News

Governor Okpebholo’s Comment About Peter Obi Is Wrong and Dangerous for Democracy

Published by Tope Fakinlede on July 22nd, 2025.

Governor Okpebholo’s Comment About Peter Obi Is Wrong and Dangerous for Democracy

The recent comments by Edo State Governor, Monday Okpebholo, suggesting that Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi, must seek his approval before entering Edo State, mark a disturbing shift toward authoritarian overreach. Such a stance is not only constitutionally baseless but also reflects a dangerous misunderstanding of democratic governance and civil liberties.

Governor Okpebholo’s assertion—made after Obi visited Benin City on July 7 and donated N15 million to the St. Philomena School of Nursing—is a glaring violation of the principles enshrined in Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution. His claim that the visit spurred unrest and that future visits would require “security clearance” is both absurd and deeply troubling.

It is fundamentally unacceptable for an elected official to presume the authority to restrict a fellow citizen’s movement, especially in a republic built on the rule of law. Nigeria’s Constitution, in Section 41(1), guarantees every citizen the right to move freely throughout the country, barring any criminal conduct. Similarly, Section 39 affirms the right to freedom of expression. These are not privileges that governors can bestow or withdraw—they are legal rights protected by the highest law of the land.

This kind of political gatekeeping is not new. In April, Benue State Governor Hyacinth Alia also attempted to bar Obi from visiting internally displaced persons (IDPs) and health facilities, citing dubious security concerns. More recently, police in Kaduna State halted a peaceful rally organized by Obi’s supporters, citing possible disruption to public order. These coordinated attempts to sideline opposition voices reveal a growing intolerance within Nigeria’s political class.

Such actions betray a failure to learn from history. In the final days of the Second Republic, political suppression and abuse of state machinery created a powder keg that led to military intervention. Governors and public office holders must tread carefully, lest they repeat the mistakes that brought about national instability in the past.

Efforts to hinder opposition figures from conducting charitable activities are not only petty but counterproductive. If Obi’s philanthropic gesture is viewed as a threat, it says more about the insecurity of the incumbent administration than it does about the intentions of the donor. Rather than appreciate assistance to the state’s struggling health sector, the Edo government chose to politicize a goodwill visit.

Allegations that Obi had, in the past, restricted the movements of political figures such as former Kaduna State Governor Nasir el-Rufai have been repeatedly debunked by security agencies. Yet, these myths continue to be recycled as justification for unconstitutional behavior.

Moreover, the claim that a political leader must notify a state government before any visit reflects a flawed understanding of governance. Such demands are not grounded in law but in fear—fear of accountability, competition, and citizen engagement.

In June 2014, similar tactics were deployed by the then-ruling PDP. APC governors were blocked from entering Ekiti State, and chartered flights carrying opposition leaders were denied landing rights. The same party now in power, which once cried foul, is repeating those same repressive tactics it once condemned.

True democracy thrives on tolerance, inclusiveness, and the robust exchange of ideas. As the Inter-Parliamentary Union has noted, the essence of political tolerance lies in respecting differing views and safeguarding the civil liberties of all citizens, regardless of their affiliations.

If the current administration in Edo—and by extension, the APC—wishes to prove its democratic credentials, it must rise above petty political antics. Performance, not censorship, is the only legitimate tool against opposition. If the ruling party is delivering tangible progress to the people, no amount of philanthropy from rivals can shake their position.

The tendency to stifle dissenting voices through executive threats and bureaucratic bottlenecks is corrosive to national unity. Okpebholo’s remarks, given the ethnic sensitivities in Nigeria, risk being interpreted as targeted against the Igbo ethnic group, further inflaming divisions at a time when national cohesion is fragile.

As the nation inches closer to the 2027 general elections, the stakes are high. The lessons from the First Republic should not be lost on today’s political actors. The path to enduring democracy lies not in suppressing opposition but in building institutions, deepening respect for civil liberties, and engaging in service-oriented leadership.

The Federal Government, too, must take responsibility. Its silence or implicit approval of these unconstitutional acts only emboldens such behavior. If the APC truly believes in democratic values, it must publicly denounce any form of political intimidation, even when it comes from within its own ranks.

Law enforcement agencies, especially the police, must remain apolitical and uphold their constitutional duty to protect all citizens equally. Nigeria’s democracy depends on their impartiality and professionalism.

Ultimately, politics should never become a vehicle for suppression. The presence of opposition is not a threat—it is a vital sign of democracy’s health. Leaders must learn to accommodate dissent, welcome scrutiny, and recognize that power is transient, but the consequences of abuse are enduring.