By Lasisi Olagunju

In a democracy, victory won through real elections brings enduring legitimacy. ‘On Your Mandate We Shall Stand’ was composed and sung for Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola because he submitted his ambition to a competitive process: he had a competent opponent, votes were cast, counted, and he won. The song, its defiance, and resilience followed that mandate because it was legitimate.

Those who chant similar slogans today may find themselves clutching empty matchboxes tomorrow if they continue to sidestep competitive elections. A democratic seat secured through elite manipulation and backroom agreement cannot command enduring popular support, especially when those same elites decide to take it back.

Nigeria today stands in the grip of what is called consensus politics; choosing candidates without the ‘trouble’ of voting. We are even scheming to elect a president next year without the inconvenience of election. Good luck to all of us.

At the Battle of Hastings on October 14, 1066, the Norman king, William the Conqueror, defeated King Harold II and went on to become King of England. Historians note that the victory set off sweeping changes across the British Isles. They say by force of arms, William took the crown and went on to remake the Church, the palace, and the culture of England. They say he did more than change the English crown; his victory remade the English language through a deep infusion of Norman/Latin forms. The consequence is that more than 60 percent of English words now carry Latin parentage.

One such word is ‘consensus’, from the Latin ‘consentīre’—“to feel together”,

“to agree,” “to be in harmony,” “to concur.”

The rains started beating that word a long time ago. Language historians note that words which experienced long migration often shed their original sense of shared feeling and acquire more instrumental meanings. So it is with ‘consensus’ in today’s political usage.

Somewhere along its long journey from Latin to modern political speech, ‘consensus’ lost its warmth. The distortion of the word and its meaning is no longer abstract. In our usage today, ‘consensus’ no longer suggests a meeting of minds; it often signals a decision already made; an outcome proclaimed from above and affirmed below. A word that once implied a genuine convergence of minds now describes an order from the throne, delivered through courtiers.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: Ibadan, Makinde And Tinubu

The parties—especially the ruling APC—have stretched and inverted the meaning of the word. In APC’s political dictionary, “consensus” increasingly reads as the will of the president, not the outcome of deliberation.

As we had it in Sani Abacha’s transition programme, we think any of today’s living parties that make it limping to the ballot in January 2027 should reach an ‘agreement’ and adopt one person as the consensus presidential candidate. That is how rich our imaginative thoughts are and how limitless our capacity for distortion of values is.

Within both party and polity, the president now embodies what Aristide R. Zolberg calls “the chief executive who is also the supreme legislator (the chief elector), and the ultimate arbiter of conflict.” Because the president is what he has always been, photo ops are staged as proof of order, while his name, cast as the final authority in the APC’s doctrine of “consensus”, is invoked to sanctify outcomes.

The APC set its neighbour’s hut on fire and rejoiced; now the blaze has caught its own roof. Across the states, the refrain is the same: the abuse of ‘consensus,’ with the president inserted into the process as decider-in-chief.

Oyo State offers a very sharp illustration. Some APC leaders, on Friday, announced Senator Sharafadeen Alli as the party’s “consensus” governorship candidate, invoking the president’s name. Within hours, former minister, Adebayo Adelabu, pushed back, also invoking the same presidency, and declaring that he remained in the race as the president’s “son”. When two rival claims lean on the same authority, what is presented as consensus begins to look like a contest of endorsements, not agreement.

Our fathers say the medicine must match the disease. Bí àrùn búburú bá wòlú, oògùn búburú la fi ńwò ó (When the affliction is severe, the remedy cannot be gentle). That may explain why the rhetoric of resistance has turned harsh. One does not need a keen ear to catch the crudity in what now issues from Oyo APC bigwigs. It is a stream of curses and abuse, imprecations without restraint. And one must ask: why?

Beyond Oyo, across Nigeria, north to south, we hear cries of plots to impose “consensus” candidates. How do you use the words ‘imposition’ and ‘consensus’ in the same sentence? Imposition comes from above; the other grows from below. ‘Imposition’ is force without consent. ‘Consensus’ is agreement without force. The two opposites appearing as companions presents a contradiction, and politics is autological, a self-defining oxymoron. You will likely agree with my linguistic choice if you believe the popular (but etymologically false joke) that “politics” comes from ‘poly’ (many) and ‘tics’ (blood-sucking parasites).

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: ‘I Am Jagaban, They Can’t Scare Me’

In Nasarawa, former Inspector-General of Police and APC governorship aspirant, Mohammed Adamu Abubakar, rejected any move towards “consensus,” insisting that only a direct primary could confer legitimacy. To him and others in the race, what is being dressed up as consensus is little more than unilateralism in softer language.

In Ondo, there are subdued objections to what the party may decide on Ondo South senatorial ticket. Aspirants for the Ondo East/Ondo West federal constituency have raised similar alarms, accusing party leaders of plotting to impose a candidate under the convenient cover of consensus. Their warning is simple: once choice is managed from above, internal democracy is already compromised.

In Yobe State, Senator Ibrahim Mohammed Bomai, Kashim Musa Tumsah, and Usman Alkali Baba—three APC governorship aspirants—have rejected the party’s endorsement of former Secretary to the State Government, Alhaji Baba Malam Wali, as its “consensus” candidate for the 2027 election.

Bomai’s choice of words is telling. He described the “consensus” imposition as an affront to democratic principles. He warned against the steady replacement of popular choice with elite arrangement. No individual, he argued, regardless of past office or political influence, has the authority to determine the leadership of millions behind closed doors. Leadership, he insisted, must emerge through a process that is free, fair, and transparent—not one brokered in the name of “consensus.” Quoting him directly, he said: “We categorically reject this attempt to subvert due process. We reject the culture of imposition. We reject any scheme that undermines fairness, equity, and the democratic rights of our people.” Those words give voice to what dissatisfied but muted APC leaders and members in Kwara, Ogun and beyond are saying in uneasy, even fearful, silence.

Lagos, for now, appears to be the exception. The emergence of Dr Obafemi Hamzat as the APC governorship candidate quietly followed a process that bore the marks of consultation rather than imposition. Hamzat combines the fine qualities of a gentleman with humble erudition. In a field without a formidable opposition, his path to final victory looks smooth. Congratulations may therefore be in order.

Choice of candidates by consensus is good, cheap and safe if it comes with clean hands. Going far back into our beginning, we find that real consensus is not alien to the African political tradition. Ghanaian philosopher Kwasi Wiredu (1931 – 2022), in his reflections on ‘Democracy and Consensus in African Traditional Politics’, argues that decision-making in pre-colonial African societies was anchored in discussion and agreement rather than imposition.

He draws, for instance, on the words of Zambia’s founding father, Kenneth Kaunda, who observed that “in our original societies, we operated by consensus. An issue was talked out in solemn conclave until such time as agreement could be achieved.” Similarly, Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, in 1961, noted that “the African concept of democracy is similar to that of the ancient Greeks, from whose language the word ‘democracy’ originated. To the Greeks, democracy meant simply “government by discussion among equals.” The people discussed, and when they reached an agreement, the result was a “people’s decision.” In African society, he said, the traditional method of conducting affairs is “by free discussion… the elders sit under the big trees and talk until they agree.”

Our politics has refused to benefit from that past of refined due process. There is no “people” in today’s decisions. And we expect today’s “consensus” arrangement to yield good governance. No. It will not. It can only produce a system that answers to kings, kingmakers, and the capos who guard their power.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:[OPINION] Abuja: Why Are The Americans Running?

When a ruling party actively promotes “consensus” after weakening the opposition, it risks sliding toward a very bad form of authoritarianism. It also strips even its own members of the power to choose their candidates. As Kwasi Wiredu observed, both Kenneth Kaunda and Julius Nyerere defended systems that claimed consensus but, in practice, narrowed choice.

The Yoruba, watching what has become of this democracy in the hands of its custodians, would say: when a wise man cooks yams in a mad fashion, the discerning take theirs with sticks. That is àbọ̀ ọ̀rọ̀—half a word—and for the wise, it is enough.

What passes for consensus in Nigeria today therefore demands closer scrutiny. When outcomes are settled before conversations begin, when dissent is managed rather than engaged, and when unanimity is announced rather than negotiated, consensus ceases to be the product of dialogue; it becomes instead an instrument of control.

“Fair is foul, and foul is fair.” In politics, as William Shakespeare suggests, opposites often blur; good and evil do not always stand apart; they, in fact, reinforce each other. Bernard Crick, in ‘In Defence of Politics’ (1962), reminds us that politics thrives on contradiction, that it is “a creative compromise… a diverse unity.”

All dictionaries insist that “consensus” and ‘coercion’ are not the same. Our politicians, however, behave as though they are—indeed, as though one can be made to pass for the other. Once coercion learns to speak the language of consensus, it no longer needs to persuade; it only needs to declare. And declarations are fast, sweet and cheap.

But there are consequences.

Someone said “every cheap choice is a lost chance at joy.” The quest for easy victory is behind the current ‘consensus’ frenzy. But it may be the death of this democracy.

In Yoruba, some proverbs come as stories. Take this: “All the animals in the forest assembled and decided to make ìkokò (hyena) their asípa (secretary). Ikoko was happy to hear the news, but a short while later he burst into tears. Asked what the matter was, he replied that he was sad because he realised that perhaps they (his electors) might revisit the matter and reverse themselves.”

Professor Oyekan Owomoyela, from whom I got the proverb, explains what it says: “even in times of good fortune one should be mindful of the possibility of reversal.”

The moral is that those who donate victory cheaply through agreement can agree again to whimsically annul the victory without consequences.

A former Rivers State Commissioner for Works, Alabo Dakorinama George Kelly, has been endorsed by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, as his preferred candidate for the Rivers State governorship.

George is expected to contest the seat under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), signaling a crucial political move ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Sources told DAILY POST that Wike settled for George after a closed-door meeting with key political stakeholders in Port Harcourt on Monday. The meeting reportedly reviewed the political situation in the state and strategies for consolidating influence ahead of the next election cycle.

At the meeting were ex-militant leaders, including Asari Dokubo and Ateke Tom.

READ ALSO:How Wike Rescued Me From Political Oblivion — Oshiomhole

According to source, their attendance underscored the high-level consultations that preceded the endorsement.

George, a seasoned political figure in Rivers State, previously served as Commissioner for Works and is considered a loyalist within Wike’s political structure.

The source who witnessed the meeting said the development was part of efforts to maintain Wike’s political dominance in the state despite his current role at the federal level.

This comes against the backdrop of a protracted political crisis in Rivers State, driven by a bitter power struggle between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his estranged political godfather, Nyesom Wike.

READ ALSO:Why I Chose Weakness In My Battle Against Wike – Gov Fubara

Since assuming office, Fubara has gradually distanced himself from Wike’s influence, leading to deep divisions within the state’s political structure, including the State House of Assembly and local government leadership.

The rift has triggered a series of political confrontations, alignments, and realignments, with both camps battling for control of the party machinery and governance structures in the state.

Efforts by President Bola Tinubu to broker peace between the two camps have so far yielded limited results, as tensions continue to simmer.

According to the source, “Wike’s endorsement of George is a strategic move to reassert control and shape the political future of Rivers State ahead of 2027,” he said.

As of press time, there has been no official confirmation on the latest endorsement.

By Tony Erha

This time around, I’m compelled to shift a steady gaze from the backwater politics and insecurity that greatly trouble Nigerians. Must it be bitter politics and unresolved insecurity all the time? There is intense migraine, where there is no respite, and no end to the afflictions. Alas, renegade politics, economic woes, and insecurity have permanently dominated the air waves and tend to mar the life of the people.

The unrestrained news of deaths, maiming and criminalities compete with political maneuvering, in this sickening season of the 2027 political transition and commotions. There is no more sanctity of human lives and normalcy. What has become usual is ceaseless news of heavy death tolls, disfigurements, political manipulations, burning and looting. Sadly, it is an endorsed insurgency of the sort, a definition of our national life that is worse than a full-scale war.

For days, the unprofessional boxing fight between Portable and Carter Efe, has dominated the happenstance chart or newsbreak of a country that is in a derisive search for peace. The news of the freestyle boxing bout of the two prominent entertainers has climbed national chart to number one. The bout, continually generates fervous, excitement and the polarization of fetishes and Christian dogmas, where Portable boasted that he was using ‘juju power’ to defeat Carter Efe and he (Carter Efe) professed he would use “Jesus power”, to floor his rival.

Well, the outcome of the fight, with Carter Efe crushing Portable, appeared to have fit the main stream narrative that “Jesus” has defeated “Juju”. The hangover ranges and rages, where Portable, who had claimed to have defeated his previous opponents with the same “Juju”, is now at the receiving end.

Whereas Joseph Oderhohwo Efe (Carter Efe) is a comedian, online streamer and songwriter; Habeeb Okikiola Badmus (Portable) is a musician of the ZaZoo genre. Both men have a penchant for engaging the youth and other entertainment fans with their brands, which sometimes lean to excessive showmanship and magnetism. In the fiercely contested and energy-sapping encounter, held on Saturday, May 2, 2026, Carter Efe won Portable via a unanimous decision in the highly publicised event, titled ‘Chaos in the Ring 4′

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: Tenebe Could Deprive Tinubu From Winning Edo Election

In a prevalent social media comment, a poster called it “pitiless ram-head-fight”, a brand with which some money bags unruly influence the youth to money, materialism, violence and self-important illusions, where hundreds of millions of Naira were sunk in”. Another pointed out that it is similar to the “BBA reality show, which is fading away”.

But, it is not far from the usual entertainment hypes once organised by outlaw American cowboys, as a forerun to the main fight between its gun-slinging gangs. It is also suited to gunfight scenes, known with American films, once popularised by American cowboy actors of memory – such as John Wayne, Ben Johnson, Clint Eastwood, Gary Cooper, Tom Mix, Gene Autry and Sam Elliott.

Yet, Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, informs us that ‘Ram Fighting’ is a blood sport between two rams, held in a ring or open field. It is commonly in culture of Africa, Asia and Europe. In Nigeria, Uzbekistan, and Indonesia, Wikipedia also stated that it gains popularity, amongst the locals.

I have watched the ‘ram fights’ in Nigeria, where fighting rams die, after spilling blood, and the spectators jubilate. Thereby stagers of the fights betted and collect the gains or losses of the fights. Such fights pose ‘Cruelty to the Animals”. As an advocate against cruelty to ‘Animals’, with the Animal Kindness Club of the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), animals should be treated with dignity.

The Portable vs Carter Efe’s duel is ephemeral ceasefire and breathing space to an overwhelmed government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Lucky Jababan – who faces restless public agitation over the avalanche economic woes, insecurity, and social problems Nigerians face.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: The Rough Games Arewa Bourgeoisies Play With The Talakawas

It’s likened to the alibi of a drunkard, that alcohol consumption makes him forget his problems. But, what he doesn’t also divulge is whether the problem is no more when the boozing has worn out, and he is himself.

Stopping problems do not require one to cause more, whereas, humanity is filled with five best strategies of problem-solving. Unfortunately, the reckless prizefighting between Portable and Carter Efe, is a delinquent official approval for the increasing violent social conduct that saturate Nigeria. For critical thinking, where do violent encounters prevail in addressing the attitudinal fisticuff of a societal?

It is like a rule that gives a people the choice to die or live. Such is the advertorial on cigarette and its addiction. “The Federal Ministry of Health Warns that smokers are liable to die young”. The question is whether it’s out of place or impossible to entirely ban smoking?

For bloodsport like boxing, wrestling, kickboxing etc., with lethal side effects like the Parkinson’s disease, brain and tissue damage, and untimely deaths, there are rules.

Once upon a time, I wanted to prove a point to my wife that the wrestling fights she often watched on network television, including the melee; free-for-all-brawls, weren’t make-believe. I got a ticket for her to watch a wrestling tournament, organised by Felix Okugbe, a late sportswriter and some other promoters, with the Raypower/AIT giving it a live coverage in an indoor sports hall of the National Stadium, Surulere, Lagos.

MORE FROM THE AUTHOR:OPINION: Middle East’s Ceasefire, Restricted Media And Public Summersaults

It turned out to be a terrible incident of regrets that I still haven’t overcome. Greco-Roman wrestling of summersaults and the American free-styles, started with thrills, ovations and cat calls. My wife was getting to the reality of the things I told her, when the worst happened.

A young wrestler called Indomitable Fearless, died instantly, in one of the supportive slams, after the medics failed to revive him. It was agonizing moment for all, and a torture to comfort my wife and getting her out of the venue, in a jiffy. Until date, wrestling bouts are hardly watched in my house.

But, blood sport has its warning like the youth are warned not to carry out in schools and at home, the physical actions of wrestling they watch on television.

Yet, entertainment exercises that insult sensibility and are fraught with dangers should be avoided, where the rules of the games are also strictly enforced.

Pointedly, there are misgivings to the slipshod fight between Portable and Cater Efe. This is, nevertheless, raised by a Nigerian woman, identified on the Facebook as Nne Sophia; “Boxing is a regulated and dangerous sport”.

She condemned how the two celebrities, who are not professional boxers, were allowed to face-off, without following some boxing rules. She decried a dangerous punch Carter Efe gave Portable, on the back of his head, called a “rabbit punch”. “This is a very dangerous thing to do as it can lead to serious disability or death. The back of the head, ‘occiput’, is where the brainstem that controls our vital body functions like breathing and our heart rate is located”