Opinion By Ayonitemi Kareem
The recent wave of accusations from anonymous “stakeholders” within the APC in Egbado South/Ipokia is more than just political bickering; it is a calculated attempt to manipulate public opinion. For anyone following this development, the most critical takeaway is the lack of accountability from the accusers.
True leaders and stakeholders stand by their words and identities. When a group hides behind a “faceless” curtain to launch attacks, it suggests that their motives are rooted in personal gain rather than the collective interest of the party or the constituency.
This write-up serves as a defense of Dr. Oluwatoyin Emmanuel Taiwo, aiming to separate documented history from recent propaganda. The core message is that political relevance should be earned through consistent grassroots service, not through last-minute press releases. By highlighting Dr. Taiwo’s specific contributions—such as mobilizing wards and funding party infrastructure—the text argues that he has “sown the seeds” of loyalty that his detractors are now trying to uproot.
The conflict also highlights a growing “crisis of fear” among the local political elite.
The defense posits that the attacks on Taiwo aren’t born out of a desire for better governance, but out of anxiety over his rising popularity. As he gains more traction with the people, those who remained idle while he worked now find themselves sidelined. This piece is a call for the public to recognize that these “stakeholders” are likely individuals who feel threatened by a transparent, democratic process.
Furthermore, the inclusion of respected figures like Salimot Badru in the original controversy is framed here as a distraction.
Readers should understand that in Nigerian politics, “name-dropping” is often used to give weight to weak arguments. This response seeks to strip away those distractions and refocus the conversation on local impact and personal track records, urging party members to ignore the noise and look at the tangible work done on the ground.
At its heart, this is a plea for the APC to uphold internal democracy. The write-up argues that the party’s strength depends on rewarding genuine service and fairness.
If the party allows anonymous voices to dictate the narrative, it risks undermining the morale of those who actually do the heavy lifting at the ward levels. It is a reminder to the party leadership that “you cannot reap where you did not sow,” emphasizing that loyalty must be a two-way street.
For the average citizen in Ipokia and Egbado South, this text serves as a “fact-check” against a smear campaign. It encourages voters to be discerning and to remember who was present during the difficult times of party building versus those who only appear during election cycles.
It shifts the power back to the people, suggesting that the ultimate test of a candidate should be their visibility and sacrifice within the community, not their ability to sponsor anonymous articles.
Ultimately, this response is a call for unity through transparency. By challenging the “faceless” critics to come out into the open, the author is attempting to level the playing field.
The message is simple: let the field remain open, let every aspirant be judged by their record, and let the people decide. It is a defense of the democratic process against the dark arts of political character assassination.
