Oriyomi’s 'one lie per day' against Makinde exposes untamed desperation, proof of selective memory – GSM Advocates

Oriyomi’s 'one lie per day' against Makinde exposes untamed desperation, proof of selective memory – GSM Advocates

A leading sociopolitical group in Oyo state, the GSM Advocates, has described recent claims by the factional Accord Party governorship candidate in Oyo State, Oriyomi Hamzat, against Governor Seyi Makinde as evidence of what was termed “a learner’s politics of self-credit and selective memory.”

The group, through one of their correspondents, Akanbi Abiola stated this on Monday following what it described as persistent and unrelenting attacks against governor Seyi Makinde following the duo's fallout. 

The group said Hamzat had the constitutional right to contest the 2027 governorship election and criticise the Makinde administration, but warned that political competition should not be used as an avenue to rewrite history.

The goup's reaction followed claims attributed to Hamzat that he was among those who “brought” Makinde into the Oyo State governorship race and should consequently personally receive credit for some of the achievements of the administration.

According to the GSM Advocates, such a claim amounts to an oversimplification of a political process that involved political parties, leaders, campaign organisations, financiers, mobilisers and thousands of Oyo voters.

“There is a point at which political criticism ceases to be a legitimate contribution to public discourse and begins to look like an attempt to rewrite history for electoral advantage,” the group said.

The statement added that nobody should question Hamzat’s right to seek the governorship or present himself as an alternative to the electorate in 2027.

“Politics is competition, and democracy thrives when credible alternatives are available. But political competition does not confer ownership of history,” the group cautioned.

The GSM Advocate questioned what Hamzat meant by his claim that he “brought” Makinde into the governorship race, arguing that the governor had established himself as a political figure in Oyo State years before the 2019 election.

The group recalled that Makinde had contested for the Senate in 2007 and subsequently contested the governorship election in 2011 and 2015 before emerging as the Peoples Democratic Party’s governorship candidate in 2019.

“Long before 2019 when Oriyomi was a common freelance radio broadcaster like every other freelancers, Makinde had participated in party politics, built political relationships, developed political structures and contested elections.

“To present his emergence as governor as though it was fundamentally the product of the intervention of one individual is historically flawed and difficult to sustain even in the eye of common sense,” the group stated.

The group, however, acknowledged that if Hamzat’s claim was that he supported Makinde during the 2019 election, campaigned for him or used his media platform on Facebook to promote his candidacy, such a contribution could legitimately be acknowledged.

“But campaigning for a candidate is not the same thing as creating the candidate,” the group added.

The GSM Advocates therefore, challenged Hamzat to publicly document the role he played in Makinde’s emergence as the PDP consensus candidate and his eventual victory in the 2019 election.

“If he believes his contribution was decisive, he should tell the public precisely what he did, the structure through which he operated and the role of other political stakeholders in that process.

“Political history should be established by evidence, not retrospective ownership like Oriyomi is trying to do” the group added.

The group further maintained that no individual could legitimately claim to have single-handedly made Makinde governor saying: “The people of Oyo State did,” he said.

He explained that the 2019 victory was the outcome of a statewide political process involving party leaders, campaign workers, political organisations and ordinary citizens.

“Thousands of voters went to polling units across the 33 local government areas. Party members mobilised. Campaign workers worked. Political leaders engaged voters. Political actors negotiated alliances.

“Thousands of ordinary citizens made individual decisions at the ballot box, and the ultimate political mandate came from the electorate.”

The statement noted that any attempt to personally appropriate that mandate diminished the role played by Oyo voters in producing the government and called on Hamzat to provide verifiable evidence for claims concerning the growth and expansion of his media platform if such claims were being deployed as evidence of his political influence.

“If supporting Makinde in 2019 gives one person ownership of the achievements of his administration, what happens to the thousands of campaign volunteers, party members, traditional leaders, religious leaders, youth leaders, women leaders, political mobilisers and ordinary voters who also supported him?

“Would they all now be entitled to a percentage of the administration’s achievements?

“People support candidates because they believe those candidates can provide good governance. Once elected, constitutional responsibility for governing rests with the elected government.

“The electorate can subsequently praise the government, criticise it, replace it or re-elect it. That is democracy.”