Since the coming of the Buhari administration, Ekiti State Governor Peter Ayodele Fayose has been in the eye of the storm, particularly since he had chosen to be a leading voice of the opposition to the government. From the electioneering campaigns during which Fayose placed a warning advert predicting the possibility of President Muhammadu Buhari becoming sick due to his old age, Fayose had stirred the hornet’s nest. Therefore, it is no surprise that he has been stung left, right and centre by the official ‘bees’ – all in the façade of fighting corruption. If anyone feels otherwise, let him mention one serving governor whose slate is spotless of financial ineptitude as of today. Simply because Fayose has chosen to tread where even angels fear to, by being the strident voice of opposition in the political wilderness, an unrelenting beaming of searchlight into his past and present activities have become the order of the day..
Fayose has been harassed by state security and anti-graft agencies ostensibly for his acerbic utterances about the economic situation and ineffective policies that are running the nation aground. Some of the punitive actions by the Federal Government agents are ultra vires, illegal, discriminatory and partisan. For example, the Department of State Security reports led to the nocturnal invasion, raid, and arrest of some judges, while similar reports against the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, was subjected to the review of the Attorney-General of the Federation to determine whether the contents of the reports were true or not.
Meanwhile, several petitions against some former governors now serving as ministers are gathering dust in the EFCC office without action. Ironically, the Professor Itsey Sagay-led advisory committee members, the chairman in particular, are always on hand in defence of super ministers who are allegedly corrupt; yet, these anti-graft czars wouldn’t mind to accuse and convict former President Goodluck Jonathan on the pages of newspapers. This has been the lot of most of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) members currently under investigation or standing trial in courts across the country.
Despite the fact that Fayose enjoys the same immunity like the President and other state executives, some of our notable lawyers willingly offer political rather than legal opinions on the freezing of his Zenith Bank account. It is incontrovertible that the Supreme Court had ruled that serving governors or executives can be investigated but not prosecuted while in office. The reason for the immunity clause is not to grant the right for perpetuation of criminal activities; rather, it is to avoid distracting the concerned governor or executive from governance. It is implied that freezing his personal account has ultimately distracted Fayose because the consequence of prosecution was already being applied; and this is in gross violation of the immunity clause enshrined in the Constitution.
Fayose cannot be the only governor with issues on financial matters but the unrelenting probing of his movements and activities leave no one in doubt that he is actually paying the price of being vocal, bold and daring.
It was, therefore, shocking, last Tuesday, when it was reported that the allocation for Ekiti State for January was being withheld for just no stated reason. One would have understood if there was a running battle between the state government and the Federal Government. Unlike the case with Lagos State in 2004 when former President Olusegun Obasanjo withheld the allocations of the state for 14 months, the reason, though illegal, was known to all and sundry. Then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration had created additional 37 local governments, having satisfied all legal procedures required in law. Obasanjo, on his part, vehemently opposed it, alleging an unconstitutional process. In reality, Obasanjo took the step to forestall a development that might breed economic and geo-political crises. Allowing more local governments would have led to a potential increment in financial obligations to states as other states of the federation could likely follow suit since monthly allocations were given based partly on the number of local governments in each state.
However, like Tinubu, who was the only governor that survived the political tsunami powered by the Obasanjo presidency that swept the Alliance for Democracy, AD, government in Obasanjo’s geo-political home base in 2004, Fayose is the only opposition governor in the South West at the moment. In the case of Ekiti, nothing of such has happened. However, people out there are already linking this development to subtle and subterranean means of weakening Fayose whose political image as opposition mouthpiece and leader transcends Ekiti. It is obvious that he is very likely to spring surprises in 2019 as a potential game-changer.
The reasons adduced by the government officials for withholding Ekiti fund are mere after-thoughts. There was nothing irregular in the process Ekiti, nay, other states were using in collecting their funds. In fact, Fayose confirmed that he received notification from the CBN that it was under instruction not to release the fund to his state. If truly the seizure has anything to do with ‘improper documentation’, how come the money was processed to the point of disbursement at the CBN before it was held back? And if it is true, according to Lere Olayinka, the governor’s media aide, that the state has been receiving the payment in the last seven months using the same format, then it is not impossible that someone somewhere is playing pranks with the entitlements of Ekiti people.
If they have issues with Fayose, starving a whole state of its dues and privileges cannot be the solution. Denying a state of its constitutionally-guaranteed entitlements in the name of politics is sheer wickedness. If nothing happens soonest, like Tinubu, Fayose should head for the court of law.

Following