Coalition or Consent? Rethinking Adebayo Adelabu’s 2019 Narrative and the Politics of Accountability in Oyo
When insists that a “coalition” halted his political rise during the 2019 gubernatorial election in , it raises a fundamental democratic question: was it truly a calculated conspiracy, or simply the collective will of the people expressed through ballots?
Because, if we are being honest, elections are not inherited—they are earned. Often painstakingly, sometimes humblingly, but always through the trust and validation of the electorate. Democracy, in its purest form, does not respond to entitlement; it rewards connection, credibility, and consistency.
The 2019 Oyo gubernatorial election, like many others across Nigeria, reflected a broader political shift driven by voter sentiment, grassroots mobilization, and alliances that are not unusual in democratic contests. Political coalitions, after all, are not inherently sinister—they are a legitimate feature of competitive politics. Across the world, from parliamentary systems to presidential democracies, alliances are built to consolidate interests and reflect shared goals.
However, where the narrative becomes troubling is in the attempt to draw revered traditional institutions into partisan disputes. Referencing —the Olubadan of Ibadanland—in a tone that suggests political bias or interference crosses a delicate line.
The Olubadan stool is not merely symbolic; it represents centuries of cultural heritage, moral authority, and political neutrality within Ibadan’s traditional framework. As a custodian of history and a unifying figure, the Olubadan embodies dignity that transcends the volatility of party politics. Reducing such an institution to a talking point for electoral grievances risks undermining both its sanctity and its role in preserving communal balance.
Equally intriguing is the subtle criticism directed at . Yet, if the conversation is truly about leadership that resonates with the people, Alli’s political trajectory offers a different narrative—one grounded in grassroots engagement, consistency, and a long-standing connection with constituents.
In Nigerian politics, credibility is not imposed; it is recognized. Voters, particularly in politically aware regions like Ibadan, are discerning. They observe patterns, remember performance, and evaluate candidates beyond campaign rhetoric. This is why political capital cannot simply be manufactured during election cycles—it must be built over time through tangible engagement and trust.
Perhaps this is where the discomfort lies. While some political actors continue to explain past defeats through external factors, others are quietly consolidating influence, strengthening relationships, and positioning themselves for future contests.
Looking ahead to 2027, one thing is clear: elections will not be decided by lingering grievances or recycled narratives of blame. The electorate is increasingly focused on competence, character, and connection. These are the currencies that define modern political success—not alliances alone, and certainly not accusations against respected figures.
Ibadan’s political landscape, shaped by its rich history and dynamic population, is far from passive. The people are not pawns on a chessboard; they are active participants in shaping their future. They remember past performances, scrutinize present actions, and ultimately make decisions based on perceived value and vision.
So rather than attributing electoral outcomes to coalitions or invoking the names of revered elders, perhaps the more honest—and admittedly more challenging—question should be asked:
What was truly offered to the people then, and what is being offered now?
Because in the final analysis, no political coalition can override a genuine, widespread mandate. When the people are convinced, when trust is firmly established, and when leadership aligns with public expectation, the outcome becomes clear—and decisive.
And that, ultimately, is the language democracy understands best.
0 Comments