Connect with us

Opinion

Wayward Ways and Means, epidemic kidnapping 

Published

on

File photo of The Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Wale Edun

We are about to witness a mud-fight between two gods of integrity. In a Nigeria where the mantra is, if you see something, say something, Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Wale Edun, elected to say something. And he did say something last Wednesday. “We talked about inflation, where has it come from? It’s come from eight years of just printing money. And the issue is that that money was not matched by productivity…For eight years, the weak were left to their own devices. It is the privileged few that took everything” he said while appearing before the Senate Committee on Finance.

Edun’s appearance in the senate was a total shellacking of the administration of Mai Gaskiya, Muhammadu Buhari. Falling short of naming that government one in same frame with Ali Baba And the Forty Thieves, Edun accused Buhari of every conceivable economic malfeasance, finally heaping the blame of Nigeria’s current economic regression at his doorsteps. He went ahead to promise that the Tinubu government would audit the N22.7 trillion ways and means advance which the Buhari regime incurred.

Bashir Ahmad, former media aide to Buhari, was however of the opinion that blame-shoveling was bad politics. Comparatively, he said, the PDP was better at dressing its stench in pleasant deodorant. Posting on X, Ahmad wrote: “I often wonder why, as a government, we concentrate more on amplifying the faults of the previous administration rather than acknowledging its numerous achievements. The PDP seems to have a more skilful approach to politics than we do in the APC…it’s rare to find instances where President Yar’adua’s (PDP) government criticized President Obasanjo’s (PDP) or where President Jonathan’s (PDP) government faulted President Yar’adua’s (PDP).”

What they cooked that burnt down the house of Nigeria is gradually exposing itself. Get your popcorn and be ready for the rumble in the jungle. When someone tries to hide behind their finger, my people compare them to the exact scenario that both Bola Tinubu and Buhari find themselves today. Their story is perfectly told in the Epa and Aja tale. The tick, which the Yoruba call Epa, is a parasitic member of the Arachnida family of insects. Arachnids are a class of joint-legged arthropods which include, among others, spiders, scorpions, ticks, mites, etc. As parasites, they feed on mammals, birds, and sometimes reptiles and amphibians. They feed on the blood of their hosts by attaching to them firmly with their proboscis. In consuming their blood, ticks satisfy their nutritional requirements. When a tick parasitizes its hosts, it acts as vector through which serious diseases that affect humans and animals are transmitted into the host. Eventually, while the tick is satisfying its survival quest, the host will suffer either diseases or anemia and eventually die. So, when Epa assumes that it is killing the host; take for instance, Aja, the dog, unbeknown to it, it is killing itself. The day the dog dies, the tick dies too. Yoruba express this as Epa npa’ra e, o l’ohun npa’ja.

Though he may right now be sunk in the pastime of feeding his cows in Daura, the truth is, Muhammadu Buhari’s self-imposed title of Mai Gaskiya may be on its way out of the retired General’s lapel. There is an ongoing attempt to deconstruct him as either the most naïvely inept Nigerian president to have lived or the imbecilic landlord who opened his house to burglars and watched while they looted his treasure. Buhari’s own political party, the APC-led government, is spearheading this deconstruction. So, should his successor, living through the mantra of “see something, say something” which has seized the information highway today, keep sealed lips and not disclose alleged massive theft of Nigerian patrimony that it is privy to? Should Tinubu see the wound on the sole of his foot as one that has familial imprimatur and thus walk loose with it? Should he say something about the massive theft that went on during the Buhari government which he has information about or say nothing? Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Wale Edu, chose the latter.

Either as blame-shoveling or “saying something when something is seen”, Buhari looks like he is in a very bad shape, image-wise. He has unfortunately landed in the hand of a successor government that is ready to scapegoat anything in sight to justify its inertia. Already, it is clear to everyone that if there is one thing in surplusage from this government today, it is blame-shoveling and immense capacity to reverse itself. In the last nine months, we have seen the government blame everybody, everything but itself for its inability to do the magic it advertised so ebulliently during the campaigns. COVID-19, Godwin Emefiele, PDP, Buhari and all what ought-nots have suffered this victimhood of government’s antics. Edun and this government have also blamed Emefiele’s alleged reckless spending of the overdraft that the Buhari government collected from the CBN as largely accounting for the food and security crises that Nigeria is battling. Right now, Nigeria is seeking Interpol’s help to arrest three suspects alleged to have stolen the sum of $6.2m from the CBN, using Buhari’s forged signature. They are believed to have done this in cahoots with Emefiele who is on trial on 20-count charges. My haunch is that, if Emefiele has his days in court, the courtroom will explode like Hiroshima did and the matter may drift off like a fog, similar to the Sambo Dasuki security fund scandal. In the same vein, this government has reversed itself so effortlessly on policies it advertised with glee, like Jay Jay Okocha did on the field of play. The last reverse was the annual levy it imposed on expatriates which it revoked pre-beginning last week.

 

For an administration like the Tinubu government that is tottering in pitch darkness and fumbling for a way out, the eternal wisdom in the tale of the tick and dog seems self-explanatory and self-evident. The “Epa npa’ra e…” presents in a number of nuggets. First is that, it can come in the form of the question that has been asked repeatedly: How can the Tinubu government, and virtually all its runners, divorce themselves from the 8-year colossal wastage and failure of the Buhari government? The president, like a nursing mother, hunchbacked Buhari into power and gave him the wings with which he flew. Until a railway line halved them into their two separate ways, Tinubu defended every of the Buhari policies with the vigour of a matador. From insecurity, Fulani herders’ rapacious bloodletting, (where are the cows?) to dwindling economy and every allied matter of state policy, Tinubu was there for Buhari. Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the president, has almost had the mucus dripping out of one of his nostrils flip inside the second as he struggles to claim that Tinubu never requested Buhari to enter the forest of the brave – the Igbo igbale. So, for the Tinubu government, through Edun last week, to surgically try to separate itself from the Buhari government will be akin to an Epa which is trying to kill the Aja. Edun, with froth metaphorically foaming out of his mouth, attempted to do that last week.

Unfortunately for the government, head or tail, it loses. This is even if it listens to the self-centered counsel of Ahmad and elects to make the calamity wrought by the Buhari government a family affair. Its situation would be comparable to that of a man all alone inside a bunker who decides to allow a stench-like fart escape from his buttock. He, all alone, will bear the stench. How reconcilable would it be for Tinubu to say that the Buhari he deodorized as recently as December last year, as emanating “from the rarest phylum of virtuous servant-leaders,” whose emergence could be likened to that of “leaders…(that) happens only by divine orchestration,” a man of “absolute and undiluted integrity” had now been discovered to have sat on a government that is surrounded by a mass of maggots?

We were still battling the waywardness found in the Buhari government’s Ways and Means when, as usual, Nigeria relapsed into its perennial orgy of massive kidnap of school pupils. The latest happened last Thursday at the Government Secondary School and LEA Primary School, Kuriga, Kaduna State. About 280 pupils and teachers were said to have been abducted by bandits. This has triggered national outrage. The bandits were reported to have invaded the Kuriga area of the Chikun Local Government Area of Kaduna State by shooting at their victims in a Gestapo manner. As usual of Nigerian Aso Rock Villa, government is flexing its effeminate muscles and throwing threats into the sky. Sub-nationals and individuals too have tethered their usual empathy offering at the grove of this rapacious god of banditry.

The incessant incidences of kidnapping in Nigeria have grown into a hydra. They have become a source of national threat. Nigeria, according to researchers, boasts of a phenomenally large public and private schools which are nearly 97,000, the largest in Africa. Its primary education sector, according to Aly Verjee and Chris Kwaja, is roughly equivalent in size to the 98,000 public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Today, these schools are under severe threat from terrorists.

The above-named scholars collated the history of Nigeria’s bloodletting. According to them, in their research work entitled An Epidemic of Kidnapping: Interpreting School Abductions and Insecurity in Nigeria (African Studies Quarterly Volume 20, Issue 3, October 2021) beginning from 2014, “the small, non-descript town of Chibok in Borno State in northeast Nigeria” earned the notoriety worldwide with the abduction of 276 girls. Since then, Nigerian northern schools have known no peace. Though the abduction sparked global outrage, Nigerian governments have moved on nevertheless. The Chibok abduction which was the cusp upon which the APC government wove its political campaign to seize power from Jonathan in the 2015 election was hung on, contributed immensely to the defeat of Jonathan. He was accused of mishandling the kidnapping. However, some top persons in this government were alleged to have organized it to embarrass Jonathan. Buhari thereafter campaigned on a pedestal of promise to restore security to Nigerians.

The scholars’ collation of the spate of kidnappings is frightening. According to them, before Chibok, other kidnaps were carried out though they attracted less media campaign. This was because the AC, CPC alignment and realignment was afoot and the masters of media orchestration in the AC had not aligned with the Buhari CPC. In 2013, 41 students and one teacher were shot/burned alive at the Mamudo Government Secondary School in Yobe State. Same year, another 44 students and teachers were murdered in a separate incident at the College of Agriculture, Gujba, about 120km east of Mamudo, reported Verjee and Kwaja. Similarly, in February 2014, another educational institution in Yobe State, which happened to be the fourth, was attacked. After the attack, 59 students were killed at the Buni Yadi Federal Government College, 30km south of Gujba. This was followed by the Chibok abductions in April 2014. With Buhari, the man who flaunted his epaulettes as a military general in civilian attire now in office, 110 girls got abducted from the Government Girls Science Technical College in Dapchi, Yobe State in February 2018.

December of that year, said Verjee and Kwaja, saw another mass abduction in Buhari’s home state of Katsina. More than 300 boys were forcefully taken out of the Kankara Government Science Secondary School. Equally, on December 19 of that same year, 18 students of an Islamic school in Dandume, close to Kankara, were detained by a kidnapping group, while in February, 2021, 42 people, which included 27 students, were kidnapped from the Government Science College in Kagara, Niger State. On February 26, figures bandied, of between 279 and 317 students, were kidnapped from the Government Girls Secondary School in Jangebe, Zamfara State. In March 2021, there were two further mass abductions and three attempted abductions, all in Kaduna State. On March 11, 39 students were abducted from the Federal College of Forestry Mechanization in Mando. A tip-off to the Nigerian Army averted the kidnap on March 13 of pupils of the Turkish International Secondary School, Rigachikun. On April 20 of same year, 20 students and three staff of Greenfield University in Chikun, Kaduna State were abducted. Five of them got killed by their captors. Plateau State was to get its own share on April 29 when four students were abducted from the King’s School, in Gana Ropp, Barkin Ladi. Then, on May 30, 136 children and several teachers were taken from the Salihu Tanko Islamic School in Tegina, Niger State. In June, 103 students were abducted from the Federal Government Girls College in Birnin Yauri, Kebbi State and on July 5, 121 children were abducted from the Bethel Baptist High School in Maramara, Kaduna State. So many more that space would not allow us reel into happened as figures provided by Verjee and Kwaja.

It will appear that, under Tinubu, Nigeria has entered its season of kidnap epidemic again. In the paper under discourse, Verjee and Kwaja made some recommendations that I found to be very profound. The first is that successive Nigerian governments have conflated the social challenge of kidnap for security challenges and as such, have solely treated school abductions as security problems which needed to be solved solely by military response. Government does this by fortifying the schools. In doing this, Nigeria is merely treating symptom rather than a national disease. Why it is impossible to get a let out of this is that, first, due to the large scale of Nigeria’s education system, deployment of soldiers and police in the protection of schools can never work.

Rather, according to Verjee and Kwaja, government must first address the trust deficit that exists between state security actors and the people. A very meager percentage of Nigerians perceive state security actors as credible. They have always had a checkered history of corruption and violence. There is a profound belief out there that Nigeria’s top security chiefs do not want insecurity to end due to the money they make from it. This perception fuels further fear of militarization and repression, leading to predatory behavior of state security actors.

Whatever it will take, Nigeria must get to solve the pandemic of school kidnappings. The audaciousness of its perpetrators and the seeming combine of many forces in carrying out the kidnappings make it very complex to get rid of. We must as well realize that this epidemic is just a tiny fraction of Nigeria’s political economy of violence. We have always had an ineffective and underperforming state, as well as sparse economic opportunities which have been fueling the school kidnappings. Already, the Kaduna government has rented private negotiators to secure the release of the kids. At the end of the day, multiple of millions of Naira would be paid to these no-gooders and like the boulder of Sisyphus, in no long a time, the terrorists will strike again. And Nigeria will begin another round of sorrow, tears and blood.

Comments

Opinion

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

Published

on

 

I have read Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju’s piece titled ” Adekambi vs Alli: Between Substance And Sensationalism” and it offers me a lot of entertainment.

Dr. Sulaimon Olanrewaju is a seasoned Journalist no doubt. Very brilliant mind, but, he needs a lecture on politics and governance.

No matter how educated or professional you could be, if you lack basic knowledge about raw politics and governance at different tiers of Government, you are bound to struggle like a fish out of the water each time you attempt to defend certain positions.

Very obviously, Dr. Olanrewaju doesn’t know how a Local Government should operate on a normal situation, even, before the Judgment of the Supreme Court obtained by president Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

I will refer Dr. Olanrewaju to a document titled ” Financial Memorandum for Local Governments”.

That document speaks to how funds belonging to the Local Governments could be legally spent.

It will also provide accurate information about the roles and powers of the Local Government Chairmen, Head of Local Government Administration, the Finance and General Purposes Committee, F&GPC, how approvals for funds, projects and how contracts are signed at the Local Government level.

Had it been that Dr. Olanrewaju had proper information, I am sure that he wouldn’t have advertised his ignorance the way he did, in the argument about Financial autonomy for Local Governments which Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is promising.

He would also have known that his Principal, Governor Seyi Makinde had been engaged in criminal activities in the manner he had been withdrawing and spending resources belonging to the 33 Local Governments illegally since 2019.

Perhaps I need to repeat this for emphasis sake. There is no Law that empowers a state Governor to withdraw money belonging to the Local Governments for the execution of projects on behalf of the Local Governments.

The fact that the monthly allocations for the 33 Local Governments would have to drop on a joint account does not confer any authority on a state Governor to illegally withdraw and spend same.

It is the responsibility of the F&GPC for each of the Local Governments to identify projects it wants to execute, approve funds for same and if the funds are beyond the approving limits of the F&GPC, it will seek approval from the Governor through the office of the Commissioner for Local Governments.

If the project would be executed as a contract, it is the sole responsibility of the HLGA to sign the contract agreement.

That is what Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is saying. That he would not make illegal withdrawals from the Local Governments funds. That he will allow the F&GPC for the 33 Local Governments to function without hinderance. That he will allow the Career officers to do their duties assigned to them by Law.

If Governor Seyi Makinde doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments and he is not hiding this fact and Sarafa Alli is saying, I believe in a functional and free Local Government, where is the sensationalism in that?

Truth hurts. Dr. Olanrewaju can not, through his essay, which I consider an afterthought, rewrite the fact that, his Principal publicly declared that he doesn’t believe in the existence of the Local Governments, not to talk of allowing them to function freely.

I am surprised that Dr. Olanrewaju is of the opinion that Senator Sarafadeen Abiodun Alli is not saying what he would do differently.

I know that the Special Adviser on Media to Governor Seyi Makinde is not deaf. Neither is he blind or dumb. He is only being hypocritical.

How else does the Allied People’s Movement, APM and its Gubernatorial candidate want the All Progressives Congress, APC Gubernatorial candidate to say what he is going to do differently?

On this issue of Financial autonomy for Local Governments, Sarafadeen Alli is saying, contrary to the illegalities of the past seven years plus, he will not concern himself with the responsibilities that are ordinarily that of the Local Governments.

On Education, he has declared that he will ensure that we go back to the 30 Pupils per classroom policy of the former Governor, Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja, now, H. I . M, Oba Senator Rasidi Adewolu Ladoja.

He said he will revive the Broadcasting Corporations of Oyo state, BCOS which is gasping for breath under Governor Seyi Makinde.

He was emphatic about the fact that he would set up a Committee to review the crisis created at the Circular Road by Governor Seyi Makinde within 72 hours when he is elected as the Governor of Oyo state.

He said he would review the sales and handing over of our Farm Settlements to Estate Developers amongst other promises.

On these issues, what are the clear positions taken by Adekambi?

If Dr. Olanrewaju wants us to believe his cock and bull stories about the performance of the 33 Local Governments under Seyi Makinde, I challenge him to ask his Principal to publish the statement of income and expenditures for the 33 Local Governments in the past seven years plus.

He should give us a breakdown of the total figure of the monthly allocations received on behalf of the 33 Local Governments, the breakdown of salaries and allowances paid, the number of projects executed, identities of the contractors who handled projects, the contract agreements, total figure of the Internally Generated Revenues, IGR received by the Local Governments and the VAT.

In the absence of these vital information, which I am certain they will never dare to make public, I want to humbly suggest that Dr. Olanrewaju should go and update his knowledge about how certain things are done.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Ladoja @82: When the ladder becomes too tall and Makinde’s sin of ingratitude | By Ayinla Joseph

Published

on

The 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.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Makinde Deserves No Sympathy: He Brought His Present Predicament Upon Himself

Published

on

In 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.

Continue Reading

Trending