THE REVOLT OF “EKITI AT HOME” Congratulations have poured in, to the governor–elect of Ekiti State; Peter Ayodele Fayose for literarily returning from the political graveyard to unseat the incumbent, Joseph kayoed Fayemi of the All Progressives Congress. Was Fayose ever really dead, politically? Casual and distant observers of the political scenario in Ekiti have postulated several reasons why Ayo Fayose won the election. Most of these write-ups are based on distant evaluations of the undulating political topography of Ekiti State, not written by people who traversed the hills and valleys of Ekiti. Let me share with you my theory of why the “machinery” of the APC could not save John Kayode Fayemi as seen by someone who travelled Ekiti extensively in the past three years. My last sentence was an assumption. There was a presupposition that the All Progressives Congress had a formidable “machinery” in Ekiti State. The Action Congress of Nigeria never infiltrated nor permeated the fabric of the Ekiti society before it morphed into the All Progressives Congress. The antecedents of the party in Ekiti, the emergence of a returnee Ekiti son (though worthy) and the meddlesomeness of Bourdillon Road all contributed to the lack of allure that the APC brand experienced. How did Fayemi emerge? His exploits during the Abacha era are well-documented and should not be recanted. He was the voice behind Radio Kudirat and was close to the Ekiti and Yoruba intelligentsia in diaspora. He was close to the elders in the Afenifere Group and was seen as a steady hand who would restore some level of sanity to the waning political health of Ekiti. Having spent a lot of time living in Ghana and the United Kingdom, Kayode Fayemi had friends and acquaintances in Ekiti high society but did not engender political followership or die-hard loyalty that Ekiti politics demands. Most Ekiti people had heard about him but did not know him. Did they believe in his brand? I doubt! This contrast in personality and brand with Ayo Fayose, a street-wise orchestrator of mass followership and political organisation was to play a determinant factor in the electioneering process. In choosing Fayemi as the candidate, ACN sought the support of Peter Ayodele Fayose whose political structure never suffered dereliction despite the travails he suffered as impeached governor. As soon as he could move freely, Fayose could be found in most innocuous places in Ekiti, mixing with the populace and assuring them that he would be back. I was at a wedding in Erijiyan where all ACN supporters disappeared into thin air at the entrance of Fayose. This was before the electioneering campaign. The same scene played out at a burial I attended in Iyin Ekiti in 2012 when Fayose showed up at an ACN appointee’s party. The musician, paid by the ACN appointee “cross-carpeted” to praise-singing Fayose, just a few minutes after he composed a tune to promote eight years of Fayemi’s rule. The hotel which hosted Fayose and his entourage ran out of drinks within an hour of becoming Fayose’s watering hole. Such was his followership that enabled Fayemi to benefit from Fayose’s rebellion against the Peoples’ Democratic Party during Fayemi’s election. His father’s burial in Afao Ekiti was a campaign ground with one poster, held by the man who was burying his dad: “Vote Fayemi” it read. Fayose was the divisive factor in Ekiti PDP that ensured that the ACN got a sizeable chunk of votes in Fayose strongholds. The reluctance of Fayose die-hards to vote for an “imported” candidate glaringly showed in the elections as ACN needed a judicial victory to oust the incumbent Segun Oni. This background is necessary to understand the nature of Ekiti politics. There is “Ekiti Abroad”, in diaspora, on social media, in academic institutions and there is “Ekiti at Home” from which this article draws its title. You need to know the difference. I learnt this from Professors Ajaja and Olowolafe in Ado Ekiti who lectured me while discussing Fayemi’s administration over a leisurely round of golf. To understand the outcome of this election, you must have a clear appreciation of the typology of Ekiti demographics or you might assume, quite erroneously that Fayemi’s voters refused to “rice” to the occasion. “Ekiti abroad” consists of the legion of Ekiti products who live outside Nigeria. They never vote (they are not resident here!) and are easily led by social media posts. Elitist and well-off by all standards, they tend to pontificate and would gladly support the “progressive” cause. They typically applaud every move of the government of the day that mirrors the welfare benefits existent in the countries in which they live. Electoral relevance and value of this segment is non-existent. Ekiti professionals, a branch of “Ekiti Abroad” is scattered in metropolitan cities all over Nigeria. They are not registered voters in their state of origin. Political relevance and value is limited to Facebook posts and other social media mention. Let us focus on “Ekiti at home” as they are the true kingmakers who revolted against Fayemi. Ekiti is arguably Nigeria’s most educated stated per capita. That is due largely in part to the educational route taken by most Ekiti indigenes. A typical career starts at a College of Education, followed by a Bachelor’s degree and post-graduate degree. In irony, the levels of hunger and poverty in Ekiti mirrors the educational accomplishments of her people. Compound this factor with lack of exposure and the dearth of commercial opportunities; what you get are Ekitis who are insular, fiery and prefer local solutions to the disdain of external influence. Ekiti is that state where pensioners and civil servants create the economy and dictate the pace of all commercial activities. They depend heavily on the outflow of government to pay their rent, pay school fees and meet life’s obligations. Combine the reticent civil servants with the youth who able but bereft of opportunities to develop themselves, this demographic segment is very sensitive, restive and violence-prone. This is the Ekiti that flares up violently in the newpapers. This is the Ekiti of Ido Osi, singing “Magbe magbe o, Ibo Fayemi ko see gbe, Magbe Magbe”. This is the Ekiti that determines who governs Ekiti. This is the Ekiti that voted Fayose and rejected Fayemi in 2014 for the following reasons: 1. They never saw Fayemi as part of them. He was a “Ghanaian” candidate imposed on them by an “alien” party. He belonged to “Ekiti Abroad” and never could understand their pain. They would rather have someone who drinks regularly in Ado Ekiti and eats at local joints than someone who relaxes at the revamped Ikogosi Warm Springs Resorts. 2. Fayemi’s choice of commissioners and aides pandered to the whims of Ekiti elite, further alienating the “Ekiti at Home”. Most of his commissioners and aides, qualified and distinguished professionals, who I met during several meetings were not grounded in Ekiti politics; due to the fact that they lived abroad or worked outside Ekiti before their appointment. His alignment with former governor, Niyi Adebayo accentuated the perception of an elitist government; focused only on making things happen for the rich and maintaining the status quo. 3. Fayemi’s brand of politics did not endear him to Ekiti people. Known as “stingy”, I recall him saying to his cabinet at a retreat in Ikogosi Ekiti in March 2013 that “stealing will not be tolerated in the name of preparing for elections”. He blatantly refused to “empower personal infrastructure” so that his aides could fight the political battle with cash. The defeat of all his aides and appointees in their constituencies points to their inability to “provide both stomach and pocket infrastructure”. In a political situation which requires a large financial armoury, Fayemi’s war chest never matched Fayose whose backers had a large reservoir of cash. This was not the battle of rice as many are wont to characterise it. It was the battle of political battle-readiness and means. Fayemi lost to political naivety, masquerading as self-assurance. He paid dearly for daring to be different in a corrupt electoral process. His senators never helped matters. They refused to donate money lavishly nor give money to every town hall meeting in Ekiti. Babafemi Ojudu was particularly guilty, refusing to dole out money liberally. He even had the temerity to complain in a widely-published interview that “people asked for money to roof their houses”! 4. Fayemi’s Ekiti infrastructure development plan is one of the best ever conceived in the history of politics in Nigeria. However, his choice of “tested” Lagos contractors (some of them Ekiti professionals) was seized on by Ekiti indigenes as pandering to the whims of Bourdillon overlord. As much as Bayo Kelekun in Special Duties and his exemplary team renovated schools and hospitals, his Works counterpart constructed roads to delight Ekiti people who were waiting to see how many of them would be “made” by the Fayemi administration. Unlike Fayose, Fayemi’s award of contracts did not mirror the political reality on ground. Fayemi did not “make” more Ekiti sons and daughters who wanted more nouveau rich people to feed the masses. 5. The political party, APC assumed a position of complacency; erroneously assuming that political success is solely predicated on performance and media mention. Fayemi performed creditably but he was never able to endear his brand to Ekiti people especially Ekiti at Home. Segun Oni, politically orphaned by the PDP touted the achievements of the party. What was his electoral value, Fayemi found out late. Despite media tours conducted for “online social media activists”, Ekiti people never saw the value of Ikogosi Warm Springs Resorts or Erinta Waterfalls. While APC was basking in social media mention, Fayose concentrated on local mention. He did not grant many interviews. He watched his utterances; all signs of the quiet before the storm. He quietly visited every opinion moulder in Ekiti. He nailed it! 6. The Micheal Opeyemi Bamidele factor has been played down in this revolt but discerning political analysts would recall that the dissent of the Labour Party candidate was a major crack in the wall of the APC. His blatant refusal to heed all entreaties and recant demystified the common united front, created by the APC. He set the initial tone of campaign against Fayemi, questioned the award of contracts and the plausibility of Fayemi’s perceived performance. Fayose benefited immensely from this wrangle as he piggy-backed on Bamidele’s accusations to launch a full scale attack of Fayemi’s government. His Labour Party never threatened the incumbent, but his participation of in the election process denied Fayemi of additional votes and dented his chances. Fayosse benefitted immensely from the mud-slinging that exposed Fayemi’s flanks. 7. Fayose’s campaign strategy was bottom up, choosing to engage the people than debate issues. He refused to participate in a televised Gubernatorial Debate. He played to his strengths: people over issues; appeal over policies; passion over plans! Never one to dwell on the finer details of personal branding and presentation, he preoccupied himself with mingling with the people and making them promises. He spoke their language and preferred to “Ja Won Si” rather than pontificate in academic semantics. He never created a social media brand. Most mentions of Fayose on social media were voluntary and lacked coordination. He defined his audience carefully. His message was simple: “I am one of you, I kicked against Obasanjo and lived, I unseated Niyi Adebayo and lived, I unseated Segun Oni and lived, give me your votes and let us unseat Fayemi who I introduced to you”. It rang true! 8. The policies of the Fayemi administration, geared towards the mobilisation of Internally Generated Revenue did not favour the impoverished people of Ekiti whose interests he genuinely had at heart. They disliked, sorry loathed his tax regime though the benefits were glaring. The inherent conundrum arose from the conflict of rights and responsibilities. Ekiti people wanted roads and drainages but they wanted to continue paying meagre tax rates. They wanted politicians who would dole out money at every function yet, the average Ekiti person writes more petitions per annum than any other citizen on corruption and embezzlement. Therein lies the dissonance of the Ekiti voter’s mentality. 9. Ekiti is a civil servant state. In institutional reform and change management, stakeholder management is the key to success and sustainability. Elected office holders often find it hard to balance the need to reform institutions with the urge to curry political followership from civil servants. Fayemi fought long-standing battles with the teachers and civil servants in Ekiti. He wanted a competency-based teaching model, which necessitated Training Needs Assessment and competency testing. He did not factor the entrenched interest of personal interests and political affiliation. Every family in Ekiti has a civil servant. Anything that threatens a civil servant job threatens a family. Fayemi created promotional examinations for civil servants. It was a lost cause. He could not move the mountains of change management. The civil servants registered their discontent at the ballot. 10. The Domino effect of Ondo’s rejection of the APC/ACN franchise resonated with our cousins in Ekiti. The natural independent spirit of the Ekiti man was rekindled when the party lost Ondo state with Olusegun Mimiko cruising to victory. That victory was a watershed of reckoning as Ekiti people awakened to the possibility of defeating the Tinubu-led party. The only factor that questioned that possibility was the candidate, who was the candidate who could turn the tide against the APC? Fayose provided that missing link. Will Osun follow suit? I doubt that possibility! The benefit of hindsight offers benefits for every stakeholder in Nigeria’s political landscape. The People’s Democratic Party is obviously in celebratory mode, happy at demystifying the APC invisibility in the South West. The All Progressives Congress has learnt a vital lesson in strategy and electoral mobilisation. The party needs to rejig its internal democracy and grassroots mobilisation efforts. It must not abandon the party faithful in Ekiti if it hopes to regain the state into its fold. Its Ondo arm already suffers from lack of attention from APC national leaders. To all political minds, the fear of the electorate has become more instructive as the beginning of political survival. Ekiti At home proved this point. I am sure it will continue to elicit opinion, informed or otherwise.
Posted on: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 17:06:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015