By Comrade Ilesanmi Kolawole
A growing pattern in Ekiti State’s political landscape is raising serious questions about leadership priorities, governance outcomes, and the increasing reliance on optics over substance. In recent months, Governor Biodun Oyebanji’s repeated visits to Aso Rock, often accompanied by well-publicized photographs with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, have been framed by his supporters as evidence of political relevance and access. However, a closer and more critical examination reveals a different narrative, one that underscores a troubling gap between image-making and actual performance.
Let us be clear: governance is not a photo album. Leadership is not measured by the number of times a governor appears in Abuja or stands beside the President for the cameras. Governance is measured by impact, visible, tangible, and verifiable improvements in the lives of the people. Unfortunately, in Ekiti today, many citizens are still searching for those defining projects that justify the current administration’s almost three years in office.
Running to Aso Rock for staged photographs will not erase political history, nor will it deceive discerning voters. Ekiti people are politically conscious and historically aware. They understand the difference between symbolism and substance. No amount of carefully curated images can replace the reality on ground, roads that remain unattended, schools lacking adequate infrastructure, youth unemployment still on the rise, and an economy that has yet to feel the full weight of purposeful governance.
It is particularly telling that as this administration approaches its third year, there is no widely acknowledged landmark project significant enough to attract a presidential commissioning. This is not a trivial matter. Across Nigeria, governors take pride in showcasing transformative projects, initiatives that speak boldly of their vision and capacity. In Ekiti, however, such opportunities appear scarce. One must then ask: what exactly are these Aso Rock visits meant to project?
More troubling is the widening perception gap between government messaging and the lived realities of ordinary Ekiti citizens. While official narratives highlight access to federal power, the people are asking for something far more fundamental, results. They want development, not display. They want progress, not posturing.
In contrast, the political trajectory of Dr. Oluwole Oluyede presents an alternative narrative rooted in consistency, credibility, and long-term strategic engagement, particularly through his foundational role in the South West Agenda for Asiwaju (SWAGA). This is not a minor credential; it is a defining pillar of his political identity and a strong selling point that speaks to foresight, courage, and commitment.
Historical records of SWAGA’s formation trace its origin back to 2020, at a time when the idea of a coordinated South-West political movement to actualize the presidential ambition of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu was still in its formative stage. It began as a small but determined circle of about ten committed political actors who shared a common vision. Among this core founding group were Dr. Oluwole Oluyede, Hon. Oyetunde Ojo, Chief Tony Adeniyi (SAN), Hon. Bimbo Daramola, Rt. Hon. Adewale Ominrin, and a few other strategic stakeholders who understood the importance of early organization and regional consolidation.
What makes Oluyede’s role particularly significant is not just his presence in that founding group, but the depth of his involvement at a time when the movement had no guarantees of success. These were not men gathering for political convenience; they were individuals taking calculated risks, investing personal resources, and building a structure from the ground up. Oluyede was part of the engine room, engaging in strategy sessions, coordinating outreach, and helping to define the ideological and operational direction of SWAGA.
As the movement began to gain traction, the group expanded its reach and influence, eventually bringing in Prince Dayo Adeyeye, a seasoned political figure with extensive experience. His later emergence as Chairman of SWAGA further strengthened the structure, but it is important to emphasize that the foundation upon which the group stood had already been laid by the original members, including Oluyede.
This sequence of events is critical in understanding political authenticity. Oluyede did not join SWAGA when it became fashionable or when success was within reach, he was there at inception, when uncertainty was high and the stakes were even higher. He contributed to building the very platform that many now seek to associate with for political relevance.
Beyond formation, Oluyede’s contributions extended into aggressive grassroots mobilization. He leveraged his networks across Ekiti State to ensure that the SWAGA message resonated at the community level. From local meetings to broader political engagements, his influence helped position Ekiti as an active participant in the South-West’s political realignment ahead of the 2023 elections.
During Asiwaju’s consultation visits, the results of these early efforts became evident. The turnout, the enthusiasm, and the cross-party participation reflected a level of groundwork that could not have been achieved overnight. It spoke to a sustained, credible, and well-coordinated mobilization effort, one in which Oluyede played a central role.
This is where the contrast becomes clear. While some political actors today rely heavily on proximity to power as a measure of relevance, Oluyede’s record demonstrates substance over symbolism. He was part of the process that built the bridge, not just someone taking photographs on it.
Furthermore, there are increasing concerns about the internal dynamics within the Ekiti State chapter of the APC. Observers have pointed to what appears to be a lingering influence of past political leadership, particularly the enduring shadow of former Governor Kayode Fayemi. This raises valid questions about the autonomy of the current administration. Can a government truly serve its people effectively if it is perceived to be operating under external control?
Leadership must be independent, decisive, and people-focused. Any structure that limits these qualities ultimately undermines governance.
Beyond these issues lies a more disturbing development, one that speaks to the broader political future of Ekiti State. It is imperative to call out actions and individuals whose conduct may be hindering the state’s progress at the national level. In this regard, Senator Michael Opeyemi Bamidele must be urged to place Ekiti’s collective interest above personal political ambition.
There are growing concerns that political maneuverings at the federal level are being influenced by narrow calculations aimed at preserving individual access and control. It is widely believed that resistance to key federal appointments for Ekiti indigenes may be rooted in fears of losing political dominance or exposing long-standing narratives that may not stand up to scrutiny.
Ekiti State, as it stands today, does not have a substantive ministerial representative in President Tinubu’s government. This absence is both glaring and unacceptable. Attempts to present other appointments as substitutes do not address the core issue. The so-called Alake appointment, for instance, cannot be said to represent Ekiti in any meaningful sense, as the appointee does not have direct political roots or electoral ties within the state.
This situation raises serious questions about representation, inclusion, and fairness. Ekiti deserves a seat at the table, not symbolic recognition, but real participation in national governance.
If indeed political calculations tied to future ambitions, particularly the widely speculated 2030 agenda, are influencing decisions that affect Ekiti’s present, then such actions must be firmly challenged. The future of Ekiti cannot be sacrificed on the altar of individual aspiration.
Ultimately, the 2026 governorship election will not be decided in the corridors of Aso Rock or through orchestrated displays of political proximity. It will be decided by the people of Ekiti, based on their lived experiences, their expectations, and their assessment of who truly represents their interests.
Photo-ops cannot replace performance. Public relations cannot substitute for results. And political narratives, no matter how well crafted, cannot override reality.
Ekiti people are watching. They are listening. And when the time comes, they will respond, not to images, but to impact.
Comments
Post a Comment