Ekiti is a New Sociology, Stupid! By Israel Jaiye Opayemi

The Ekiti governorship election has come and gone, but
certainly not its consequences. This is why in other climes, both
the party that won and the one which lost the election would
have by now commissioned different studies to into the
circumstances in which the election was won or lost.
Sadly, we have been regaled with strange perspectives from an
army of Political Analysts many of whom have not been to Ekiti
but have advanced reasons why Dr. Kayode Fayemi lost the
election and Mr. Ayo Fayose won. I often tell my professional
colleagues, we are in trouble with the way the media generously
dispense the title, Public Affairs Analyst and Commentator to
anyone who has something to say about an issue of pubic
interest whether the person is a subject matter expert or not.
By now, we would have seen the electronic media inviting
professionals who truly qualify as subject matter experts to
discuss the Ekiti election and the emerging issues. In other
climes, we would have seen the APC commission a research or
stage a Focus Group Discussion to gain an insight into what
really happened in the last election so as to predict what may
still happen in Osun State and perhaps the rest of South West
Nigeria.
I have been to Ekiti a couple of times before the Fayemi era.
Interestingly, one of those occasions was to attend the burial
ceremony of the departed the mother of the Labour Party
Governorship Candidate, my dear brother, Barrister Opeyemi
Bamidele when Mr. Ayo Fayose was governor. I also visited Ekiti
State a few times during the Segun Oni era.
But nothing compares with the development I saw in the State
when I visited again in June 2013 at the invitation of Governor
Kayode Fayemi. Then, my frequent trips into Ekiti State
began. I am therefore an on the ground witness to the
campaign and the issues involved. I write not just about what
took place on the streets or in the media but at the back end
of the Fayemi campaign.
Expectedly, Fayemi ran a decent issue based campaign. He
assembled a great team of professionals and politicians alike.
He deferred to his campaign team but wavered not on issues of
principles. He took nothing for granted. He took his campaign
to the grassroots. I have heard some puerile arguments that
Fayemi lost because his campaign, just like his government, was
elitist. Space will fail me to avail readers the details of
Fayemi’s Voter Contact Programme.
A Governor that was said not to be in touch with the grassroots
reached out to all the 263 farmsteads in Ekiti State with the
message of his campaign spread across Ado, Ife-Orun, Efon,
Emure, Gboyin, Ekiti South West, Ifelodun, Oye, Ileje Meje,
Ikole, Ekiti East, Ekiti West, Ijero and made in roads to the
smallest communities in Moba and Ikere alike.
A Governor that has been accused of running an elitist
government created jobs for 16, 000 young men and women
through the Youth Volunteer Corps; another 800 jobs through
the Ekiti State Peace Corps, yet another 400 jobs through
engagement as Para-Medics and Fire Fighters and put in place
a best in class Social Security Scheme to cater to the needs of
25, 000 elderly citizens through payment of Social Security
allowances every month.
Interestingly, the media reported all of these giant strides by
Fayemi before the election but the same media is today
replete with the stories and analyses of Fayemi not being in
touch with the grassroots after the election. We cannot be
approbating and be reprobating.
Something is not quite right and I believe a few people should
know. Ekiti State under Fayemi is perhaps the only State I
know where the people come together at Town Hall meetings to
set their own local governance priorities as part of the annual
budgeting process.
The Fayemi administration institutionalized meetings at 132
towns and villages to connect with the people and feel their
pulse on what they want per time. The government then makes
provision for those projects desired by the people into the
State’s Budget. Most often, local contractors from the communities are picked
to handle such projects and their names published or sent to
the community leadership for everyone to know. Yet, we have
been told Fayemi was out of touch with the grassroots and did
not “connect” with the people. Ademo Olu Michael, Chairman,
Okada Riders Association of Ekiti State in a recent interview
with The News Magazine acknowledged that Fayemi has
employed and empowered 15,000 youths through the Youths in
Agriculture Programme. But who did he lead his members to
vote for? Fayemi has been accused of offending Ekiti State
students.
President, Students Union, Ekiti State University, Temitope
Ibitoye has this to say about Fayemi, “ in terms of developing
the State, in terms of the execution of his projects, I will give
him a pass mark. I think he deserves a second term to
consolidate and finish the good work he has started. I give him
80 percent mark…The man is trying.
He employed 10,000 youths giving 10,000 each.” But who did
Ekiti State University students vote for? The Fayose campaign
was delighted to splash their pictures displaying their bags of
rice and their voters cards on social media platforms to drive
home the point. But the campaign and Fayemi’s governance
methodology are not the subject of this article but what I
suspect to be the new sociology of the Ekiti people, our own
‘Fountain of Knowledge’.
I will be writing and speaking about the Fayemi campaign more
in the near future before the next general elections.
My thesis is, a new sociology may have emerged in Ekiti land.
Insights into this new sociology in Ekiti began to emerge during
one of my trips at which some members of my consulting team
had joined me in Ekiti.
They opted to take a cab to join me in the hotel where I lodged
in Ado Ekiti. They engaged the taxi driver in a discussion about
how beautiful the city had become with good roads, street
lights and good drainage systems. His response was rather
worrisome to my team members.
He acknowledged that Fayemi had performed excellently well
especially on roads but spoke glowingly and with nostalgia
about the Fayose days and how his convoy would stop by at
their taxi park and he would dole out cash to the lucky ones
around.
He would have none of their sermons about what was wrong
with a governor doling out tax payers’ money in that fashion
and the principle of accountability and all that my team had to
preach about. From then on, we took a decision to always do
this whenever we were in Ekiti.
Should we have asked Dr. John Kayode Fayemi to set fire on his
beliefs of many years and copy this despicable practice? I
have read and heard some Public Affairs Commentators argue
that Fayemi should have done this if only to win his re-election
since that is what Ekiti people wanted in their governor. But I
ask, what is the place of character in that? Would that not
have amounted to crude deceit? Shouldn’t a leader have a
character that defines him? How will a leader account for cash
doled out in such a manner?
I am not a Sociologist, but my elementary knowledge of that
interesting discipline will suffice here. I hold a Masters Degree
in Political Science with specialization in Political Economy.
So the Stomach Infrastructure theory is of great interest to
me having done an in-depth study of the work of Professor
Joseph Richards on “Democracy and Prebendal Politics: The
Rise and Fall of the Second Republic” while preparing my
Masters thesis. Joseph used the term to describe the sense of
entitlement that many people in Nigeria feel they have to the
revenues of the Nigerian State.
Elected officials, government workers, and members of the
ethnic and religious groups to which they belong feel they have
a right to a share of government revenues. Was the Ekiti voter
behavior a validation of the views of Richard Joseph? Not one
voter so far interviewed after this election has said Fayemi
did not perform.
Their case against him was that he did not build what is now
called “Stomach Infrastructure”, a euphemistic reference to
his failure to dole out cash from the State treasury to them.
Sociology is the scientific study of human social behavior and
its origins. According to the American Sociological Association,
“Sociology is the study of social life, social change, and the
social causes and consequences of human behavior.
Sociologists investigate the structure of groups, organizations,
and societies, and how people interact within these contexts.
Since all human behavior is social, the subject matter of
sociology ranges from the intimate family to the hostile mob;
from organized crime to religious cults; from the divisions of
race, gender and social class to the shared beliefs of a common
culture; and from the sociology of work to the sociology of
sports.”
It is therefore logical to extend this context to the sociology of
politics and in this case sociology of Nigerian politics. If our political parties have what is today called Research,
Trends and Emerging Culture Committees within their
structures, understanding the sociological issues the Ekiti
election has raised should be the preoccupation of such a group
for both the APC and the PDP now.
So, what has changed about the social life of the Ekiti man
and woman? Who is today’s Ekiti man or woman? We grew up
knowing that once an Ekiti person says No to you, he or she
would rather be killed than change his mind. So, what manner
of Ekiti artisans were those who met Fayemi, gave him theirs
word but collected cash and rice from Fayose and gave him
their votes? What manner of Ekiti teachers were those who
endorsed Fayemi publicly a few days to the election and voted
for Fayose secretly? Shouldn’t we then interrogate if there
are social changes taking place? A classic case in point was a
field report an Aide to the Governor shared with me.
It was a Polling Centre in Ido Osi where voters pleaded with
INEC officials to allow 17 elderly people who had been
accredited to vote first by reason of their age and frailty.
After the votes were counted, Fayemi should at least have had
19 votes if the votes of the 17 elderly people were added to
that of the APC agent and the Aide in question. But strangely
Fayemi lost that Polling Booth and the Aide quietly approached
some of the elderly people who waited patiently to see the
votes counted and asked why they voted for the PDP
candidate. One of them responded in Ekiti dialect that Fayose
has promised to increase the Social Security Allowance they are
being paid to N10,000 if voted into office and he has
demonstrated his commitment by paying each of them the
same amount of money as incentive to vote.
So, don’t look too far for answers to why Fayemi may have lost
all the local governments. It was money speaking! Again,
shouldn’t Mr. Ayo Fayose be interested in this question, who is
today’s Ekiti man? Shouldn’t the APC be interested in knowing
if what happened in Ekiti is a regional behavioural change or
an isolated one restricted to just Ekiti State?
Will the Osun people collect cash and rice and still follow their
hearts to vote for Ogbeni Rauf Aregbeshola? Will our self-
styled Public Affairs Analysts tell us in 2015 BRF only
succeeded in building physical infrastructure in Lagos and not
stomach infrastructure to justify a defeat of the APC if one
happens? Is this stomach infrastructure theory becoming the
shared belief of the Yorubas as a people with common culture?
The need to probe these issues was perhaps the intent of
Governor Babatunde Fashola recently when he raised some
questions about the Ekiti State elections. But Mr. Ayo Fayose,
the man who should be interested in interrogating these
sociological issues more got it all wrong and took up the
gauntlet with BRF, accusing him of insulting Ekiti people.
Since sociology is also a scientific study of consequences,
shouldn’t we as a people be interested in the consequences of
the verdict of the Ekiti people for democracy in Nigeria? One
consequence I can predict with a measure of accuracy is that,
elected officials may simply not bother so much about
performance. I suspect the thinking will become much more
about primitive accumulation of wealth by stealing and saving a
little for reckless distribution at motor parks and at interest
group meetings. While we can wish the Ekiti people, “happy
married life” with the Governor of their preference, the
implication of the Ekiti election may just be indicative of a new
sociology not just in Ekiti land but perhaps in the South West.
An election in which a candidate who did not present a single
manifesto to the people got their overwhelming votes should
give some cause for worry.
An election in which the incumbent who was widely adjudged to
have performed excellently well and presented a clear
manifesto before the people for his second term “lost” in all
the 16 local governments cannot be healthy for the democracy
culture.
This is the time for the political parties to put on their thinking
caps. It is crass naivety, sorry, insipid stupidity not to focus on
this new sociology and interrogate it further. It is a disturbing
sociology and a destructive sociology at that.
This is certainly our expressway to becoming a failed State.

Mr. Opayemi, a Public Relations Consultant, writes from Lagos.
You can converse with him @iopayemi