How Federal might came to Osun and met the people, by Stephanie Shaakaa

n n

File: Governor Ademola Adeleke

n

Osun was supposed to be a governorship election.

n

Then Abuja arrived.

n

The problem is not that Abuja came to Osun. The problem is what Nigerian democracy becomes when Abuja can become the largest political presence in a state election.

n

What followed was not illegal simply because it was powerful. Political parties are entitled to mobilise. Governors are entitled to campaign for their party. National leaders can travel to states and ask voters to support their candidates. There is nothing inherently undemocratic about any of that.

n

The discomfort begins somewhere else.

n

It begins when a state election starts to look like a national political operation, when the machinery of a ruling party becomes so enormous that the distinction between party strength and the aura of government power begins to blur.

n

That is what made Osun worth watching.

n

The All Progressives Congress did not treat the August 15 election as an ordinary contest. It constituted a national campaign council that was initially announced as 276 members and later reported at 291, drawing in governors, National Assembly leaders, ministers, federal and state lawmakers and senior party figures from across the country. Imo Governor Hope Uzodimma was made chairman, with Yobe Governor Mai Mala Buni, Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker Tajudeen Abbas among the senior figures in the leadership of the campaign structure.

n

Then, as the campaign entered its final hours, the spectacle became even more visible. Four serving governors were reported in Osogbo for the APC’s final mega rally .Uzodimma, Edo’s Monday Okpebholo, Kogi’s Ahmed Usman Ododo and Ondo’s Lucky Aiyedatiwa. They were joined by Akpabio and other national political heavyweights.

n

There was nothing subtle about the message.

n

Abuja was interested in Osun.

n

The APC itself had already described the election as a “must win” contest and as a crucial test of its readiness for 2027. Its national chairman said the party would deploy its nationwide political structures, elected officials and grassroots network to reclaim the state.

n

Again, none of this, by itself, proves that federal government resources were unlawfully used for partisan purposes. That would require evidence, and serious political writing should not manufacture it.

n

But democracy is concerned with more than illegality.

n

It is also concerned with power.

n

And power has a psychological dimension.

n

When a candidate goes into a state election surrounded by governors, ministers, senators, the leadership of the National Assembly and the full political machinery of the party controlling the federal government, voters do not see only a campaign team. They see the weight of the centre.

n

That weight is often deliberately amplified to manufacture an air of inevitability. The concentration of national heavyweights in a state capital is frequently deployed as a psychological tool,a bandwagon effect designed to demoralize local opposition, overwhelm undecided voters, and signal that resistance is futile.

n

That weight can be felt without anyone issuing a threat.

n

It can be communicated in a sentence as ordinary as the one APC National Secretary Ajibola Basiru delivered during the campaign, when he urged Osun voters to choose an APC governor because, he argued, the state would benefit from having a governor whose party controls the Federal Government.

n

There is a legitimate argument inside that proposition. Federal and state governments work together. A governor who belongs to the governing party may indeed find cooperation with Abuja easier.

n

But there is another question hiding inside it.

n

When does cooperation become leverage?

n

And what happens to federalism when voters begin to hear a state election partly as a choice between having access to Abuja and being outside the governing party at the centre?

n

That is not a trivial question.

n

A governorship election is supposed to answer a relatively simple question. Who do the people of this state want to govern them?

n

It should not quietly become another question.Who will give us the best relationship with the President?

n

Those questions are not the same.

n

One is about representation.

n

The other is about political dependency.

n

This is the deeper danger of federal might in state elections. It does not necessarily arrive carrying a threat. Sometimes it arrives carrying promises, access, prestige and proximity to power. It tells voters that the road to development may be smoother if they choose the candidate who sits on the same political side as Abuja.

n

Yet, when external actors descend too heavily, they frequently miscalculate the local psyche. Electorates often view an overwhelming federal onslaught not as a persuasive pitch, but as an infringement on their political maturity,a subtle insult that triggers a protective local backlash and turns the ballot box into a referendum on local pride versus external dictation.

n

Perhaps that is still viewed as legitimate political persuasion by its architects.

n

But we should still ask what kind of democracy we are building when the federal government becomes such a powerful presence in contests that are supposed to be decided at the state level.

n

Nigeria is a federation, not a political pyramid in which every important decision must eventually be traced back to the centre.

n

A governor should be able to govern effectively without owing his legitimacy to the President. A state should be able to choose an opposition governor without being made to feel that it has chosen political isolation.

n

Anything else risks turning federalism into patronage.

n

And that is where the Osun election becomes particularly instructive.

n

Because after all the governors came, after the national leaders mobilised, after the ruling party assembled one of the most formidable campaign structures imaginable, the voters still had the last word.

n

Ademola Adeleke won with 511,067 votes against Bola Oyebamiji’s 444,815, carrying 19 of the state’s 30 local government areas.

n

The national political machine had arrived.

n

The electorate did not surrender its independence.

n

That is perhaps the most important lesson of Osun.

n

Power can campaign.

n

It cannot vote.

n

Governors can stand on platforms and make promises. Ministers can explain the advantages of alignment with Abuja. Party chairmen can assemble structures that stretch across the country. National lawmakers can descend on a state and transform a local rally into a national spectacle.

n

But when the curtain closes and the voter enters the polling booth, all of that power must become irrelevant for a few precious seconds.

n

The voter stands alone with the ballot.

n

That small privacy is one of democracy’s greatest protections.

n

It is also why politicians should be careful about becoming intoxicated by the size of their own machinery.

n

The APC’s campaign in Osun demonstrated impressive organisation. There is nothing wrong with a political party knowing how to mobilise. In fact, weak political parties are a danger to democracy too.

n

But there is a difference between political organisation and political omnipotence.

n

The first strengthens democracy.

n

The second begins to frighten it.

n

This distinction matters particularly as Nigeria approaches 2027. When ruling parties treat off-cycle state contests as militarized proxy tests of national supremacy, they exhaust public goodwill, strain state resources, and turn routine democratic transitions into high-stakes existential battles.

n

If the lesson political parties take from Osun is that every state election should become a test of the federal government’s strength, then state politics will gradually become an extension of presidential politics. Governors will increasingly be judged not by what they can do for their people but by how close they are to the centre. Opposition parties will be forced to campaign not only against candidates but against the gravitational pull of Abuja itself.

n

That would be a terrible direction for a federation.

n

And the principle should apply regardless of who occupies Aso Rock.

n

Today the APC controls the Federal Government and has the machinery to deploy its national political establishment into a state contest. Tomorrow another party may control Abuja and do exactly the same thing.

n

The objection, therefore, should not be partisan.

n

It should be constitutional in spirit and democratic in principle.

n

No president should need to fear an opposition governor. No state should need to belong to the President’s party before it can expect fair treatment. And no voter should ever be made to feel that choosing the “wrong” party means choosing development’s wrong side.

n

That is not federalism.

n

That is political dependence.

n

Osun has given Nigeria an unusually useful warning because the people of the state ultimately demonstrated that the centre can come with all its weight and still fail to determine the outcome.

n

The APC brought governors.

n

The people brought ballots.

n

The APC brought national structures.

n

The people brought their judgment.

n

The APC brought Abuja’s political gravity.

n

The people remained in Osun.

n

And that is the point Nigerian democracy must never forget.

n

A political party can bring the whole country to a state election, but it cannot bring the whole country into the polling booth.

n

There, for one brief moment, the governor, the minister, the senator, the party chairman and the President disappear.

n

There is only the voter and the ballot.

n

That is where federal might must end.

n

Because the moment Abuja becomes the invisible candidate in a state election, the election is no longer simply about who should govern the state.

n

It becomes a test of whether the people still believe that the state belongs to them.

n

Osun answered that question more clearly than the politicians expected.

n

Abuja came calling.

n

The people answered at the ballot box.

n n