Connect with us

Opinion

Who deserves pardon: Saro-Wiwa or Buhari?

Published

on

At No 9, Rumuibekwe Road in Port Harcourt on November 10, 1995, the devil sat in a corner, having a saturnalia. No one could see him. He wore dark goggles, donning the uniform of a five-star Army General, wrapped up in a huge celebratory mood. His arch-enemy, Kenule Beeson Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists had just been hanged at the Port Harcourt Prison.

Inside No 9, Rumuibekwe, family members sat on the hood of parked disused cars, weeping profusely, others holding their heads in anguish. By that instant the most recently widowed woman in the world, Hauwa Saro-Wiwa, was inconsolable. Reporters at the Ogoni Special Civil Disturbances Tribunal reported that, since her husband was charged before the tribunal which leapt on its two hind legs like a kangaroo that it was, perhaps sensing a ghoulish foreboding, Hauwa came in to the Rivers House of Assembly Complex venue of the tribunal to observe the proceedings looking gaunt, pale and lean.

On that morning when the devil’s infernal reign was announced, Hauwa, in the company of wives of the then about to be executed Ogoni activists, had taken breakfast to Ken and his convicted compatriots at the Bori Camp Army Settlement where they were detained. The events that transpired must have given Hauwa inkling that the day might be the last for her husband. Not only did the heavily armed security personnel deny the Ogoni wives the opportunity of seeing their husbands, they returned the food after taking them to Ken and the others because, according to them, Ken refused it since he couldn’t confirm where it came from. Like a soliloquy, Harry Saro-Wiwa, Ken’s younger brother who was also at Rumuibekwe Road that afternoon, told journalists, amid wailings, that “the devil has triumphed.”

As prophetic as Harry’s statement was on the afternoon of that November 10, 1995, he should have known that this was just the devil’s dress rehearsal and its eventual triumph would come years later. If Harry ever thought the execution of the Ogoni activists just ordered by military despot, Sani Abacha, marked the triumph of the devil over the Ogoni people’s advocacy, he should have waited for what would happen 26 years later. For the devil, its final triumph came like a thief in the night. Just a few hours to the 26thanniversary of the horrendous hanging of Saro-Wiwa and eight others, the triumph came with pomp and ceremony.

When it came, the hanged activists shook restlessly in their graves. President Muhammadu Buhari recently played host to some Ogoni leaders who had come to pay him a courtesy call at the Aso Rock Villa. Receiving them, Buhari in his address, said that, “In spite of the grievous circumstances, the federal government will consider the request for the grant of pardon to finally close the Ogoni saga.” 

By that statement, Buhari erected the gallows preparatory to the second and final hanging of Saro-Wiwa. So, the question is: who deserves pardon between this man and that man judicially murdered 26 years ago? Then, the devil threw an orgy like one who had won tombola. It was almost the same way the devil danced in triumph when he vanquished the biblical couple of the early Christian Church, Ananias and Sapphira. Pardon for who and by who?

The trajectory of what led to the hanging of Saro-Wiwa by Abacha is in the public domain and should not dare detain us here. Suffice to say that, since 1958 when Shell Oil Company began drilling on Ogoni land in what was to translate Nigeria into a petro-state economy, the sorrows and tears of this oil-rich people began. 

Dissatisfied by the effluents, combustible gas flares and the degradation of their land as a result of the exploration which rendered farmlands covered by oil spillage blow-out, rendering them unsuitable for farming, in 1970, the first petition against the operations of Shell, which was then operating a joint venture with the British Petroleum, was made by Ogoni chiefs who took their petition to the Military Governor, lamenting that Shell was “seriously threatening the well-being, and even the very lives” of the people. As if confirming the content of their petition, that same 1970, a huge blowout that spanned three weeks, occurred on the Bomu oilfield in Ogoni land which caused untoward hardship, outrage and widespread pollution.

The Iko people, Ogoni neighbours, were to feel the brunt two years after. In defiance, they protested at the head office of Shell which promptly invited the notorious Mobile Police nicknamed Kill and Go, resulting in the destruction of 40 houses while 350 people became homeless. That year, Ken and his brothers formed a non-violent action group named the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) and Ken was made president and Ledun Mitee his vice. On August 4, 1990, Ogoni elders signed what they called the Ogoni Bill of Rights that sought “political control of Ogoni affairs by Ogoni people, control and use of Ogoni economic resources for Ogoni development, adequate and direct representation as of right for Ogoni people in all Nigerian national institutions and the right to protect the Ogoni environment and ecology from further degradation.”

A year after the Ogoni Bill of Rights was signed, it was amended in August 1991, authorizing and empowering MOSOP to seek international assistance for the plight of the Ogoni people and make an appeal to the international community. Saro-Wiwa thus began engagements with multilateral organizations, United Nations, US, Europe and other groups all over the world to sensitize them about the evil being perpetrated by Shell, in cahoots with the Nigerian military government.

Saro-Wiwa, renowned author and playwright, with books like On a darkling plane, Soza Boy and Four Farcical Plays which he adapted to the highly successful television series called Basil and Company, now abandoned all these to concentrate on his people’s advocacy. In July 1992, at Geneva, he addressed the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Peoples where he said, inter-alia: “I speak on behalf of the Ogoni people. You will forgive me if I am somewhat emotional about this matter. I am Ogoni … Petroleum was discovered in Ogoni in 1958 and since then an estimated 100 billion dollars worth of oil and gas has been carted away from Ogoniland. In return for this the Ogoni people have received nothing.”

The Nigerian military elite was riled at Saro-Wiwa’s diffidence. Reputed to be one of them, being friends with many of the big-epaulette soldiers like Abacha himself, it was obvious that Saro-Wiwa was intent on liquidating them and upturning their pots of soup, perhaps committing an intra-elite harakiri. The denouement came on January 4, 1993, when Saro-Wiwa got the Ogoni to celebrate the Year of Indigenous Peoples. This he did by getting 300,000 Ogoni people to peacefully protest against the environmental destruction of Ogoniland by Shell. It frightened Shell departments in London, got the Nigerian government scampering hither thither and was said to remain, till date, the largest demonstration against any oil company. Excited at the turn-out, as if predicting his own death, Saro-Wiwa said if he died then, he was an accomplished man.

Upon seizing the reins of power, Abacha did two things that was to be the pall of Saro-Wiwa. One was the appointment of Lt. Col Dauda Musa Komo as Military Administrator of Rivers State and, Major Paul Okuntimo, an Okun-Yoruba from Kogi State, as Commander, Internal Security, in Rivers State. Okuntimo later became an Army Brigadier-General, rising to become adviser to Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello. Both superintended over the torture, arson and killing of Ogoni and the liquidation of Saro-Wiwa in 1995. Okuntimo died recently in Ibadan of cancer. In all these, there were coordinated evidence that showed that Shell was sponsoring the Kill and Go policemen as evidenced byWillbros, a contractor working for it, which owned up to calling government troops to violently fire back in response to demonstrations by the Ogoni and paying Major Okuntimo and ‘his boys “field allowances”.

It will seem that the assignment was to deliver Saro-Wiwa’s head on a platter. Then came the Abacha Constitutional Conference which the Ogoni agreed that Ken should attend as their representative to voice their plight. Ken however did not submit the form until its submission expired. At a rally in Gokana Local Government which he called to address the people, he was forcefully prevented from mounting the podium and escorted to his car by Mobile Policemen. While entering his car, he was alleged to have told the surging crowd that he had heard that “the vultures” who stopped him from going to the Confab were meeting somewhere and all should be done to fish them out and dealt with.

Before then, Okuntimo was reported to have sent a “restricted” memo to Komo, the Military Administrator, stating that Ogoni was making “Shell operations still impossible unless ruthless military operations are undertaken for smooth economic activities to commence.” In the memo, Okuntimo recommended “Wasting operations during MOSOP and other gatherings making constant military presence justifiable.” On May 21, 1994, exactly nine days after this memo, in Gokana, a mob seized Ogoni elders suspected to be anvils of Shell and the Nigerian government who were taking mercantilist interest in Shell’s continuous exploration and who antagonized MOSOP. In the process, Chief Edward Kobani, Mr. Albert Badey, Chief Samuel Orage and Mr. Samuel Orage were cruelly murdered, thus opening the way for an excuse by government to justify a military operation.

The second day, Saro-Wiwa, Ledum Mitee and many other Ogoni leaders were arrested in connection with the killings. General Abacha then constituted the Tribunal which had Justice Ibrahim Auta as Chairman. Apart from Wiwa and Mitee, other Ogoni leaders brought before the tribunal were a former Commissioner for Commerce and Tourism, Dr. Barinen Kiobel; Mr. John Kpuinen and Baribian Bere. While Gani Fawehinmi acted as defence counsel, Joseeph Dauda (SAN) stood for the prosecution. Fawehinmi had to withdraw at some point when he found out that the state’s hands were heavily visible for the prosecution. For instance, a major evidence in his grip, a tape of a press conference held by Dauda Komo and an Alhaji Kobani, was pronounced unrecyclable by the tribunal. From then, Saro-Wiwa refused to cooperate with the tribunal and his imposed counsel, Michael Kamebigba. Mittee defended self.

Finding Saro-Wiwa and the others guilty, Auta, in a 3-hour judgement, said the murder of the Ogoni four had the accused Ogoni leaders’ hands in it. He sad their offence which contravened the Civil Disturbances Decree of 1987 and punishable by S 316 of the Criminal Code. He thus found the accused guilty and to be hanged by their necks. One Victoria Vokwe had given evidence that Saro-Wiwa told her that there would be a revolution in Ogoni land and heads would roll. As Auta rose, Hauwa wept uncontrollably, her shoulder on Political Scientist, Claude Ake’s shoulders. Ake, who was also inside the Rivers State House of Assembly Complex venue of the tribunal, wore a visage of crimson.

The world still believed that Abacha had a modicum of humanity left in him and would not kill Saro-Wiwa. Prof Wole Soyinka and Wiwa Junior, son of Saro-Wiwa, however moved to Auckland, Newzealand, to convince the gathering Heads of State of the Commonwealth to persuade Abacha to commute the sentences. On November 5, 1995, Bola Ige, in his Uncle Bola’s Column, wrote defending the Ogoni convicts, which he entitled. Saro-Wiwa will live.

On Thursday, November 8, 1995, the Provisional Ruling Council (PRC) confirmed Auta’s sentence. Announced by the GOC, 82 Division of the Nigerian Army, Major General Victor Malu, the PRC said there was no room for clemency. On Saturday, November 10, barely 48 hours after the PRC confirmation, Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni elders, among whom were Saturday Dordee, Nordu Eawo, Felix Nuate, Paul Levula, David Gbokoo, Baribor Bera, Barinen Kobel were hanged at exactly 11.30am. About two hours before then, the prison and other adjoining roads were cordoned off by heavy MOPOL as the hanging was going on. By 2pm, their bodies, taken in a Port Harcourt City truck, were driven out of the prison premises to the cemetery and by 3.15pm, the burial was concluded. There was unconfirmed rumour that their bodies were spattered with acid to speed up the process of decomposition.

Other reactions followed like the suspension of Nigeria from the Commonwealth and harsh reactions by leaders of the world. The UN General Assembly condemned it and President Clinton responded by recalling U.S. Ambassador Walter Carrington for consultations and banned the sale and repair of military goods and services to Nigeria. For British Prime Minister, John Major, it was a “judicial murder.”

Several declassified information pointed at the fact that Saro-Wiwa was murdered by the Nigerian state. He was a sore in their throats and if he and his MOSOP continued, they would put “sand-sand” in the “gari” of the Nigerian military elite who profited from the environmental sorrows of the Ogoni people. With his education, international connection and reach, Saro-Wiwa was fast penetrating the sacred groove of international attention. He had to die.

Apparently anticipating Nigeria’s wickedness, The Guardian, in 1992, had asked him what epitaph he would want written on his grave. The man whom Nigeria was so unfair to that it denied him the usual six feet of the earth, he told the reporter. In death, Abacha reportedly even ordered that acid be poured on Saro-Wiwa, so as to shrink the space of the earth he occupied.

At the time Saro-Wiwa was hanged, Major General Muhammadu Buhari, as he then was, was the de-facto Prime Minister of Nigeria as he served as the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) Chairman. He controlled the levers of the economy and levers of the operations of government. Throughout the period, there was no word from Buhari for the Ogoni leader nor in favour of their being spared to live. Indeed, Saro-Wiwa had to die for the interest of the military elite which Buhari protected, to be sustained. One can thus logically agree that, ipso facto, Buhari was part of the hangmen who finished off the rights activists and his compatriots.

Having said this, it will be safe to conclude that Buhari’s recent claim of considering the offer of clemency to Saro-Wiwa “as part of this administration’s bid to lay the foundation for genuine reconciliation and bring closure to the issues of Ogoni land” was a post-humus re-conviction and re-murdering of Saro Wiwa and his men by the Nigerian state that he represents.

“What type of country is this?” was Saro-Wiwa’s last word on record, a hypothetical question that he sought answer to without success, until the hangman wrenched life out of him. Twenty six years after, the echo of that morbid question still thunders across Nigeria. We all still ask ourselves what type of country this is.

 

 

Celebrated columnist, Dr. Festus Adedayo,  writes from Ibadan

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