A sharp political fault‐line is opening up in Oyo State as the Oyo G22 Renewed, a coalition of prominent indigenes from 22 Local Government Areas outside Ibadan, have formally urged that the next governorship in 2027 should not go to an Ibadan indigene. The group says this demand arises from longstanding marginalisation, calling for fair rotation of political power among all zones of the state. This push has set off intense discussions about equity, governance, and inclusivity in Oyo State politics.
What G22 Renewed Is Saying
The coalition, speaking via an open letter, argues that Ibadan has “over‐dominated” the state governorship since the return to democracy in 1999.
They emphasise that the other zones—Oke‐Ogun, Ogbomoso, Ibarapa, Oyo North etc.—have been sidelined despite their contributions to the state’s socio‐political landscape.
They argue that the principle of rotational justice in party politics and governance demands that 2027 be the turn of a non‐Ibadan zone.
Voices and Zones Aligning with the Demand
Oke‐Ogun in particular has been vocal. Former Minister Adebayo Shittu has stated that political leaders in that region are already strategising to ensure that the governorship comes from Oke‐Ogun in 2027. He remarked that continuing to settle for the deputy governor or other subordinate posts is no longer acceptable.
A socio‐political group, Egbe Ajosepo fun Itesiwaju Gbogbo Wa, has publicly backed the rotational demand, calling for fairness, inclusivity, and political balance. Their national chairman, Mr. Dauda Olaifa-Alade, made this known during a community meeting at the House of Chiefs in Ibadan.
Historical Context & Why the Argument Resonates
Since 1999, four of the five governors of Oyo State have been from Ibadan: Lam Adesina, Rashidi Ladoja, Abiola Ajimobi, and the current governor, Seyi Makinde.
The repeated ascent of governors from Ibadan has fueled perceptions that political power—and by extension development projects, state appointments, patronage—are overly concentrated in Ibadan and its environs.
Critics note that Ibadan has advantages: population size, political infrastructure, economic clout. But the counterargument from G22 Renewed and allied voices is that population does not equate to indigene status, nor should it override claims for fairness.
Counterpoints & Possible Pushbacks
Some may argue that Ibadan deserves continued eligibility because of its large population, established political networks, and economic importance. But as G22 Renewed points out, not all residents of Ibadan are indigenes, and political representation should reflect actual citizenship, contributions, and merit, not merely residency or numbers.
Another potential argument is that denying Ibadan elites the chance to run might disincentivise investment or political stability. Conversely, proponents of rotation say that spreading the governorship honours across zones can enhance legitimacy, reduce feelings of exclusion, and ensure more balanced development.
Implications for 2027 and Investor/Stakeholder Watchpoints
Political parties in Oyo (especially APC, PDP, smaller ones) will be under pressure to zone the governorship and/or consider power‐sharing arrangements so as to avoid intra‐party conflict in 2027.
Interested aspirants from outside Ibadan may see this as a window of opportunity—with G22 Renewed potentially acting as a kingmaker bloc of sorts, if they can translate moral suasion into votes.
Voters outside Ibadan will likely expect policy commitments beyond mere rhetoric: concrete guarantees for infrastructural development, investment, access to appointments, education, health etc., if the next governor is from their zone.
The declaration by Oyo G22 Renewed marks a significant escalation in the ongoing conversation about equitable governance in Oyo State. As 2027 approaches, the question is not only who becomes the next governor, but which zone gets the chance—and how political fairness, inclusivity, and rotational justice are respected. For a state with diverse zones and long‐standing perceptions of imbalance, the coming months will likely be decisive in shaping both electoral outcomes and public trust.
0 Comments