By Wale Obanigba, Esq.
26 February 2026
The fury that followed Festus Adedayo’s critique of the Ondo State government says far more about our shrinking tolerance for dissent than it does about the supposed excesses of opinion writing. In any democracy, robust commentary is not a crime, it is a civic duty. Attempts to criminalise, delegitimise, or demonise dissent should alarm every citizen who understands that power, once insulated from scrutiny, inevitably degenerates into impunity.
The counter-assaults by Idowu Ajanaku, the Commissioner for Information, who has suddenly found his voice after failing to live up to expectations since his appointment and the Ondo State Commissioner for Justice and Attorney-General, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, SAN, miss the central issue. This debate is not about whether Adedayo’s language is sharp. It is about whether the Governor of Ondo State, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, can be questioned openly, forcefully, and persistently over his stewardship of a commonwealth that belongs to all Ondo citizens.
Public office is not a private estate. Governance is not a favour dispensed by benevolence. Every naira spent, every policy adopted, and every political decision taken by a governor is drawn fromm the collective patrimony of the people. When a journalist interrogates that stewardship, he is not committing malice, he is performing a public service. To label such interrogation “malicious,” or worse, to dress it up as an attack on the state itself, is a familiar authoritarian reflex. It deliberately confuses criticism of a government with hatred for a people.
Ondo State is not Governor Aiyedatiwa. The government is merely a temporary trustee. Trustees do not get offended when beneficiaries ask questions. They provide answers. Supporters of the administration insist that projects and programmes speak for themselves. If so, there should be no fear of scrutiny. The appropriate response to Adedayo’s arguments ought to have been a calm, factual rebuttal supported by figures, timelines, and measurable outcomes, not attempts at character assassination. When officials choose intimidation over explanation, citizens are entitled to wonder what exactly is being hidden.
Crucially, the attempt by Ajanaku to deploy the example of former Lagos State governor Akinwunmi Ambode as a shield for Governor Aiyedatiwa collapses under the weight of historical fact. The Ambode comparison does not strengthen the argument in defence of power, it fatally weakens it. Ambode did not leave office because he was unfairly criticised by journalists or victims of so-called “toxic commentary.” He exited because Lagosians, through the political process, declined to grant him a second term. In a democracy, re-election is the ultimate performance audit. Had Ambode governed in a manner that sufficiently inspired public confidence, Lagosians would have rewarded him with another four years.
That they did not is instructive. It reinforces a basic democratic truth, leaders are judged not by how loudly they silence critics, but by how convincingly they earn the trust of the people. Performance ultimately speaks at the ballot box. Invoking Ambode, therefore, does not insulate Governor Aiyedatiwa from scrutiny, it amplifies the case for it. Ondo State, like Lagos, is governed by citizens, not by courtiers, not by officials who treat criticism as treason. Where governance delivers tangible value, public confidence follows. Where it does not, history, and the electorate render their verdict.
More troubling is the precedent being set by attempts to delegitimise critical voices. If journalists and commentators are silenced today for criticising the governor, who will speak tomorrow when ordinary citizens bear the consequences of poor governance? Democracies do not collapse overnight, they are strangled slowly, often under the applause of those who believe power must be defended at all costs.
Governor Aiyedatiwa cannot escape accountability. He governs resources that do not belong to him, policies that affect lives beyond his political circle, and institutions meant to outlive his tenure. Criticism even when uncomfortable, is part of the price of that responsibility. Defending Festus Adedayo is, therefore, about defending the right and the obligation to question those who wield power over our common destiny. Ondo State deserves a future shaped by transparency, debate, and accountability, not by fear of criticism.
Leaders must never confuse authority with infallibility. History has been unkind to societies that allow power to go unchallenged.
Wale Obanigba writes from Akure.
