Politics
Fayemi And The New Sociology Of Politics
Ekiti State, formerly
known as the “Centre of Knowledge,” but now “Land of Honour” took her turn in the gubernatorial test on June 21, 2014 with a verdict of “no victor, no vanquished”. One may be wondering why there was “no victor, no vanquished” in an election in which three major political parties with three heavy weights engaged themselves in a battle of wills and wits to win the hearts and votes of the electorate at all costs.
While Governor Kayode Fayemi of the All Progressives Congress (APC), on the driving seat of Ekiti Government, tried to use the test to cruise into his second tenure, his major challenger and candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Mr Ayo Fayose was determined to recover the peoples’ mandate which he believed was stolen from him through judiciary gate. Fayose lost to Fayemi in a court of law after a stay of more than three years as landlord of Ekiti State Government House. Mr. Opeyemi Bamidele, a member of House of Representatives and candidate of the Labour Party (LP) saw the governorship poll as an opportunity to serve the people as No 1 citizen of the state.
Bearing all calculations by the candidates to win the election, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) which was leaking its wounds from poor outing in previous exercises was, however, prepared to make a difference in the poll in which 732,166 voters registered across 2,195 polling units in the state with 177 wards.
In a ‘hard fought’ election among the three candidates, INEC released the score card and returned Ayo Fayose of PDP as the winner, having won in all the 16 local government areas of the state with 203,090 votes. the incumbent governor polled 120,433 votes to clinch second position while the LP candidate, Bamidele, settled for third position with 18,135 votes.
Even though there were records of unsavory episodes when the candidates toured parts of the state to sell themselves to the people, the verdict of INEC on the Ekiti gubernatorial poll, did not tear the Ekiti people and their peace apart as earlier predicted in some quarters.
But the beauty of the Ekiti election can better be appreciated in the rare show of sportsmanship exhibited by Governor Fayemi despite the fact that he lost in his bid to return to Government House for a second time. Hours after INEC released the result, Ekiti remained peaceful and Governor Fayemi not only accepted defeat, but also congratulated Fayose, the governor-elect for emerging victorious.
In a broadcast in Ado-Ekiti last Sunday, Fayemi said he had no choice but to accept the results of the June 21 election and congratulated the governor-elect “if indeed the outcome of the election is the will of the Ekiti people.”
Displaying an uncommon disposition that is unknown to Africa politics, Fayemi insisted that “if this is the will of the Ekiti people, I stand in deference to your will. If the result of the elections is an expression of the voice of our people, we must all heed your voice. I have just spoken with my brother, Mr. Peter Ayodele Fayose, congratulating him on his victory. In a few hours from now, I would be meeting the governor-elect to discuss the future of our dear state and how we would work together to institute a smooth transition programme.”
The governor not only participated in the election, he also saw the outcome of the polls as truly reflecting the wishes of the people and therefore accepted in clear terms that “conscience is an open wound, only truth can heal”.
The leadership of APC is worried why and how the party lost to the opponent in the polls even with the power of incumbency, Fayemi believes that there is no need crying over the spilt milk. With no blame for any one for his political summersault, Fayemi, however, thanked the people for support even as he promised to keep faith with them in building Ekiti together.
“Elections tend to be highly divisive affairs that often see a brother rising against his brother. Despite our diverse party affiliations, and regardless of which way we voted on Saturday, we must remember that we are all sons and daughters of Ekiti State. Ekiti is ours to build together”, Faymei added in his post-election broadcast.
Three uncommon features stand out in Fayemi reaction to the Ekiti election. They are, his conscience and political will to concede defeat in the face of realities, his sportsmanship to congratulate his winner (Fayose) and his concern and willingness to build Ekiti together irrespective of party affiliations.
Governor Fayemi may have fought a good fight and kept the faith in the election that was adjudged credible, free and fair by stakeholders, the voice of the people, INEC concurred, was the voice of God. No wonder, he (Fayemi) threw in the towel; a situation that has evolved what could be regarded as a new sociology in Ekiti politics.
Reactions have trailed Fayemi disposition to the outcome of the election. To some, Fayemi’s gentleman disposition to concede defeat is ‘un Africa’, but the APC flag bearer in the polls believed that there is nothing “un-African of un-Nigerian” about his congratulatory message to Fayose. Fayemi who received the governor-elect in his office in Ado-Ekiti, remarked that, “They said my congratulatory message to governor-elect is un-African or un-Nigerian. I don’t think it was so because that was what I was expected to do as a democrat.”
Respecting the wishes of the people in an election, does not make one a political misfit or coward. Fayemi argues that his action was prompted by the belief that “our democracy is fragile and we have to do whatever we can as leaders to strengthen and deepen it the more”.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal, agreed that the governor conceding defeat and congratulating his opponents is exemplary in nature and has added value to the country’s democratic principles. In a statement by his Special Adviser on media, Imam Imam, the speaker said “the governor’s action to congratulate his opponent was a clear proof that our politics is imbibing standard global practice associated with electioneering process”.
To the All Progressives Congress, the action of its candidate in the election was the position of the party. “Of course, the governor couldn’t have made such statement without consulting with the party leadership. What he said is the position of the party leadership,” Lai Mohammed, the APC spokesman said.
The Governor-elect must be grateful to God because the man who wrestled power from him four year ago but lost to him in the June 21 polls is not desperate to remain in office, as it is often the case with most incumbents who usually demonstrate the bad loser syndrome. But more importantly, Fayemi has demonstrated to the world that the interest of Ekiti people is more paramount than his personal ambition and that politics can be played with decorum and restraint.
Meanwhile, Fayose who said his coming back as governor was borne out of the genuine intention to promote love and unity among Ekiti people, did not hide his warm feeling about Fayemi conceding defeat to him when he said “His (Fayemi’s) statesmanship conduct would forever remain in history”.
Today, Ekiti is victorious and in the eyes of history, this is a lesson for all politicians that election must not be seen as do-or-die affairs. Politicians must avoid the bad loser syndrome, build and sustain democracy and not pull it down.
As the 2015 general elections draw nearer, time will tell whether politicians will build on Fayemi’s new sociology of politics-where election is contested and decided without going to court or return to the old and expensive order that increases court cases after every poll as well as promotes tension and acrimony in the land.
APC governorship candidate, Governor Kayode Fayemi and his wife Bisi on queue waiting for their turn to vote during the governorship election in Ekiti State recently.
Samuel Eleonu
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
