By Ahmed Abdulmumin
The struggle for power rotation, historically referred to as the “Power Shift Agenda,” in Kogi State was pioneered by prominent political figures from Kogi West (Okun/Yoruba) and Kogi Central (Ebira).
Following the creation of Kogi State in 1991, the Igala ethnic group dominated the governorship for approximately 24 years. This long period of political dominance generated complaints from other parts of the state over perceived lopsided appointments, uneven infrastructure development, political exclusion and an imbalance in access to government.
Prominent political figures from Kogi Central and Kogi West subsequently began advocating for a political arrangement that would give other parts of the state an opportunity to produce the governor.
Among the prominent historical and past political leaders associated with this agitation were Senator A.T. Ahmed of Kogi Central, Prince Olusola Akanmode of Kogi West, Senator Tunde Ogbeha, Chief Clarence Olafemi, among others.
These men belonged to different political generations and operated at different levels, but the central idea behind the agitation was the same: no single section of Kogi State should permanently monopolize the highest political office.
Unfortunately, after years of agitation, negotiations, political alliances and sacrifices by these leaders, the larger objective of establishing a generally accepted and sustainable system of power rotation has never been fully achieved.
Their efforts produced political victories at different moments, but they did not succeed in creating an arrangement strong enough to bind future political actors. In that sense, much of the sacrifice and political struggle of the past leaders risks becoming another chapter in Kogi’s political history without producing the permanent solution they envisioned.
Kogi State has three senatorial districts: Kogi East, Kogi Central and Kogi West but the reality is that political rotation is not consistently practiced even within these districts.
If the argument is that justice requires the governorship to rotate among the three senatorial districts, then the same principle of fairness should also apply within the districts themselves.
There are local governments, communities and ethnic groups that feel marginalized even when power is located within their broader senatorial district.
Kogi Central provides an important example. The district is not made up of one people alone. The Ebira population is numerically dominant, but there are other communities, including the Ogori-Magongo people, whose political representation and access to major elective positions have often been a subject of concern.
The same broader question can be asked in Kogi West and Kogi East: does political power genuinely rotate among all the communities within those districts, or does it simply move between the dominant political groups?
We need Kogi state were a credible and qualified candidate from Ogori-magongo,Bassa,Ibaji, Igalamela, Yagba east and west, Mopa-Muro, Kabba- Bunu local government will be given the chance to occupied the Senate and house of representative position respectively and also get supported for governorship election.
The political history of Kogi State changed dramatically following the death of Prince Abubakar Audu in 2015.
The political development that followed eventually produced Alhaji Yahaya Bello of Kogi Central as governor in 2016, ending the long period in which the governorship had been held by politicians from Kogi East.
Kogi Central did not necessarily obtain power through power rotation agreement. Rather, an extraordinary political circumstance created an opening that ultimately changed the political equation of the state.
This raises an important question: if that circumstance had not occurred, would the political establishment in Kogi East voluntarily have surrendered the governorship to Kogi Central?
Nigeria practices representative democracy. The Constitution does not provide that the governorship of Kogi State must rotate among ethnic groups or senatorial districts.
Consequently, any rotation arrangement would essentially depend on political consensus, party agreements, negotiations and the willingness of political actors to respect the understanding.
Some people in Kogi East may publicly support power rotation today because they believe it could help them regain political power tomorrow. But political support for rotation should not automatically be interpreted as a permanent commitment to surrender power once their own region regains the governorship.
The fear among opponents of an informal arrangement is straightforward: what happens when power eventually returns to Kogi East?
Will the political class there voluntarily surrender power after eight years, or will another argument be presented for why rotation should continue in their favour?
There is no constitutional mechanism that automatically compels a future governor or political establishment to hand over power to another senatorial district simply because an informal agreement was previously reached.
That is why Kogi people must distinguish between political promises, political agreements and enforceable constitutional provisions.
I will tell you why Kogi west is now more interested in power rotation.
Kogi West’s renewed interest in the power-rotation argument is understandable from a historical perspective.
Since the creation of Kogi State in 1991, Kogi West has never produced a substantive elected governor of the state.
Today, many political actors from the district see the 2027 political cycle as a potentially historic opportunity.
The political environment is also being interpreted by some Kogi West stakeholders as favourable because President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is a Yoruba man, while Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, is from Kogi West and now occupies the position of Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission.
Rt. Hon. James Abiodun Faleke is also a prominent political figure from Kogi West and a close political ally of President Tinubu, with a significant role in the political structures surrounding the Tinubu administration.
These circumstances have naturally generated optimism among some people in Kogi West that the political environment may finally be favourable to their long-standing ambition of producing the governor of Kogi State.
Some people in Kogi West genuinely believe in power rotation because they see it as a matter of fairness and historical justice. Others, however, may not necessarily be interested in rotation as a permanent principle. Their primary objective may simply be to take power in 2027 whether through an agreed rotation arrangement or through the political strength and influence available to them.
Kogi Central finds itself in a particularly delicate position.
Having previously benefited from the political realignment that brought Yahaya Bello to power, many stakeholders in the district now understand the vulnerability that comes with surrendering the governorship without a clear and credible agreement.
The concern is that if power moves from Kogi Central to either Kogi East or Kogi West, the region may find it extremely difficult to regain the governorship if the receiving region later decides not to honour an informal rotation arrangement.
This concern is partly rooted in electoral mathematics.
If future political competition is determined largely by population and voting strength, a region with a smaller population may face greater difficulty reclaiming power once it has surrendered it.
Therefore, for many people in Kogi Central, the question is not simply whether they support rotation. The bigger question is whether there is a credible guarantee that rotation will actually continue when their turn comes again.
It would also be unfair to suggest that every person or political leader from Kogi East opposes power rotation.
There are certainly people from Kogi East who support equity and political accommodation.
However, there are also political voices within Kogi East who believe that the governorship should be won through democratic competition rather than predetermined rotation.
Some may believe that their region has the population, political structure and electoral strength required to regain the governorship without relying on a rotational arrangement.
There are strong political sentiments among some Igala stakeholders who want their region to regain the governorship.
The desire to regain political control by the Kogi east has also been reflected in political campaigns and agitations surrounding the creation of additional states, including the proposed Okura State.
Whether or not one agrees with those agitations, the Kogi east demonstrate that political identity and control of governmental resources remain extremely important to them.
As the Kogi east has historically dominated the governorship and strongly desires to regain it back, can the people of Kogi Central and west reasonably assume that the Kogi east would surrender the office after one or two terms under an informal rotation arrangement?
If respected political leaders of previous generations, many of whom had long political careers and reputations for political negotiation, could not establish a universally accepted system of power rotation, why should Kogi people automatically believe that today’s politicians will succeed?
This is not an attack on the current political class. It is a question of political realism.
Many of the political actors who speak about rotation today are themselves pursuing political ambitions with all their resources.
Governor Usman Ahmed Ododo, for example, has a unique opportunity to influence the political conversation because the power currently resides in Kogi Central.
A voluntary decision by the present political leadership to support a credible and transparent transition to another senatorial district could become a historic contribution to Kogi’s political development.
But even if such a transition occurs, another question remains:
What mechanism will guarantee that the next region will voluntarily surrender power when its own tenure expires?
That is the question that must be answered before Kogi celebrates rotation as a permanent solution.
Democracy allows citizens to vote for candidates of their choice. Political parties nominate candidates. Elections determine who governs.
There is no constitutional provision that says Kogi East must produce the governor for eight years, followed by Kogi Central for eight years, followed by Kogi West for eight years.
Kogi needs more than the rotation of governors.
Kogi needs the rotation of opportunities.
It needs equitable appointments.
It needs fair distribution of infrastructure.
It needs inclusion of minority communities.
It needs a political culture where no ethnic group believes that government belongs permanently to it.
And it needs a system where the Ogori-Magongo people and other minority communities within the three senatorial districts are not forgotten simply because they lack the numerical strength to dominate election.
– Activist Ahmed Abdulmumin
ahmedabdulmumuni100a@gmail.com
