Opinion
Atiku Abubakar and the sexual history of the Nigerian presidency
Published
5 years agoon
In early 2014, the Zimbabwean public sphere literally caught fire. Rumours that the country’s former Prime Minister and the presidential candidate of the Movement for Democratic Change, (MDC) Morgan Tsvangirai, had suffered “a nasty blow from below,” euphemism for zero virility, spread like bushfire. At about the same time, the virility-restoring prowess of Emmanuel Makandiwa, a ‘miracle-working’ Pentecostal prophet, froze the stratosphere like snowflakes in winter. Estranged wife of Tsvangirai, Elizabeth Macheka, had lit the fire. In an interview she granted The Herald, which was entitled, Why I ditched Tsvangirai: Wife Macheka had been quoted to have said that she had separated from Tsvangirai due to ‘sensitive personal issues’ and that this was known to her and Tsvangirai alone and which only the two of them could resolve.
The above story was told by Wale Adebanwi, highly respected scholar, in a recently published journal article he entitled The Carnality of Power. Therein, Adebanwi had explored the centrality and virility of power and how men of power, through their libido, use sex as a locus of power, as well as how all of us, scholars, lay scholars and society as a whole, “need to pay greater attention to the ways in which obscenity can help explain the nature of power.
For a Zimbabwean public that salivated on riveting gossips and rumours in high and low places, Macheka’s statement was the confirmation it needed for a high-quality rumour it hitherto circulated. In whooshing whispers and mouth-to-ear transmission, the former prime minister was said to have been afflicted by an “under-neath,” below-the-trousers problem of ‘erectile dysfunctional disorder.’ The Herald did not also help matters. It immediately and unabashedly tagged what Macheka dubbed ‘sensitive personal issues’ as ‘a medical one.’ Thereafter, Fungai Machirori, Zimbabwean journalist and blogger, did a salacious piece on the issue which she entitled, Of Penises, Politics and Pentecostalism in Zimbabwe, an essay which she called an “exposé of trouble in the un-paradise that is Tsvangirai’s love life’’
As the story went, in the bid to seek spiritual remedy for the restoration of his numb member, Tsvangirai had to make a sudden visit to Nigeria to meet the infamous miracle-hawking pastor, T. B. Joshua, now late. Joshua had been catapulted to the zenith of Zimbabweans and Southern Africans in general’s migration to his shrine for spiritual patronage due to a 2012 prophecy he made that an African leader who he said was ‘old and unwell,’ would die. At the exit of Malawian president, Bingu wa Mutharika,, the popular belief was that Joshua was ‘spiritually powerful.’ However, Macheka, unable to contain the penile starvation from Tsvangirai, had packed her things and fled her marital home.
The Zimbabwean yellow press world immediately interpreted this visit to Lagos by Tsvangirai as a spirited spiritual search for cure to what Adebanwi tagged his “double jeopardy” – an under-the-trousers virility trouble and a dwindling political fortune.
In his own penis-restoration evangelism, Makandiwa, who is the founder of the Zimbabwe-popular United Family International Church (UFIC), was said to have, during a New Year’s Day service, performed “a penis-enhancing miracle” on a Namibian. The penal calamity that the Namibian suffered from was said to be such that his private member was “the size of a two-year-old’s” and because of this phallic deficiency, he had to run from pillar to post so as to be able to prevent his own “Macheka” from eloping. In the report of what transpired, Prophet Makandiwa had reportedly commanded the Namibian’s miniature member to “arise!” and thereafter, according to an eyewitness, “first month grow, second month grow, third month grow, fourth month grow, fifth month, ummm stop,” such that, “the organ must have grown exponentially until the prophet decreed it to stop.”
For those who think less of the power of sex in high places, Oscar Wilde, Irish poet and playwright, was ready to shock them. “Everything in the world is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power,” he had written. Scholars have taken the Wilde libidinous theorising further to say that there is an intersection between gender, sexual power and political power. So in the analysis of political power, a belittling of sex and sexual power could be a barren pursuit. Indeed, as Adebanwi said, there is an expectation that “the African man of power must display or exhibit his virility – particularly sexual virility.”
Last week, the place of sex in the Nigerian presidency became an issue of discourse. 2019 presidential candidate, presidential hopeful in the 2023 presidential election and former Nigerian Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, had suffered a fate though not similar to Tsvangirai’s but not totally dissimilar to it. Linking both is a single thread of marital dislocation, a desire by one partner in a patrimony to discontinue on a sexual voyage, though ostensibly for different reasons. Atiku Abubakar’s own “Macheka,” Jennifer Iwenjiora Douglas Abubakar, until now his wife and a former Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) correspondent in the 1980s, had gone to her own “The Herald” last Tuesday to narrate that her marriage to the stupendously wealthy politician named Turaki had broken down irretrievably with effect from June 26, 2021. Jennifer had loomed large as subject of a probe some 12 years ago by the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, chaired by Senator Carl Levin, alleging that she, in cahoots with her husband, had funneled slush funds allegedly stolen from the Nigerian government, into America.
“The core reason for the divorce was disagreement over my continued stay in the United Kingdom, to look after my children and several other long-standing issues. I needed to play the role of a mother at this time to the children who have gone through the absence of both father and mother growing up; especially, with the passage of my elder sister who used to look after them,” said Douglas, alongside issues of disagreements over ownership of Turaki’s Nigerian, Dubai and UK properties.
Respected columnist and serial Facebook posts activist, Kayode Samuel, had put the sexual/power implication of the matrimonial squabble in perspective. In a post he made immediately the Atiku-Jennifer divorce became public knowledge, he had written, “Dear Igbo babes, it seems a vacancy may soon be coming up (or has already come up!) for a new wife in the home of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar. The federal character-compliant attribute of his household was one of his strong selling points at the last elections. Now that his Igbo wife is leaving, I’m sure the old man would be thinking of making up her quota in time for 2023. So, up your game “sharperly“, ezigbo nwanyi oma! I won’t be charging anything for this piece of pricey intelligence. I’ll just take it to be part of my nwanwa duties…” Jennifer hailed from the Onitsha area of Anambra State.
Nigeria’s serial presidential candidate, the Turaki, seems to share fate with Zimbabwe’s Tsvangirai. Tsvangirai, aged 61, is “married as many times as he has lost in his bid to become Zimbabwe’s elected president.” This seems to be Abubakar’s lot too. Basking under the Islamic libidinous latitude which allows him to marry four wives, the Turaki went ahead to federal-characterized his libido by marrying Titi from Osun State, as well as other undisclosed women who must be from the northern part of Nigeria. Today however, Abubakar is facing his own double jeopardy of carnality and politics, like Tsvangira.
The political carnality jeopardy the Turaki is battling has to do with the fact that, Emperor Nyesom Wike and the Young Turk governors of the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) like the Namibian’s shrinking manhood, seem to have shrunk the spatial chance of presidential contestation in the PDP against Abubakar whose presidential aspiration’s cloud seems to be dimming. For a man ravaged by serial allegations of corruption during his tenure as Vice President and whose strongest credential for the Nigerian presidency is his democratic – if you like, laissez fare – under-the-trousers personal economy, having had wives from the three geopolitical zones of Nigeria, unlike his challengers whose libido is tribalistic and ostensibly unidirectional, Abubakar’s loss of Jennifer Douglas, a major tripod of his credential, could be a mortal political, rather than a familial blow, in the proportion of Tsvangirai’s loss of masculinity. The question many people are asking is, was Jennifer actually being reticent on the real reason(s) she had to do a Micheka on her own Tsvangirai?
Counterpoising Tsvangirai’s “blow from below” image are some African presidents who were “perceived to have used their manhood well.” In Nigeria, we had the goggled dictator, General Sani Abacha, who though multiple attempts have been made to impeach the narrative of how he died, but over whom the prevailing facts on the streets have prevailed, one of which is that, he died after consuming poisoned apple fruits administered by stealth by the CIA and using Viagra to pump up his virility while working on two Indian prostitutes imported for him at the presidential Villa. Another was late dictator President Gnasingbe Eyadema of Togo, renowned with an elephantine sexual appetite as huge as the Basilica in the Ivorian city of Yamoussoukro. He was known for always sleeping with wives of his male ministers and his few female ministers. One of the ministers, said to have been blessed with an ‘especially attractive’ wife, had to hide her from Eyadéma so that he would not lay his lecherous paws on her. In this virility league was also the late Zairean dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko. Mobutu was said to be as lecherous as a he-goat. This is not to forget the father of them all, the former South African president, Jacob Zuma, who is said to have married at least six times.
In Africa, when a man of power “uses his manhood well,” he is seen as not being effeminate as Tsvangirai. If he is then “blessed” with an imposing virility, whether he uses it licitly or illicitly, this easily gains traction, making his rule to be seen as dominant and domineering. Another example in this regard is Robert Mugabe, who never hid the illicitness of his virility and who had been dating Grace, who he later married, even before his late wife’s death.
The man of power who possesses the Eyadema, Zuma and Mobutu image of a libidinous behemoth in Nigeria’s power calculus is Olusegun Obasanjo. During the Petroleum Trust Development Fund (PTDF) saga when he and Abubakar aimed at each other’s jugular, Atiku had alleged that Obasanjo bought a 607 Peugeot car for a woman friend who resided in Abeokuta with slush funds accruing from the PTDF scandal. Like Mugabe, Obasanjo was then married to Stella, who was Nigeria’s First Lady. In 2018, Obasanjo’s son, Gbenga, even alleged in a court affidavit that his father was having an affair with his wife, Moji. Mrs. Patricia Etteh, the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, was also rumoured to be Obasanjo’s woman friend. In The Carnality of Power, Adebanwi talked about “one prominent and ‘internationally respected’ West African president (who was) famous for breaking meetings – even abroad – to have a ‘quickie’ with his countless paramours.”
Indeed, Nigeria had been “lucky” to have occupiers of the seat of power whose sexual virility was benumbing. Military President Ibrahim Babangida reportedly went out of Dodan Barracks to demonstrate the strength of his awesome libido. In a 2013 book he authored entitled Honour for Sale: An inside account of the murder of Dele Giwa, a military aide to Babangida, Major Debo Basorun, wrote about how, on a trip to France, late First Lady, Mrs. Maryam Babangida, literally pummeled her husband for his presidential libidinous rascality.
Taking the opportunity of a long official meeting he had that dragged into the thin hours of the morning, IBB had engaged a paramour in a liaison whose dalliance with her husband Maryam got to know through the scent of her perfume in IBB’s hotel suite. Dealing the General heavy blows under locked door, when the Better Life for Rural Women proprietress eventually opened the door to IBB’s scared aides who had been ordered by a senior officer to prise the door open upon hearing noise of violence in the suite, they saw a C-in-C, renowned for his braggadocio that “we are not only in office but in power” whose face had been pockmarked by bruises from feminine paws. He was panting amid sweats, with a roughened military service dress which had some buttons torn off by a woman scorned into fury by the stray libido of her husband.
Those who knew Muhammadu Buhari as a young military officer claim that he too sowed wild oats too like his colleagues. They said he specifically coveted liaisons with mountainous posteriors. However, age and ill health would seem to have dealt a blow on that fancy. While emerging from the throes of a health challenge and on a visit to Angela Merkel of Germany and he was asked about the place of his wife in his government, Buhari had attempted to communicate his virility and masculinity, like an African who sees sex as conquest and show of power. He seemed to be saying that he had an active “under-neath” that ill health could not upstage. His wife, according to him, belonged to “zi oza room,” a euphemism for a hot libido. This sense was probably what a social media virility fabricator was about when he sent out a picture of Aisha Buhari, the First Lady, which went viral recently, a picture that had been touched to bear a protruded belly, suggestive of a Buhari who hadn’t gone the way of Morgan Tsvangirai.
In all, as Prof Adebanwi counsels, if we carefully rummage the lurid, the grotesque, the salacious stories of their Sex-cellencies – even at state levels with the governors – we may find anchors to how power politics in Nigeria and Africa can be explained through sex. Similarly, as Zimbabwean journalist and blogger, Fungai Machirori, told us, we may need to study the sexual histories of our men in power because, from the rhythm of the silent but jangling bells of the dangling penises of men in power, a silent compass to their politics may just as well be hiding.
Dr. Festus Adedayo, a Journalist and Columnist writes from Ibadan
You may like
Opinion
Makinde Deserves No Sympathy: He Brought His Present Predicament Upon Himself
Published
2 days 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.
Opinion
Bayo Adelabu and the Art of Treachery: When the Boy Who Was Fed Bites the Finger
Published
4 days agoon
September 21, 2026Politics — that masquerade that never dances the same step twice.
Who would have thought it?
Who, after the political bruising of 2023, after the detour to Accord and the eventual return to the political fold, culminating in a ministerial appointment under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, would have imagined that Bayo Adelabu would one day find himself politically associated with a movement backing Seyi Makinde and the Allied Peoples Movement (APM)?
Yet here we are.
Recent developments surrounding the Boye Nation movement have raised questions in Oyo’s political circles. Ajiboye Akande Sangogade, popularly known as Boye Nation and identified in reports as an aide to Adelabu, is leading a movement that is expected to formally declare for the APM at a youth-focused event scheduled for September 21, 2026, at the Lekan Salami Stadium, Adamasingba, Ibadan. Organisers say Governor Seyi Makinde is expected to attend.
That development naturally raises a political question: where exactly does Adelabu stand?
The question becomes even more compelling against the background of the 2027 Oyo governorship contest.
Adelabu had sought the APC governorship ticket, but Senator Sharafadeen Alli eventually emerged as the party’s candidate. The APC formally unveiled Alli and his running mate, Adesoji Adedeji, in July. Adelabu, however, had previously rejected the claim that Alli’s emergence represented a consensus arrangement and maintained that President Tinubu had backed his own ambition.
Now, with one of his prominent political associates leading a movement into the camp of another party, the political temperature has understandably risen.
The question being whispered across Ibadan is simple: is this merely the independent political decision of an aide and his supporters, or does it reflect a larger political strategy?
That question deserves an answer.
Because in politics, proximity is rarely meaningless.
If an associate who has operated closely within a politician’s political structure suddenly becomes a leading face of another political platform, observers will naturally ask whether the principal is aware, supportive, opposed or simply indifferent.
But there is an important distinction.
Association is not proof of instruction.
The fact that Boye Nation is associated with Adelabu does not, by itself, establish that Adelabu authorised the movement, financed it or personally endorsed APM’s presidential project. Those are matters that require evidence or a direct statement from the former minister.
And that is precisely where the real political conversation should begin.
Adelabu’s political history has never been short of twists. From his 2019 governorship bid to the 2023 political realignment and his appointment as Minister of Power, his journey has demonstrated the fluid nature of Oyo politics.
Today, however, the political arithmetic appears to be changing again.
The same APC that accommodated him after his 2023 political excursion now has another candidate carrying its governorship flag. Meanwhile, people identified with Adelabu’s political structure are appearing at an APM event expected to have Makinde at its centre.
For APC loyalists, that development may understandably raise questions about loyalty and party discipline.
For Adelabu, it presents an opportunity to clarify his position.
Is he still fully committed to the APC?
Does he support the activities of Boye Nation?
Does he have any connection with the planned APM mobilisation?
Or is Ajiboye Sangogade acting entirely on his own political conviction?
These are not unreasonable questions.
Indeed, they are questions that political actors should answer openly rather than leave the public to fill the gaps with speculation.
One thing, however, is certain: politics in Oyo is entering another season of realignment.
The September 21 gathering at Adamasingba may therefore be more than a concert. Organisers have described it as a youth mobilisation platform and a formal declaration of Boye Nation for the APM. Reports also indicate that the event is expected to receive members of the movement into the party.
That makes it politically significant.
Whether it represents a personal decision by Sangogade, a broader movement by Adelabu’s associates or something more strategic remains to be seen.
But one lesson from politics remains timeless:
When political friendships are tested, silence often creates more questions than answers.
And as the 2027 political season gathers momentum, Oyo’s political actors may soon discover that yesterday’s alliances can become tomorrow’s fault lines.
The masquerade has changed its dance.
Everybody is watching the drummer.
Opinion
Seven Factors That Keep Sharafadeen Alli Ahead in 2027 Oyo Governorship Race
Published
2 weeks agoon
September 14, 2026By
Bisi Oladele
Fact 1: Homegrown Leader with Unmatched Grassroots Experience
Senator Alli’s political journey began at the grassroots level in Ibadan, where he made history in 1991 as the first democratically elected Executive Chairman of Ibadan North Local Government. This early leadership role demonstrates a deep, foundational understanding of local governance and the needs of the people, a critical asset for a state governor.
![]()
Fact 2: Rare Combination of Top-Tier Academic and Professional Credentials
Senator Alli is not just a politician but also a distinguished legal practitioner with a Ph.D. in Legislative and Strategic Studies. His extensive education, including degrees from the University of Ibadan, combined with his fellowships from prestigious professional institutes, provides him with the analytical, legal and strategic acumen required to manage the complex affairs of Oyo State.
![]()
Fact 3: Proven Executive Administrative Competence at the Highest State Level
His tenures as Secretary to the Oyo State Government (SSG) and later as Chief of Staff (CoS) to the Governor showcase his direct experience in the engine room of state administration.
![]()
He has been intimately involved in policy formulation, committee leadership and the day-to-day running of the state, making him uniquely prepared to assume the governorship and hit the ground running from day one.
Fact 4: Demonstrated Executive Business Leadership with Regional Impact
As Chairman, Board of Directors of Odu’a Investment Company Limited, Senator Alli was not just an administrator but a visionary economic leader. He spearheaded landmark investments such as the Cocoa Mall and Heritage Mall in Ibadan, which transformed the economic landscape of Oyo State. This proven ability to attract and drive large-scale economic development is directly transferable to governing Oyo State.
![]()
Fact 5: Battle-Tested and Consistent Political Figure
Senator Alli’s political career spans more than three decades, weathering the annulment of his 1996 Senate election and consistently remaining a relevant and influential force. He has contested for Deputy Governor and Governor in the past, giving him a comprehensive understanding of statewide campaigns and the diverse political landscape of Oyo State. His journey demonstrates resilience, deep political networks and unwavering commitment.
Fact 6: Current, Performing Senator and Influential Figure
As the sitting Senator for Oyo South, he is actively delivering quality representation, impactful constituency projects and people-oriented legislation. He has sponsored five Bills and raised six Motions to promote development. Senator Alli has also facilitated employment for 100 constituents across Federal Government agencies.
![]()
His role as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Agricultural Colleges and Research Institutions, as well as his membership in the ECOWAS Parliament, demonstrate that he is not only focused on local issues but is also equipped with a broader perspective on governance, trade and regional integration.
Fact 7: Unifying and Respected Traditional Title Holder
Senator Alli’s position as the Ekaarun Balogun of Ibadanland, one of the highest-ranking chieftaincy titles in the ancient city, signifies his deep-rooted connection to tradition and his standing as a respected community leader.
His reputation as a calm, wise, simple, relatable and inclusive bridge-builder who unites people across political, religious and ethnic divides positions him as a leader capable of fostering peace, stability and consensus across the entire state.
Oladele is the Director of Media & Publicity, Senator Sharafadeen Alli Campaign Organization.
MEGAICON TV
‘Today, we celebrate Olubadan Ladoja’s wisdom, service at 82’ – Oseni
Oyo deserves selfless, independent governor, not ‘modern-day Emperor’ – Ex-AG backs Alli
Photos: APC youths welcome Adedeji with massive crowd in Saki, Ogbomoso
Trending
-
Politics3 weeks agoOyo won’t become real estate company, says Alli
-
News2 weeks agoOyo South: Oseni Approves N100m for Ibadan Community Road Rehabilitation
-
Politics2 weeks agoOyo 2027: Alli appoints Oladele, Olaosebikan, Tunji media directors
-
Politics2 weeks agoOyo South: Ibadan security groups back Oseni’s senatorial bid