The on-going political drama in Yorubaland, tending to pit Asiwaju Tinubu against Professor Yemi Osinbajo mandates the intervention of Yoruba People on whose behalf the contest is taking place, especially given the historical antecedents and outcome of such contests.
Without prejudice to others who may later enter the contest and recognizing that Professor Yemi Osinbajo is yet to formally declare his interest, his supporters and admirers have embarked on a series of activities pointing in that direction, hence the Yoruba Referendum Committee’s assumption as to his contesting.
We therefore proceed as follows:
(1) Drawing parallels from our historical experience, the outcome of this contest between the two is often couched within the context of a repeat of the 1962 crisis and its aftermath, lending credence to the saying to the effect that “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. This will not and cannot be the case simply because the contexts for the resolution are vastly different, where, in the current circumstances, it will not lead to a repeat but a DEFEAT for the Yoruba, UNLESS the Yoruba People intervene, directly, by ensuring an alternative political paradigm, which is to be found in the Yoruba Referendum.

(2) Without going into details of the historical experience, it is enough to note that political decisions, including party formations, at the time were made from within the Region; the external incursion via the 1966 military coups and the resulting Biafra war, enabled Yoruba leadership to reassert itself, albeit in a modified manner, as the entire country was subjected to Unitarist control. This has been further expanded, to such a point that we do not even have the prerogative to establish, control and determine our political direction by the simple fact that all political activities are now centralized such that any resolution dependent on the center will become a defeat, regardless of who emerges victorious between the two.

(3) For Asiwaju Tinubu and professor Osinbajo, the above is borne by the fact that the main thrust of their supporters rest on establishing their bona fides, in a major push to force the Yoruba into making a choice, woven around the following: (a) their administration in Lagos State, as Governor and Attorney general, and their impact and influence on the quest for True Federalism and democracy in Nigeria via their engagement of the then Central Government and its Unitarist tendencies,(b) their critical and active participation in bringing about the defeat of the PDP in 2015 (c) the relevance of faith or religion in the current dispensation which will appear to favor the vice president, (d) their records within the “June 12” democracy movement, playing critical roles in the entire quest (d) the recent resuscitation of their erstwhile struggles on VAT, Southern Governors’ solidarity, resistance to centralized control and ownership of land, etc.

(4) The above is neutralized by the fact that the Yoruba, as a People, have no control over the APC, which will ultimately be the decider; we will be bound by the party’s choice, which we all know will be based on factors incongruent with our imperative, thereby mandating us to turn the tables and force both to make a choice in favor of, or against the Yoruba Imperative, couched either as Self-Determination, Restructuring, True Federalism, Autonomy or Regionalism.

(5) This becomes paramount when it is recognized that political power does not reside in the individual but in the application of the collective aspirations and expectations of the People anchored around their existential reality with a roadmap towards actualization and sustenance, embedded within the people and their consciousness and often at the instance of a vanguard, which, in this instance, is the SW APC, within which the entire quest must be sorted out and provide the platform for the counter-choice.

(6) It is also said that men make history, but not in circumstances of their own choosing. So far, both are aiming at contradicting this maxim, making it appear as if they are attempting to make history in the circumstances they have chosen when it is certain that such is not the case as they are merely operating within the circumstances chosen for them, evidenced by the reality of their dependence on the choices to be made at their party’s convention, and which will be based on other interests either in opposition to, or in defiance of our Imperative, all reinforced with the establishment of an “electoral bank” in the North, which is always flaunted in our faces, thereby making them susceptible to the “a o m’erin j’oba” syndrome and its consequences.

(7) Political brinksmanship is often the result of the path they have chosen, comfortable with the assumption that the Yoruba will have to choose either of them upon which either would be able to negotiate his options while in power and which brings forth the question as to the necessity or otherwise of sustaining brinksmanship as the political foundation or an opportunity to reassert our ability to create a new reality.

( This brinksmanship is possible only because of our inability to break its cycle, and this, flowing from our inability to establish the political paradigm and sustain it, which allows political parties to fill the vacuum. These political parties are often special purpose vehicles for certain interests, which may sometimes become bargaining chips, resulting in an endless cycle of power contestations for its own sake, more so when the political and economic conditions necessitating their existence continue to be tilted against the development of Yorubaland.

(9) The story of the APC is so well known that it needs no rehashing. Yet, it has not even tilted in the direction of addressing the Democracy Question, where the aspirations of the various Peoples are subjected to only an electoral norm, disguised as democracy while disregarding the fact that electoral choices are manifestations of the expectations and aspirations in each society, the parameters of which are to be defined by that society.

(10) This is a direct reflection of the universalism of our humanity and not its negation; for, contrary to some, who wish to “detribalize” and “Nigerianize”, the existential reality is in the existence of the People (tribe) and their universalism denied by the act of “detribalization”, hence calling into question, its democratic assumptions. This is further reflected in the controversy over the inclusion or absence of “True Federalism” in APC’s original Manifesto and which calls into question, the reliability of such a party in resolving that issue, and, by extension, the roles expected to be played by the two aspirants.

(11) The APC’s control of central power enables a deviation from the aspirations of the various peoples making up its membership hence the SW APC’s lackluster response to the constant calls for Restructuring or True Federalism, despite its public declaration of support, but without any practical roadmap for its actualization.

(12) This is possible only because the political parties exist outside the established or projected aspirations and expectations of the People, which compromises our ability to situate our Yoruba quest as an end, yet capable of influencing other Nationalities in their own quest, thereby ensuring the coming into being of all the Peoples of Nigeria, having been freed from the shackles of a colonial State. This implies the existence of a political paradigm anchored on a pursuit for itself and legitimized by its own social, cultural, and economic parameters, thus providing the circumstances for making history.

(13) The ingredients for the above are present in the general demands for Restructuring, True Federalism, Autonomy, etc which must provide the foundation for political engagement for Yoruba people and which the APC, by definition, cannot fulfill; yet the APC is the only vehicle through which either Asiwaju Tinubu or Professor Osinbajo will or can contest for the presidency.

(14) Therefore, to aggregate the Yoruba Quest, and save these two gladiators and other contestants from themselves, it is incumbent for all of us to pressurize the Houses of Assembly to pass the Bill for a Referendum into Law and conduct the Referendum as a matter of urgency and necessity.

(15) This is because the Yoruba Referendum Bill makes provision for the Governors of each State as well as the Yoruba in Kwara and Kogi States, to, in the event of a “Yes” vote, appoint members into a Constitutional Council of Western/Oduduwa Region,[i][/i] which shall be vested with powers to present and represent the views of Western/Oduduwa Region and negotiate on behalf of the Region with all the agencies of the Nigerian Government, non-Governmental organizations, and the international Community.

BAT is a repected political genus in the south and the whole country. Osinbajo is no doubt his benefactor amosngt others like Fashola, Aregbesola, Fajabiamiala, Mamora, Alhaji Lai to mention but a few but as it stand, Osinbajo remain the man that can restore hope of this country, his acting days is a pointer of a great leader and problem solver he is.