Opinion
Nigeria’s Cat and Mouse Fight With Amnesty International
Published
5 years agoon
By
Mega Icon“Where the cat is a kitten, the court is wretched… No man there would rest at night because of rodents, for we mice would destroy many men’s malt, and you rats would tear men’s clothes were it not for the cat of the court who can pounce on you. If you rats had your way, you could not rule yourselves” – William Langland, ‘The Parliament of Rats and Mice’.
There is this bitterly hostile rivalry between cats, mice and rats that is as old as antiquity. Unable to find a solution to this constant rodents/cats squabble, Odolaye Aremu, Kwara State, Ilorin’s dadakuada music exponent, retrieving his muse from ancient Yoruba wisdom, sang that only God could settle this endless rivalry – Olo’un lo le se’dajo ologbo at’ekute’le. In 2014, British’s House of Commons attempted to exploit this rivalry by using one to neutralize the other. Rising in parliament to debate the infestation of the House buildings built in 1860 by a huge mice population, MP Anne McIntosh said, “It is a matter of fact (that) the mice population is spiraling out of control.” To combat the rodents, members suggested storming the House of Commons with a herd of cats.
“The Parliament of Rats and Mice” is the title of the prologue to William Langland’s Piers Plowman. Considered to be one of the greatest works of English literature of the Middle Ages, it is an allegory of cats and rats, a narrative that tellingly depicts their rivalry. Though a social commentary on control of central power and authority during the reign of English king, Richard II, (1377-99) it is also a commentary on the disorder and abuse in government of his reign. Just ten years old when his grandfather died, Richard’s reign was fraught with crises, ranging from economic, social, political, to the constitutional. It became so bad that a “continual council” had to be set up, with the purpose of “govern(ing) the king and his kingdom.” Excesses of Richard II and his courtiers became intolerably high, including high level of corruption among royal councilors and advisers which the parliament could not stomach. Led by John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster and son of Edward III, the king’s uncle, the crown and the royal family considered the parliament’s eventual inquisition as threat to its power. Langland’s allegory peered searchlight into this chaos, representing the cat as John of Gaunt and the kitten as Richard II.
After so many squabbles between them, the rats concluded that the world would have peace if rodents let the kittens be. One rat, addressing its colleagues, said, “Though we had killed the cat, another would come to catch us and all our kind, although we creep under benches. Therefore I advise all the commons to let the cat alone… Where the cat is a kitten, the court is wretched. That is witnessed in Holy Writ, to whoever will read it: ‘Woe to thee, O land, when thy king is a child.’ No man there would rest at night because of rodents, for we mice would destroy many men’s malt, and you rats would tear men’s clothes were it not for the cat of the court who can pounce on you. If you rats had your way, you could not rule yourselves.”
Global human rights policeman, Amnesty International (AI) and the Nigerian government are acting out Langland’s allegory. AI, over the years, has become the “cat of the court who can pounce on you,” as it ferrets nooks and crannies, baying for the blood of “mice (that) would destroy many men’s malt.” Last week, AI accused the Muhammadu Buhari-led government of extrajudicial executions in the Southeast and Niger Delta areas of Nigeria, as well as what it called “heinous crimes of enforced disappearances” of persons. It linked unknown whereabouts of persons to government. Said AI’s Media Manager, Isa Sanusi, “Not only these tragic disappearances, but also the government’s continuing failure to establish the truth and bring justice to their families, are growing stains on Nigeria’s reputation. Scores of disappearance cases…remain unresolved and cast doubt on Nigerian government’s commitment to keeping its own citizens safe.”
Sauced with blood-curdling examples, AI’s frightening allegations were made on the anniversary of the International Day of Support for Victims of Enforced Disappearances. Sister to a 33-year-old businessman whose disappearance since August 2014 after his arrest by Nigerian policemen, was quoted by AI to have said: “My brother’s disappearance affected everyone at home. We just decided to leave everything to faith, hoping he will show up one day. But we need closure, for us to know what actually happened to him. As it is now, nobody knows whether he is alive or dead”.
Another was the celebrated disappearance of Abubakar Idris, known as Dadiyata. A university lecturer and vocal government critic, Dadiyata was abducted from his Kaduna home on August 2, 2019 and his whereabouts is shrouded in secrecy. He was a critic of the Kaduna state governor, Nasir El-Rufai. Another case cited by AI was that of 15 year-old Emmanuel John. Arrested by soldiers in a raid of Synagogue church at Oyigbo in Rivers State in October, 2020 while soldiers were searching for members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) Emmanuel’s whereabouts too has remained unknown. Yet another was 44-year old Felix Adika. After his arrest by the Bayelsa state DSS on February 27, 2016, for alleged membership of the Niger Delta militancy, his family last saw him in March, 2019.
Recently, in a BBC piece she penned, Adaobi Tricia Nwaubani, Nigerian journalist and novelist, depicting the fad of “unclaimed bodies” of “missing people,” allegedly wasted by policemen on the streets of Nigeria, wrote about the experience of an Anatomy student of the University of Calabar, 26-year old Enya Egbe, who fled from his anatomy class upon seeing the body of a friend of his, hitherto declared missing, whose corpse was the specimen to be worked upon.
AI also alleged that Nigerian security forces’ clampdown on IPOB militants has resulted in a gale of arbitrary arrests, detentions, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions in the Southeast and Niger Delta area. It claimed that “the whereabouts of at least 50 suspected members of IPOB arrested in Oyigbo, Rivers State, are still unknown since October and November 2020.” So also 41-year old Izuchukwu Okeke, a commercial motorcycle rider who was last seen on July 5, 2021, after his invitation by the police in Owerri, Imo State.
“The cases of at least 200 people – including former militants from Niger Delta, members of IPOB, #EndSARS protesters and security suspects believed to have been subjected to unresolved enforced disappearances in Nigeria have been documented by Amnesty International – The real number is believed to be higher. Nigerian security forces often cite the anti-terror law that allows the authorities to hold people without charge or trial in unofficial places of detention, often without contact to the outside world in practice, clearly increasing the risk of people disappearing after being detained,” said AI.
While it could put up with allegation of the impunity of Nigerian police’s disappearance of persons which has been national pastime in Nigeria from time immemorial, the Buhari rat was pissed off at the temerity of the cat to question its right to urinate inside the soup bowl. In a reply to AI, similar to the flipping of an enraged rat’s whiskers, Garba Shehu, presidential spokesman, accused AI of championing the matters of “a tiny dot in a circle,” which he euphemized as “those that violently oppose the Federal Government of Nigeria.” He could not stand AI “parroting the line of Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB, a proscribed terror organization.” He also claimed that “controversial American lobbyists are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars annually… laundering IPOB’s reputation in Washington DC.”
Global Terrorism Index, (GTI) n a 2015 document produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace, gave a comprehensive summary of key global trends and patterns in terrorism of the preceding 15 years. With data from the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) GTI said terrorism had become highly concentrated, “in just five countries — Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria…. (countries which) accounted for 78 per cent of (global) lives lost.” It said further: “Nigeria has experienced the largest increase in deaths from terrorism… There were 7,512 fatalities from terrorist attacks… an increase of over 300 per cent. The country houses two of the five most deadly terrorist groups (in the world)…Boko Haram and the Fulani militants.” Yet, the government of which Shehu is a megaphone has deodorized the terrorism of Fulani herders, as well as bandits’, refusing to label the latter terrorists. It seems obvious that government is aware that the moment it does, many of the Northern bigwigs who offer nesting place for terrorists and their allies being masqueraded as bandits, would face the wrath of the globally authorized cats.
Justifying, rather than repudiating the allegations by the AI, Shehu wondered why the international organization would be interested in the case of an “IPOB (that) murder(s) Nigerian citizens… kill police officers and military personnel and set government property on fire, (who have now) amassed a substantial stockpile of weapons and bombs across the country.” He then propounded a racist counterfactual, a line of thought prevalent among and deployed by African despots to racially profile western opposition to their tyranny and thus legitimize their despotism: “Were this group in a western country, you would not expect to hear Amnesty’s full-throated defence of their actions. Instead, there would be silence or mealy-mouthed justification of western governments’ action to check the spread of ‘terrorism.’”
Astonishingly, Shehu then queried AI’s legality in Nigeria. “Amnesty International has no legal right to exist in Nigeria,” he said. “The Nigerian government will fight terrorism with all the means at its disposal (italics mine). We will ignore Amnesty’s rantings… an organization that does not hold itself to the same standards it demands of others,” he concluded.
This cat and mouse tiff has endured between AI and the Buhari government almost since the latter’s inception. At a time, AI alleged that, in the name of fighting insurgency, Nigerian soldiers were massacring civilian population in the northeast. In 2019, same Nigerian government engaged in a spat with respected Wall Street Journal when it revealed that over 1,000 Nigerian soldiers killed by Boko Haram insurgents were secretly and unceremoniously buried in a graveyard at Maimalari Army barracks in Borno State.
Government’s attempt to query the legitimacy of AI for doing a job whose modus operandi is known all over the world is baffling and reveals its naivety or insincerity. Or both. The question to first ask is if Shehu was aware that Nigeria is a signatory to international legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, (ICCPR) as well as the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances? Does he know that by being a signatory to the conventions, Nigeria had ceded the right to “investigate, prosecute, punish and provide remedies and reparation for the crimes of enforced disappearance” to the AI?
It bears stating that AI is always at loggerheads with rogue governments all over the world that have no regards for the lives of their people. In Nasirabad, Sindh, Pakistan on April 17, 2017, like Nigeria’s Dadiyata, Hidayatullah Lohar was forcibly disappeared. An activist, his abductors, men in police uniform and civilian clothes, rough-handedly disappeared him from the school where he taught, shoved him inside a double-cabin grey coloured vehicle and his whereabouts, since then, has become a mystery. In same Pakistan in 2017 and 2018, repeatedly harassed blogger, Ahmad Waqass Goraya, was also forcibly disappeared, alongside three other bloggers in Punjab. Their sin was that they ran Facebook pages considered to be critical of Pakistani military’s policies. Same happened during the Brazilian military dictatorship in 1964 where 434 political deaths and disappearances reportedly occurred between 1946 and 1988.
As Langland said in ‘The Parliament of Rats and Mice’, humanity will never have rest at night if heartless rats are left to inflict destruction on the world. This philosophy explains the establishment of agencies of cats empowered to pounce on them. Yoruba have a saying that if a mentally challenged was left unchecked to do whatever they liked with the remains of their mother, they could barbecue it. If despots and rogue governments, especially in Africa, were left unpoliced, they will turn the state into a field of blood. That was why the world criminalized in July, 2002, through the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court, forced disappearance (or enforced disappearance). It is a secret abduction or imprisonment of a person by a state or political organization, or by a third party “with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of a state or political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the person’s fate and whereabouts, with the intent of placing the victim outside the protection of the law.”
IPOB has acted like a demented organization, inflicting irresponsible and senseless violence on the people of the southeast. Its sadism reflects the kind of leadership that Nnamdi Kanu gives it. It kills, maims and orchestrates untold arson on government buildings, with a magisterial impunity that must never be allowed in a community of human beings. However, Nigeria has gone past the military despotism of 1984 – whether George Orwell’s or the cow-obsessed despot’s – where Bartholomew Owoh and his ilk could be executed retroactively. The moment we laud, rather than heckle government in its trampling on human rights, no matter who the victim is, we lose an essential component of human essence. Felons abound all over the world and an eye for an eye would make the globe go blind. With patent bias harboured by the head of this government for Igbo and anyone else but the Fulani and his blood-soaked pedigree, it is dangerous for humanity to hand over Nigeria’s remains in his hand, unchecked. He will willingly make suya of it.
It is a notorious fact that his government’s sense of justice is warped and self-serving. Fulani nomads’ pillaging, acknowledged by the Terrorism Index, which made it to declare Fulani herders as a global terror as far back as 2014, is not worth the labeling of terrorism in the lingua franca of the Nigerian government; not the terrorism of northwest felons, even when they downed a military jet. Comparatively small-scale irritation of felons of southeast, spearheaded by Kanu and separatist agitators of southwest, never known to have shed a pint of blood, however provoke the misplaced hyper brawns of the government.
It is not difficult to explain the anger of this government against Amnesty International and its phobia for public disclosure. An English proverb says that evildoers are evil dreaders. Yoruba’s own version of this is that executioners mortally dread the presence of swords in their vicinity. Government’s dread manifests in its choice not to name Boko Haram sponsors all this while, even when requested by Rtd. Commodore Kunle Olawunmi and even Mary Beth Leonard, U.S. Ambassador to Nigeria last Monday. Leonard had said America was eager to help Nigeria in the disclosure. Could government’s dread of disclosure be a consequence of fear of its own shadow? Till date, government hasn’t said a word about the retired Commodore’s maggots-dripping allegations of its covert boost for insurgency.
Due to the collapse of the mirror that our society once used to reflect its core values, with which it identified evils in human action, it goes without saying that this Amnesty International and government’s cat and mouse tiff would be viewed by many Nigerians with the APC/PDP, region and religion lens.
As I write this, the pulsating rhythm of British reggae music sensation, UB40’s highly apocalyptic track, in the album entitled Labour of Love, the band’s fourth studio album released in the UK on September 12, 1983, filtered into my ears. Denouncing evil doers represented in a Johnny “who’s too bad,” who was busy “robbing and stabbing, looting and shooting,” UB40 had asked pointedly, “One of these days, when you hear a voice say come, Where you gonna run to?” It is such question we should ask Nigerians who legitimate known evils of this government. So, like UB40, I ask, when individuals become personal victims of this governmental evil which they play the ostrich in labeling its correct name, where will they run to?
Dr. Festus Adedayo, a media expert and lawyer writes from Ibadan
You may like
Opinion
Re: Adekambi vs Alli: Dr. Olanrewaju’s Descent To Soliloquizing | Sola Abegunde
Published
3 days agoon
October 1, 2026By
Mega Icon
I have read Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju’s piece titled ” Adekambi vs Alli: Between Substance And Sensationalism” and it offers me a lot of entertainment.
Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju is a seasoned Journalist no doubt. Very brilliant mind, but, he needs a lecture on politics and governance.
No matter how educated or professional you could be, if you lack basic knowledge about raw politics and governance at different tiers of Government, you are bound to struggle like a fish out of the water each time you attempt to defend certain positions.
Very obviously, Dr. Olanrewaju doesn’t know how a Local Government should operate on a normal situation, even, before the Judgment of the Supreme Court obtained by president Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
I will refer Dr. Olanrewaju to a document titled ” Financial Memorandum for Local Governments”.
That document speaks to how funds belonging to the Local Governments could be legally spent.
It will also provide accurate information about the roles and powers of the Local Government Chairmen, Head of Local Government Administration, the Finance and General Purposes Committee, F&GPC, how approvals for funds, projects and how contracts are signed at the Local Government level.
Had it been that Dr. Olanrewaju had proper information, I am sure that he wouldn’t have advertised his ignorance the way he did, in the argument about Financial autonomy for Local Governments which Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is promising.
He would also have known that his Principal, Governor Seyi Makinde had been engaged in criminal activities in the manner he had been withdrawing and spending resources belonging to the 33 Local Governments illegally since 2019.
Perhaps I need to repeat this for emphasis sake. There is no Law that empowers a state Governor to withdraw money belonging to the Local Governments for the execution of projects on behalf of the Local Governments.
The fact that the monthly allocations for the 33 Local Governments would have to drop on a joint account does not confer any authority on a state Governor to illegally withdraw and spend same.
It is the responsibility of the F&GPC for each of the Local Governments to identify projects it wants to execute, approve funds for same and if the funds are beyond the approving limits of the F&GPC, it will seek approval from the Governor through the office of the Commissioner for Local Governments.
If the project would be executed as a contract, it is the sole responsibility of the HLGA to sign the contract agreement.
That is what Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is saying. That he would not make illegal withdrawals from the Local Governments funds. That he will allow the F&GPC for the 33 Local Governments to function without hinderance. That he will allow the Career officers to do their duties assigned to them by Law.
If Governor Seyi Makinde doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments and he is not hiding this fact and Sarafa Alli is saying, I believe in a functional and free Local Government, where is the sensationalism in that?
Truth hurts. Dr. Olanrewaju can not, through his essay, which I consider an afterthought, rewrite the fact that, his Principal publicly declared that he doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments, not to talk of allowing them to function freely.
I am surprised that Dr. Olanrewaju is of the opinion that Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is not saying what he would do differently.
I know that the Special Adviser on Media to Governor Seyi Makinde is not deaf. Neither is he blind or dumb. He is only being hypocritical.
How else does the Allied People’s Movement, APM and its Gubernatorial candidate want the All Progressives Congress, APC Gubernatorial candidate to say what he is going to do differently?
On this issue of Financial autonomy for Local Governments, Sarafadeen Alli is saying, contrary to the illegalities of the past seven years plus, he will not concern himself with the responsibilities that are ordinarily that of the Local Governments.
On Education, he has declared that he will ensure that we go back to the 30 Pupils per classroom policy of the former Governor, Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja, now, H. I . M, Oba Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja.
He said he will revive the Broadcasting Corporations of Oyo state, BCOS which is gasping for breath under Governor Seyi Makinde.
He was emphatic about the fact that he would set up a Committee to review the crisis created at the Circular Road by Governor Seyi Makinde within 72 hours when he is elected as the Governor of Oyo state.
He said he would review the sales and handing over of our Farm Settlements to Estate Developers amongst other promises.
On these issues, what are the clear positions taken by Adekambi?
If Dr. Olanrewaju wants us to believe his cock and bull stories about the performance of the 33 Local Governments under Seyi Makinde, I challenge him to ask his Principal to publish the statement of income and expenditures for the 33 Local Governments in the past seven years plus.
He should give us a breakdown of the total figure of the monthly allocations received on behalf of the 33 Local Governments, the breakdown of salaries and allowances paid, the number of projects executed, identities of the contractors who handled projects, the contract agreements, total figure of the Internally Generated Revenues, IGR received by the Local Governments and the VAT.
In the absence of these vital information, which I am certain they will never dare to make public, I want to humbly suggest that Dr. Olanrewaju should go and update his knowledge about how certain things are done.
Opinion
Ladoja @82: When the ladder becomes too tall and Makinde’s sin of ingratitude | By Ayinla Joseph
Published
7 days agoon
September 28, 2026The Yoruba say, when a man forgets the ladder that took him to the top of the iroko tree, the fall that awaits him will be narrated as a proverb.
On Thursday, Ibadan stood still for its king. Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja clocked 82. Not 82 years of mere age, but 82 years of bruises, battles, betrayals and benediction. A former Senator. A former Governor. An elder statesman who, like Oduduwa, returned as king. The following day, Friday, Oba Ladoja also clocked one year on the throne of his forefathers.
Ibadan celebrated him. Nigeria celebrated him. The Presidency sent greetings. Former governors knelt. Serving governors bowed. The Alaafin of Oyo paid tribute. The Soun of Ogbomoso poured libation of words. Even the Aseyin, far in Iseyin, bought a full page in a national daily to say: our father lives.
But in Agodi Government House, there was silence. Cold, deliberate, imperial silence.
Governor Seyi Makinde did not felicitate his king. No advert. No statement. No courtesy of any sort extended. Nothing. His protégé, Bimbo Adekanmbi, toed the same line of contempt. For 48 hours, Ibadan people waited for a word that never came, until shame forced a whisper.
We must ask: what manner of politics is this?
In 2019, it was this same Ladoja who held Makinde’s hand when Makinde had no hand to hold. It was Ladoja who coordinated the coalition, who gathered the angry, the broken and the hopeful, and stitched them into a garment called victory for a man who had never won anything before. Without Ladoja, there would have been no Omituntun in 2019. And the man knows it.
Philosophers call it the Paradox of Power. Machiavelli warned about it in “The Prince”: that power acquired through the mercy of others must be sustained by gratitude, otherwise it consumes itself. Plato called such rulers philosopher-kings who failed philosophy. Men who know how to win power but not how to carry it.
History is littered with them.
Emperor Nero of Rome who burnt the city that made him emperor. King Rehoboam in the Bible who told the elders who made him king: “My little finger shall be thicker than my father’s waist.” Emperor Commodus who thought Rome was his father’s farm and turned the palace into a circus until the circus swallowed him.
Seyi Makinde governs like them — as an emperor, not as an Omoluabi. A man who believes loyalty must flow upwards to him, but must never flow downwards from him. He rides on the shoulders of giants and then complains that the giants are too tall.
Today it is Ladoja he snubs. Yesterday it was the Alaafin. The day before, the Soun. Tomorrow, which Oba will taste his disdain? He has transferred his personal hatred for the Olubadan stool into a war against all royal stools in Oyo State. That is not politics. That is poison.
And what shall we say of Bimbo Adekanmbi, his political son, who has learnt this ignoble art of ingratitude so perfectly? The Yoruba say, “the child who says his mother will not sleep, he too will not sleep.” To watch a man seeking to be governor practise contempt for the throne he seeks to govern is a disaster foretold.
Oyo people know Omituntun 2.0 for what it is — a poisonous pill coated with sweet advertisement. If 2.0 can openly humiliate an 82-year-old first-class monarch who made him, what will Omituntun 3.0, headed by his anointed, do? It will be the unkindest cut of all. It will be the complete desecration of the Omoluabi ethos that Ibadan and Oyo hold sacred.
Seyi Makinde will be remembered. Not for the roads that crack before commissioning. Not for the parks that lead to nowhere. He will be remembered as the governor who rode on the backs of eminent men and made every one of them regret that they ever lent him their shoulders.
Ladoja at 82 needs no advert from Agodi to be great. The king’s greatness is not conferred by the governor. But the governor’s smallness is exposed by how he treats his king.
Oyo people, shine your eyes. This affliction must not rise a second time.
Opinion
Makinde Deserves No Sympathy: He Brought His Present Predicament Upon Himself
Published
2 weeks agoon
September 23, 2026In response to my brother, Shuaib Idris, who wrote the piece titled “Seyi Makinde Deserves Our Sympathy,” I submit that Seyi Makinde does not deserve our sympathy. How do you sympathise with somebody who brought political calamity upon himself?
There is a point in every political journey when a leader must pause, look around and ask himself a difficult question: How did I get here? For Governor Seyi Makinde, that moment has long arrived.
Much has been written and said about the governor’s increasingly combative public interventions, his exchanges with political opponents and his determination to market the candidacy of his preferred successor. Some have interpreted these developments as signs of pressure surrounding him. But sympathy, in this circumstance, may be misplaced.
If Governor Makinde is under pressure today, much of that pressure is self-inflicted. If his administration is now being subjected to increasingly intense scrutiny, he cannot reasonably blame those asking the questions. And if political opponents have become emboldened enough to challenge his record openly, he should perhaps examine the decisions and conduct that have created the circumstances in which those challenges are now flourishing.
The governor’s recent political conduct provides ample illustration.
At the 70th birthday celebration of Bishop Francis Wale Oke, the governor reportedly used his appearance to introduce Bimbo Adekanmbi, the APM governorship candidate whom he supports. Adekanmbi’s emergence as the APM candidate is not in dispute; the party adopted him as its consensus candidate in May.
Two things continue to haunt him: his subpar performance in office and what critics describe as his imposition of Adekanmbi and Open Salawu, new entrants into his team, on his “first eleven.”
The question, therefore, is not whether Governor Makinde has the right to support a candidate. He does. The question is why a governor who repeatedly speaks of his administration’s achievements appears increasingly eager to make the 2027 succession contest a personal project.
A governor nearing the end of his tenure should ordinarily be concerned about preserving the dignity of the office, defending his record with facts and allowing his preferred candidate to present his own credentials. Indeed, Adekanmbi himself has publicly said he would not be a political stooge and that he would take responsibility for his own decisions if elected. That is political rhetoric. However, everything about Adekanmbi, according to his critics, points to the possibility of his being a stooge waiting to be planted to do Makinde’s bidding after the latter leaves office in 2027.
Yet Governor Makinde has increasingly inserted himself into the political conversation surrounding his successor. That creates an unavoidable question: if Adekanmbi is sufficiently qualified and politically prepared to succeed him, why does the governor so frequently feel compelled to fight the successor’s battles himself?
This is where the argument about pressure becomes particularly relevant. Political pressure does not simply descend from heaven. It can be generated by the choices of the politician himself.
Consider the recent exchange with Senator Sharafadeen Alli over the legal profession. Governor Makinde reportedly questioned Alli’s experience as a lawyer, arguing that he had never entered a courtroom. Alli’s campaign organisation subsequently responded by detailing his legal background and professional experience.
There is nothing wrong with political candidates examining one another’s records. That is part of democratic competition. But reducing a lawyer’s professional identity to courtroom appearances is a curious line of attack, particularly when the political argument ought ultimately to be about competence, experience, policy and public record.
A lawyer can practise in several areas of the profession without making litigation the centre of his career. Administrative work, corporate practice, legal consultancy, governance and institutional management are among the possible avenues available to members of the profession.
The larger point, however, is this: when an incumbent administration turns the professional credentials of an opponent into a central campaign issue, it invites its own record to be placed under the microscope. So, why does he need to be sympathised with over what he brought upon himself?
The response from Alli’s camp has shifted attention towards questions about Makinde’s own record as an engineer and governor, particularly the controversy surrounding diesel-powered streetlights and the renovation of the Lekan Salami Stadium. Those are now matters of public political debate, with competing claims about expenditure and performance. How do you sympathise with someone who threw a stone and received a Scud missile?
This is the unavoidable consequence of political combat: once you open the door to scrutiny of another man’s credentials, you should expect yours to be examined with equal intensity. Governor Makinde cannot reasonably demand immunity from the same standard he applies to others.
The same principle applies to his much-advertised “first eleven.” If the governor describes his administration as being driven by a carefully assembled team of exceptional people, the public is entitled to ask what became of that team when the question of succession arose. Why was the search for a successor extended beyond this celebrated first eleven?
A football coach who constantly boasts about his first eleven naturally invites the question of who among that eleven can step forward when the captain leaves the field. If none is selected, his team’s fans will ask why. That is not persecution. It is accountability.
There is another issue the governor should confront: political loyalty. Governor Makinde did not arrive at the Government House in 2019 in isolation. His political journey involved alliances with people and groups who contributed to the coalition that eventually produced his victory. The political history of that period is well known and should not be rewritten simply because former allies and associates are now on different sides of the political divide.
The problem with “use and discard” politics is that yesterday’s ally eventually becomes tomorrow’s witness. People who helped build a political structure do not disappear simply because their usefulness has expired. And when they begin speaking, the politician who once relied on them may find himself answering questions he never anticipated.
That appears to be part of the political atmosphere surrounding Governor Makinde today. His confrontation with traditional institutions is another matter that requires careful reflection. Whatever one’s political affiliation, Yoruba traditional institutions occupy a distinctive place in the cultural architecture of Oyo State. Political disagreement with individual traditional rulers is legitimate; treating the institution itself with disdain is entirely wrong, and it raises questions about Makinde’s Omoluabi values.
A governor may disagree with a monarch’s political preference. He may even believe traditional rulers should remain politically neutral. But the language employed in expressing that disagreement matters.
The office of governor carries enormous constitutional authority, but it also carries a moral obligation to exercise restraint. A governor should not need to be reminded that words spoken from Government House do not remain personal words. They acquire the weight of the office. That is why some of Governor Makinde’s recent public exchanges have generated such controversy.
The irony is that political power is temporary, while institutions and relationships often outlive individual office holders. The governor should know this better than most.
He is approaching the end of his constitutionally permitted tenure in Oyo State. The political question before him is therefore not how to remain governor indefinitely, but what legacy he will leave behind. Will he be remembered primarily for the projects executed under his administration? For the policies introduced? For the institutions strengthened? Or increasingly for the political battles fought during the final phase of his tenure? The last question is what will occupy people’s minds most after Makinde has left office.
The most consequential political mistake an incumbent can make is to interpret every criticism as persecution and every opponent as an enemy. Criticism is not necessarily hatred. Opposition is not necessarily sabotage. Questions about public expenditure are not necessarily attacks on a person. And scrutiny of an administration is not evidence of an organised conspiracy.
A mature government answers questions. A confident administration publishes records. A secure political movement allows its candidate to speak. And a governor who believes his record speaks for itself should have little reason to spend every available political moment speaking for his preferred successor.
That is why sympathy for Governor Makinde is evidently misplaced. The political pressure surrounding him today is not simply something that happened to him. It is also the product of political decisions, alliances, rhetoric and strategies that he and his political associates have consciously pursued.
He chose his successor. He chose his political platform. He chose to engage his opponents. He chose to make their records a subject of public debate. He chose to defend his administration through increasingly political exchanges. Those choices have consequences.
The electorate is now watching. And when the people begin to ask questions, the appropriate response from a governor is not to complain about pressure. It is to provide answers. Oyo people do not owe any politician sympathy for the consequences of his political choices. They owe themselves something far more important: a careful examination of every candidate, every record, every promise and every claim before making their decision in 2027.
MEGAICON TV
Ido Communities Rally Oseni, Lawmaker Assures Fresh Development Interventions
Gunmen abduct 20 NYSC members in Imo
Independence: Alli celebrates Nigeria at 66, seeks support for Tinubu, APC candidates
Trending
-
Politics2 weeks agoAPM Rally: APC Tackles Makinde Over Use of ‘CAF-Rejected’ ₦5.5bn Stadium
-
Politics4 weeks agoOyo won’t become real estate company, says Alli
-
News3 weeks agoOyo South: Oseni Approves N100m for Ibadan Community Road Rehabilitation
-
Politics3 weeks agoOyo 2027: Alli appoints Oladele, Olaosebikan, Tunji media directors