olubadan and the Alaafin. Adeleke has not answered that question. He has merely introduced an unrelated expenditure in an attempt to divert attention.
I have no objection to Governor Makinde giving G-Wagons, aeroplanes or even private jets to people he loves, provided he does so with his personal resources. He is entitled to his private generosity. But public accountability should not cease because a governor is generous to his friends, associates or political admirers. The issue is not his freedom to give birthday presents. It is his responsibility to discharge governmental obligations.
As for Adeleke’s unnecessary personal attacks, I refuse to dignify his descriptions of me as a drunken or lowly writer with an elaborate defence. Neither description reflects my personality, and neither alters the substance of my argument. He only needs to be aware that despite his opinion of me as a drunken, lowly writer, I am his better by far as a family man and a responsible father – two essential duties he has failed in. I will also not allow his inability to sustain an intelligent argument to dictate the level of my engagement.
I am upset with Dare Adeleke for not living up to his claim of belonging to Oja’ba. He lacks the intellectual discipline, street wisdom and argumentative dexterity traditionally associated with the historic Ibadan community. His response has demonstrated an unfortunate deficit in all three. “Dare ò m’èsì, ó tún gọ!”
There is also something deeply incongruous about Adeleke’s pretentious defence of Governor Makinde. Those familiar with the undercurrents of Oyo politics may find his public posturing rather amusing. He presents himself as an unquestioning defender of the governor, yet political hypocrisy has a way of concealing its true colours beneath an appearance of loyalty. If the human stomach were transparent like a calabash, perhaps the governor would have a clearer view of Dare Adeleke as the green snake lurking beneath the green grass.
But my concern remains the dignity of the Olubadan and Alaafin institutions, not Adeleke’s political theatrics. He has had an opportunity to answer straightforward questions. He failed. He has had an opportunity to correct the allegations with verifiable facts. He avoided them. Instead, he manufactured a N1 billion contribution, inflated the governor’s generosity and attempted to intimidate a critic with insults.
Let me therefore restate the questions he could not answer: Has Governor Makinde paid the statutory salaries and entitlements of the Olubadan and the Alaafin since their ascension? Has he provided them with their official vehicles in accordance with applicable government policy? If yes, let Adeleke produce the evidence. If no, let him explain why.
A G-Wagon cannot answer questions about unpaid salaries. A palace cannot substitute for statutory entitlements. And N1 billion in political propaganda cannot turn N250 million into N1 billion. Dare Adeleke may choose to defend Makinde with insults, exaggerations and emotional outbursts. I will continue to interrogate the administration with facts, logic and questions that public officeholders owe the people answers to.
The dignity of the Olubadan and the Alaafin is far more important than Adeleke’s desperate attempt to earn political applause. And no amount of name-calling will make me abandon the responsibility of holding those in power accountable.
Opinion
OYO AHEAD: Senator Alli Blueprint for Oyo Renewal | Muji Armstrong-Bello
Published
1 week agoon
November 6, 2026By
Mega IconThe unveiling of Senator Sharafadeen Abiodun Alli’s OYO AHEAD manifesto has introduced a new dimension to the 2027 Oyo State governorship conversation. Beyond the usual campaign promises, the document presents an attempt to define not just what a government intends to do, but how it proposes to govern. Its central message is that Oyo State needs a development model built around grassroots empowerment, economic productivity, institutional accountability and measurable performance.
What makes the manifesto politically significant is its attempt to connect the candidate’s personal political journey with a proposed programme of government. From his experience as Chairman of Ibadan North Local Government to his service as Secretary to the State Government, Chief of Staff, Senator and Chairman of Odu’a Investment Company, Alli presents himself as a politician whose experience cuts across grassroots administration, constitutional politics, legislative representation and business management. These experiences provide a solid foundation for effective governance and reinforce the expectation that his proposed agenda can be translated into tangible results for the people of Oyo State.
The first pillar, local government autonomy, may well become the most politically consequential. By promising transparent access to council allocations, monthly funding arrangements and greater freedom for local governments to address community needs, BSA is placing grassroots governance at the centre of his development philosophy. The message is unmistakable: democracy must be felt beyond the Government House, and the dividends of government must reach the communities where ordinary people live and work.
His infrastructure proposals also deserve attention. Rather than concentrating exclusively on new construction, the manifesto promises an audit of unfinished roads, published completion schedules, farm access roads, improved electricity, potable water and affordable housing. This suggests an understanding that infrastructure should be judged by its economic and social usefulness, not simply by the political visibility of projects.
In healthcare, the proposed Oyo Care Guarantee for infants, pregnant women and residents above 70 is a significant social intervention. The commitment to strengthen primary healthcare, address shortages of medical personnel and expand health insurance coverage recognises that healthcare is not a privilege reserved for those who can afford it. With the right funding arrangements, adequate staffing and firm institutional commitment, these promises can be translated into a sustainable healthcare system that delivers tangible benefits to the people of Oyo State.
Education is another area where the manifesto attempts to reconnect Oyo with its historic reputation as a pioneer of educational development. Reducing classroom congestion, repairing schools, expanding scholarships, establishing skills centres and linking graduates to employment are proposals that speak directly to the future of the state’s young population. These interventions are designed to translate educational investment into measurable improvements in learning outcomes, practical skills and employment opportunities for the next generation.
Perhaps the most compelling economic proposition is the commitment to move Oyob beyond an economy of consumption towards one of production, investment and job creation. The proposed industrial parks, revival of the Oluyole Free Trade Zone, ₦10 billion Youth Fund, digital skills programme and support for small businesses suggest an administration seeking to make employment creation a central responsibility of government. The ₦150 billion annual internally generated revenue target reflects an ambitious vision of economic growth, driven by expanded business activity, increased investment, efficient revenue administration and the elimination of financial leakages, while preserving a favourable environment for citizens and businesses to prosper.
Agriculture gives the manifesto another important regional dimension. Oyo possesses considerable agricultural potential, particularly across Oke-Ogun, Ogbomoso and Ibarapa. The proposals for processing facilities, revived farm settlements, mechanisation, storage, agricultural insurance and export promotion recognise that farmers cannot prosper merely by producing crops; they must also have access to markets, processing facilities and value chains. If properly executed, this could transform agriculture from subsistence activity into a major engine of industrial growth.
Security, appropriately, is treated as the foundation upon which every other pillar depends. The proposed strengthening of community security networks, protection and insurance for hunters and vigilantes, improved surveillance and farmer-herder mediation reflect the reality that development cannot flourish where fear controls access to farms, schools and businesses. The accompanying commitment to public disclosure of projects, contractors and costs also reinforces the argument that security and accountability are inseparable responsibilities of government.
One particularly striking feature is the candidate’s personal commitment to publish quarterly performance reports and to decline a second-term request if Oyo State is not measurably better by the end of his first tenure. This is a bold political undertaking. It shifts the conversation from the traditional entitlement of incumbency to the obligation of performance. This commitment further underscores the importance of measurable performance targets, transparent reporting and regular public assessments as the foundation for accountable and results-driven governance.
The strength of OYO AHEAD lies not only in the breadth of its promises but also in the opportunity to translate them into a practical development programme. The proposed revenue expansion, healthcare guarantee, youth and women empowerment funds, educational reforms and infrastructure projects provide an ambitious agenda for the state. With proper financial planning, sound legal frameworks, effective coordination and measurable implementation targets, these proposals can form the foundation of a purposeful and results-oriented administration.
This places an important responsibility on the OYO AHEAD Steering Committee. Beyond campaign mobilisation and public presentation, the Committee must sustain the technical work required to support the manifesto with reliable data, realistic costing, legal guidance, implementation timelines and measurable outcomes. The depth of this preparation will be central to demonstrating that OYO AHEAD is not merely a collection of campaign promises, but a carefully considered programme for governing Oyo State.
As the 2027 governorship election approaches, the debate should increasingly focus on the future of Oyo State: the governance philosophy, experience, policy direction and preparedness of those seeking the people’s mandate. Political alliances and personalities will naturally shape the contest, but the enduring question is which proposals offer a clear and practical pathway to development, prosperity and accountable leadership.
OYO AHEAD has placed such a pathway before the people of Oyo State. Its seven pillars provide a framework for addressing the state’s development priorities, while its emphasis on grassroots governance, economic productivity, human capital development and accountability speaks to the need for a new direction. With his political experience, administrative background and familiarity with the challenges of Oyo State, Senator Sharafadeen Abiodun Alli is well positioned to lead the effort to translate this blueprint into meaningful progress. The promise of OYO AHEAD is renewal; its ultimate measure will be the transformation it delivers to the lives of the people.
Prince Armstrong-Bello, JP. Akogun Aliiwo Ibadanland, Author of “Yoruba Leadership in Diaspora: Equity Justice and Tradition” is a Political Communication Strategist and Public Affairs Analyst
Opinion
OYO 2027: MAKINDE EATS SOUR GRAPES, ADEKANMBI’S TEETH MUST BE SET ON EDGE
Published
1 week agoon
November 4, 2026The confusion within the ranks of the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) is becoming increasingly difficult to describe.
The political empire built by Governor Seyi Makinde on what critics describe as lies, betrayals, broken promises and greed appears to be crumbling by the day.
Indeed, Makinde and his APM loyalists are providing an endless source of amusement these days.
Virtually everyone who leaves the Makinde administration is suddenly dismissed as a “paperweight” by the party’s social media attack dogs.
I have often wondered whether these fellows are unaware of the wisdom behind the Yoruba belief that even cotton wool, when gathered in sufficient quantities, can become a load too heavy for one person to carry.
As the Yoruba proverb puts it: Eni ní òwú ò t’ẹrù; ìwọ̀nba tó fẹ́ fi tan iná ló mú.
You keep losing prominent politicians and influential party stakeholders, yet you dismiss them as political nonentities. But which heavyweight has the power to cast more than one vote for a preferred candidate?
I am certain that even Bimbo Adekanmbi must be wondering how things deteriorated so badly for the APM.
Before his emergence as Governor Makinde’s anointed governorship candidate was made public, I granted an interview on a television station during which I openly predicted that Adekanmbi would get the governor’s endorsement and that his choice as successor would spell trouble for both men.
To one another, both men have become potential political albatrosses. Unfortunately, Governor Makinde’s ego appears to have blinded him to realities beyond his immediate political calculations.
I am particularly surprised that Adekanmbi failed to recognise that he was walking into a political trap by accepting Makinde’s endorsement.
Greed, indeed, can be a dangerous disease. In Adekanmbi’s position, no discerning politician would have ignored the number of political enemies Governor Makinde had accumulated during his seven years in office.
It follows, therefore, that Adekanmbi would inevitably inherit many of those political liabilities. Sadly, he either failed to appreciate the implications or simply chose to overlook the consequences.
By the time Governor Makinde, or perhaps Seye Famojuro, settled for Adekanmbi, the governor was already embroiled in disagreements with prominent political figures, including former Deputy National Chairman of the PDP, Ambassador Taofeek Oladejo Arapaja, Alhaji Bisi Olopoeyan and several first-class traditional rulers in Oyo State.
He had also fallen out with several influential political figures, including Senator Hosea Agboola, Alhaji Razak Gbadegesin, former Deputy Governor Barrister Gbolarunmi Hazeem, Chief Mrs Jumoke Akinjide, Hon. Mulikat Adeola Akande, former Deputy Governor Engr. Rauf Aderemi Olaniyan, Prince Diran Odeyemi, former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose, former Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike and even President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
Beyond these strained relationships, several stakeholders within the Makinde political camp were already uncomfortable with the process that produced Adekanmbi as the APM governorship candidate.
There were also contentious discussions about whether Governor Makinde should be succeeded by a Christian. Equally troubling to some stakeholders was the question of whether it made political sense for Makinde to present Adekanmbi as his preferred successor when both men hail from Ona-Ara Local Government Area.
At the time, agitations were mounting over Governor Makinde’s alleged failure to comply with the Supreme Court judgment granting financial autonomy to local governments.
Other contentious issues included the controversial Circular Road project, the sale of government assets and the proposed transfer of Oyo State farm settlements to estate developers.
The state’s debt profile, which has remained a subject of public concern and debate, was another issue that had yet to be satisfactorily addressed.
All these issues were already in the public domain before Adekanmbi accepted the offer to become Makinde’s anointed candidate.
One is therefore compelled to ask: what could have persuaded Adekanmbi to accept such a politically dangerous offer?
I can only think of one reason: greed.
When Governor Makinde claimed that he had advised Adekanmbi not to inherit his enemies, he was being economical with the truth.
The reality is that those political liabilities became Adekanmbi’s the moment he accepted Makinde’s endorsement.
The governor knows that he is carrying a political baggage that could weigh heavily on his preferred successor. Yet, he appears unwilling to be held accountable for the political consequences of his own administration.
Unfortunately for both men, even Adekanmbi’s campaign slogan tells a story of its own: “Omi Tuntun 3.0”.
How, then, does he intend to separate himself from the “Omi Tuntun” administration and the controversies surrounding it?
Governor Makinde has never hidden his discomfort with genuine local government autonomy. Adekanmbi, by his posture, appears prepared to sustain the same political template, which critics blame for weakening the 33 local government councils in the state.
On virtually every issue over which the people of Oyo State have expressed concern, Adekanmbi appears to be offering continuity rather than a departure from the policies of the present administration.
He has failed to condemn the controversy surrounding the proposed transfer of the Ogbomoso Farm Settlement to estate developers, despite protests by residents of the ancient town.
He has equally remained silent over the controversy surrounding the administration’s reported moves involving the Saki Farm Settlement.
He also appears untroubled by the reported transfer of the 4,000-hectare Eruwa Farm Settlement to investors, whose whereabouts and activities have, according to critics, remained unclear two years after the arrangement.
Indeed, Adekanmbi appears not to appreciate the extent of the challenges facing the state. For instance, Oyo State is said to be short of six general hospitals if the benchmark of one general hospital per local government area is adopted.
Yet, when Senator Sharafadeen Abiodun Alli promised in his manifesto to address this deficit, APM spokespersons reportedly went on the offensive, describing the manifesto as “lacking in originality”.
Governor Makinde has been in office for more than seven years. During this period, his administration has received ecological funds on several occasions.
The question, therefore, is simple: what has happened to those funds?
There are concerns over the utilisation and accountability of the ecological funds received by the state. The governor owes the people a clear explanation of how these resources have been deployed.
There are also questions surrounding the proposed upgrade of the Alakia Airport, a project for which Adekanmbi himself was appointed by Governor Makinde to head a committee.
I have been reliably informed that the contract sum for the airport upgrade was reportedly reviewed upwards from its original figure of over N50 billion to well above N150 billion.
I have raised this question before, but I am yet to hear Adekanmbi offer a convincing explanation or response to the allegation.
Similarly, Governor Makinde reportedly approved more than N60 billion for the renovation of the Government House, an expenditure that attracted public criticism.
As of today, the visible works include the construction of a hall, the painting of the Government House mosque and church, and the replacement of tiles in both places of worship.
I challenge Governor Makinde to tell the people of Oyo State how much of the more than N60 billion reportedly approved for the renovation has actually been released and expended.
Beyond that, the governor should invite members of the press to conduct an independent assessment of the work carried out so far. The people deserve transparency and accountability, not unanswered questions.
The state government’s performance in education is another area that demands urgent attention.
Oyo State’s performance in WAEC and NECO examinations has continued to attract concern, particularly when compared with the performance of other states, including neighbouring Osun, which has been celebrated for its fifth-place position in a recent examination ranking.
Senator Sharafadeen Abiodun Alli has argued that the state must return to an educational system that makes teaching and learning more conducive. One of his proposals is a 30-pupils-per-classroom policy.
But rather than engage constructively with the proposal, APM voices have dismissed its feasibility.
Adekanmbi, as the party’s governorship candidate, has also failed to offer a clear departure from the present arrangement, under which many public primary and secondary school classrooms remain severely overcrowded and unconducive to effective learning.
Oyo State cannot afford another administration that merely promises continuity without addressing the shortcomings of the present one.
The people deserve better, and they now have an alternative in Senator Sharafadeen Abiodun Alli.
Governor Makinde has eaten sour grapes. Unfortunately, Bimbo Adekanmbi appears destined to bear the consequences.
His teeth, indeed, must be set on edge.
MEGAICON TV
Late Lam Adesina’s Legacy Remains Enduring – Oseni
Ogbomoso Political Earthquake: Makinde Loses Ex-CoS, 32 APM Chieftains to APC
Oyo APC Raises Alarm Over Alleged Plan to Sell Govt Fish Farm
Trending
-
News3 weeks ago2027: Alli, Oseni Tour Ibarapa, Seek Support for APC Candidacies
-
News4 weeks agoOyo South: Sheikh Olafimihan Hails Oseni for N10m Inyass House Donation
-
Opinion3 weeks agoDoctors’ Strike and the Price of Human Life | By Olusegun Hassan
-
Metro3 weeks agoAlli Visits Slain APC Member’s Family, Pledges Support for Pregnant Widow