Why an Allegation Cannot Replace Evidence, and Why the People Must Decide in 2027
The decision by Hon. Kanmi Ajibola, an Osun State lawmaker representing Oriade Constituency, to drag Senator Francis Adenigba Fadahunsi before the Federal High Court in Osogbo, seeking to prevent him from participating in the January 16, 2027 senatorial election, raises serious questions about the motive, legal foundation and democratic implications of the action.
While every citizen has the constitutional right to seek judicial redress, that right must not be confused with the power to determine another person's political fate through allegations that are yet to be established by a competent court.
The fundamental question is this: Is Hon. Ajibola seeking justice for alleged victims of political violence, who are these victims! Or is he attempting to achieve through the courtroom what should ordinarily be decided by the electorate at the ballot box?
These are two different matters, and they should not be deliberately confused.
1. AN ALLEGATION IS NOT A CONVICTION
Hon. Ajibola's affidavit contains serious allegations against Senator Fadahunsi, including claims of threats, killings and an alleged instruction to political supporters to attack opposition members. Who are these killed? Where and in what circumstances?
Such allegations deserve proper investigation. Every life lost to political violence is a tragedy, irrespective of party affiliation. Nobody should be above the law.
However, the seriousness of an allegation does not automatically establish its truth.
Has Senator Fadahunsi been convicted by a competent court for ordering, sponsoring or participating in the alleged killings? Has a judicial finding established that he personally directed anybody to commit murder? And was any murder actually committed?
If the answer is no, then the distinction between accusation and proven criminal responsibility must be respected.
A court of law must be guided by admissible evidence, not political narratives, emotional affidavits or the intensity of partisan disagreement.
2. THE SENATOR HAS EXPLAINED HIS CONTROVERSIAL REMARKS AND APOLOGISED
The controversy surrounding Senator Fadahunsi's August 11 remarks has been repeatedly presented by political opponents as an unquestionable call for physical violence. But was it a call for physical violence or a metaphorical exclamation?
Even then, the Senator has offered an explanation, maintaining that his remarks were made in a political context and were intended metaphorically to mean defeating political opponents at the polls.
More importantly, following the controversy surrounding his remarks at the palace of the Owa of Ijesaland, Oba Clement Adesuyi Haastrup, Ajimoko III, Senator Fadahunsi issued a public statement.
He expressed regret over the tension generated by his remarks, apologised for the misunderstanding and called on political leaders, supporters and citizens to embrace peace.
He also congratulated the party that won the governorship election and urged the incoming administration to govern inclusively.
This is an important development that should not be ignored.
An apology does not automatically erase possible legal liability, neither does it amount to an admission of criminal guilt. However, it demonstrates an opportunity for political de-escalation and reconciliation.
If the objective is genuinely to prevent further violence, why should every opportunity for reconciliation be sacrificed on the altar of political hostility?
3. WHY MUST A POLITICAL DISAGREEMENT BECOME A CAMPAIGN TO REMOVE A CANDIDATE?
Hon. Ajibola is himself a politician and a candidate of the Accord Party for Oriade Constituency.
Senator Fadahunsi is the APC candidate for Osun East Senatorial District.
Both men are therefore participants in the same electoral contest, albeit at different legislative levels.
This political reality makes it necessary to scrutinise the circumstances surrounding the suit without prejudging its merits.
If Senator Fadahunsi has failed his constituents, the electorate has the democratic opportunity to reject him.
If his political opponents believe they have better candidates, they should present their programmes, records and credentials to the people.
Democracy does not permit political opponents to substitute allegations for electoral competition.
You cannot claim to trust democracy while simultaneously seeking to prevent your political opponent from appearing before the electorate without establishing a lawful ground for disqualification.
The court must determine whether the reliefs being sought have any foundation in the Constitution and applicable electoral laws.
4. INEC CANNOT BE TURNED INTO AN INSTRUMENT OF POLITICAL DISQUALIFICATION
Ajibola has also challenged INEC for allegedly failing to sanction Senator Fadahunsi over the controversial remarks.
But what specific provision of the Electoral Act or other applicable law empowers INEC to remove a duly nominated candidate merely because an opposing politician accuses him of making inflammatory remarks?
INEC's responsibilities must be exercised within the limits of the law.
The electoral commission is not a criminal court, nor can it assume the role of determining criminal guilt based solely on allegations presented by a political opponent.
Where an alleged criminal offence has been committed, the appropriate investigative and prosecutorial authorities must follow due process.
Where electoral disqualification is sought, the claimant must establish a legally recognised ground.
The court should therefore distinguish between political controversy, alleged criminal conduct and the constitutional requirements for eligibility to contest an election.
5. THE RECORD OF SERVICE MUST ALSO COUNT
Senator Fadahunsi's years of public service and contributions to Osun East should not be erased because of a political controversy.
His supporters have consistently pointed to his interventions, assistance, empowerment initiatives and contributions to communities across the senatorial district.
Even the Osun Pro Youth Frontiers, in its recent intervention, acknowledged his years of service and urged the people to embrace reconciliation.
The Senator should be judged on his record, his conduct, his response to criticism and, ultimately, his performance before the electorate.
6. OSUN PRO YOUTH FRONTIERS HAS OFFERED A MORE CONSTRUCTIVE PATH
The recent peace initiative by Osun Pro Youth Frontiers deserves commendation.
Through its road walk in Ilesa, the organisation called on political leaders and youths to reject violence, inflammatory rhetoric and political thuggery.
It reminded the political class that peace is not merely the absence of conflict but the presence of justice, empathy, mutual respect and responsible citizenship.
The organisation also appealed to those agitating for Senator Fadahunsi's recall to reconsider their position, while making it clear that accountability must remain within constitutional and peaceful channels.
This is the kind of intervention Ijesa/Ife zone needs.
Our traditional institutions, community leaders, political stakeholders and youths must not allow political disagreements to destroy the bonds that have held our communities together.
7. LET THE COURT DETERMINE THE CASE, BUT LET THE PEOPLE DETERMINE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE
There is no argument against the right of Hon. Ajibola to approach the court. Equally, Senator Fadahunsi is entitled to defend himself and enjoy the presumption of innocence where criminal allegations are concerned.
But the demand to remove a candidate from the ballot is a serious request with significant democratic consequences.
The court must establish whether the claimant has demonstrated a recognised legal basis for such an extraordinary order.
A controversial statement, however regrettable, does not automatically translate into a constitutional disqualification. Neither does an affidavit transform allegations into established facts.
If evidence exists that anybody ordered, sponsored or participated in unlawful killings, let the security agencies investigate and let the law take its course.
There must be justice for victims, accountability for perpetrators and equal protection for every citizen, regardless of political affiliation.
But there must also be fairness to the accused.
Osun East belongs to its people, not to the APC, Accord Party or any individual politician.
Senator Fadahunsi should not be above the law, but neither should he be denied his democratic rights through unproven allegations.
The January 16, 2027 election should provide an opportunity for the electorate to assess the candidates, compare their records and make their choice.
No political shortcut. No trial by public opinion. No predetermined verdict.
Let the court decide the law. Let the security agencies investigate alleged crimes. And let the people decide who represents them.
That is democracy. That is justice. That is the path to lasting peace in Ife/Ijesa and Osun State.
KAKAKIOODUA ONLINE MEDIA
No comments:
Post a Comment