For generations, the Alaafin of Oyo has occupied a distinctive position in Yoruba history. During the era of the Old Oyo Empire, the Alaafin was at the centre of a sophisticated political, administrative and military system whose influence extended across large parts of Yorubaland. That historical reality remains an important reference point in any serious discussion about the hierarchy and traditional institutions of present-day Oyo State.
The political landscape, however, changed dramatically during the 19th century. The collapse of the Old Oyo Empire, the emergence of new centres of military power and the eventual arrival of colonial rule transformed the balance of influence among Yoruba kingdoms.
Ibadan became one of the most powerful political and military centres of the period. But historically, its traditional structure was different from that of Oyo. Ibadan was governed through the Baale institution rather than an Alaafin-style monarchy. That distinction is important because the modern prominence of Ibadan should not automatically be projected backwards to suggest that its traditional institution was historically identical to the Alaafin's imperial stool.
Ile-Ife occupies another unique position. Its importance in Yoruba civilisation goes beyond political authority, with the ancient city widely regarded as a major spiritual and cultural centre of Yoruba history. Consequently, any discussion of traditional precedence in Yorubaland must recognise that political authority and spiritual ancestry are not necessarily the same thing.
The creation of Osun State in 1991 further changed the administrative map. Ile-Ife became part of Osun State, while Oyo remained a separate state. Today, the Ooni of Ife occupies the permanent chairmanship of the Osun State Council of Obas, demonstrating that state-level traditional arrangements can be shaped by legislation and institutional precedent.
That raises a fundamental question for Oyo: why should the historical position of the Alaafin be treated differently?
The controversy surrounding the Oyo Council of Obas did not begin today. The Alaafin had historically occupied the permanent chairmanship, but the arrangement became contentious during the administration of former Governor Adebayo Alao-Akala. The Council subsequently became embroiled in disagreements over its composition and leadership, eventually contributing to the long period during which the statutory council was largely inactive.
The issue returned dramatically after the emergence of the new Alaafin, Oba Akeem Owoade. In 2025, the Oyo State House of Assembly considered amendments to the state's traditional institutions framework amid calls to restore the Alaafin's permanent chairmanship.
However, the final arrangement went in another direction.
In January 2026, Governor Seyi Makinde inaugurated the Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs after about 15 years of inactivity. Under the amended law, the chairmanship became rotational among the Alaafin of Oyo, the Olubadan of Ibadanland and the Soun of Ogbomoso, with each expected to serve a two-year term. The Olubadan, Oba Rashidi Ladoja, became the first chairman under the new arrangement.
The development immediately exposed the sensitivity of the issue. The Alaafin was absent from the inauguration, while reports also indicated disagreement over whether the three monarchs had actually reached the consensus described by the governor regarding the rotational arrangement.
For me, the larger question is not whether the Olubadan, Soun or Alaafin deserves respect. All three traditional institutions deserve respect. The question is whether Oyo State has allowed contemporary political considerations to gradually replace historical precedent.
If history establishes the Alaafin's traditional primacy within the Oyo political system, then restoring the Alaafin as permanent chairman should not be treated as an insult to Ibadan or Ogbomoso. It should be viewed as an institutional recognition of history.
Of course, any attempt to change the present arrangement will attract political reactions. Ibadan interests may argue that restoring permanent chairmanship to the Alaafin diminishes the Olubadan. Others may interpret it as an attempt to undermine the current chairman.
But there is an even more important consideration: the timing.
With the next election cycle approaching, any sudden attempt to remove or diminish the Olubadan's current position could easily be interpreted as political witch-hunting rather than genuine historical correction.
That is why the matter should not be handled through political manoeuvring.
If Oyo State eventually decides that the Alaafin should return as permanent chairman, the change should be made openly, transparently and through the proper legislative process. The State Assembly should conduct consultations, examine the historical and legal records and allow all affected traditional institutions to present their positions.
The objective should not be to humiliate Ladoja, diminish Ibadan or antagonise Ogbomoso.
It should be about one simple principle:
If history has been displaced by politics, then history deserves an opportunity to reclaim its rightful place—but not through political vendetta.
The Alaafin's permanent chairmanship may remain controversial, but the debate deserves to be settled by history, evidence and law—not by whichever political interest happens to be strongest at the moment.
0 Comments