EDITORIAL: When The Throne Chooses Politics Over The People, Kwara Has A Right To Ask Questions
The traditional institution in Kwara State has long been revered as a symbol of unity, impartiality, and moral leadership. It is an institution that predates political parties and derives its legitimacy not from elections, but from the trust and respect of the people.
That is precisely why the recent visit by some Kwara traditional rulers to Abuja, reportedly to engage President Bola Ahmed Tinubu over the governorship ambition of an aspirant, has generated widespread public concern.
Whether the visit was intended as consultation, endorsement, or advocacy, one unavoidable question has emerged: Should the throne be seen as participating in partisan political succession?
This question becomes even more significant against the backdrop of the security challenges that have affected parts of Kwara in recent years. Attacks on communities, kidnappings, and the displacement of residents have repeatedly made headlines. These are matters of public record.
Many Kwarans therefore expected that whenever a delegation of respected traditional rulers secured access to the nation's highest political office, the dominant message would be a call for stronger security, greater protection for vulnerable communities, and sustained federal intervention against criminal elements.
That expectation is neither unreasonable nor political. It reflects the fundamental duty of every leader, traditional or elected to place the safety and welfare of the people above every other consideration.
No traditional ruler is prohibited from engaging government. In fact, such engagement is essential. However, when public attention shifts from pressing security concerns to discussions surrounding a governorship contest, it is understandable that citizens begin to question priorities.
Traditional rulers occupy a unique constitutional and cultural space. They are fathers to supporters of every political party. Their influence rests on public confidence that they will remain impartial, serve as mediators in times of tension, and always put the collective interest above partisan interests.
Once the institution is perceived-rightly or wrongly-as taking sides in political contests, its moral authority risks erosion. Trust, once diminished, is not easily restored.
This editorial is therefore not an attack on any individual monarch. It is a defence of the institution itself.
The throne should never become an extension of any political campaign. Governors will come and go. Political parties will win and lose elections. Aspirants will rise and fall. But the traditional institution must remain above the fray if it is to retain the respect of present and future generations.
The people of Kwara deserve traditional rulers who use every opportunity before the President to speak first for the security of their communities, the welfare of their subjects, economic development, education, and peace. Those are causes that unite all Kwarans regardless of party affiliation.
History will judge leaders not by the politicians they stood beside, but by the people they stood up for.
The throne is most powerful when it speaks for everyone. It becomes weakest when it is perceived to speak for one political interest.
For that reason, Kwara's traditional institution must jealously guard its neutrality. Its greatest asset is not political access, it is public trust. And public trust is too precious to gamble with.
No comments