By Maroof Asudemade

From the billions wasted fighting Ajimobi’s council chairmen to another ₦4.278 billion election gamble, Oyo cannot afford a governor who treats avoidable litigation as a governing strategy.

There is a worrisome pattern in Governor Seyi Makinde’s approach to governance in Oyo State: decisions taken with political folly and insufficient regard for their legal consequences, followed by expensive battles that leave taxpayers to bear the cost. His latest commitment of ₦4.278 billion to conduct another local government election, despite pending litigation seeking to halt the electoral process, raises a familiar question: when will the governor learn that public money is not his personal war chest for settling political scores?

On October 20, 2026, the Oyo State Government announced approval for the expenditure of ₦4.278 billion on chairmanship and councillorship elections scheduled for December 29, 2026. The state government is to contribute approximately ₦1.711 billion, while the 33 local government councils will provide the remaining ₦2.567 billion. The money is intended to finance preparations for the election through the Oyo State Independent Electoral Commission.

That is a substantial financial commitment for an election whose legality is already being challenged in court. A Federal High Court in Abuja has commenced proceedings in a suit seeking to restrain the conduct of the Oyo local government elections pending determination of the substantive case. The claimant alleges that OYSIEC exceeded its constitutional powers in screening candidates. The existence of the suit does not mean the election has been declared unlawful, nor does it establish that the court has ordered a suspension. Nevertheless, it raises an obvious question: why should a government commit billions of naira to an electoral process without first giving the pending legal challenge the attention it deserves?

This is not the first time Makinde’s political decisions have exposed Oyo State to substantial financial liabilities. When he assumed office on May 29, 2019, the governor dissolved the local government councils elected under his predecessor, the late Senator Abiola Ajimobi. Makinde defended the action on the ground that he considered the election unconstitutional. The affected chairmen and councillors challenged their removal, and the dispute travelled through the judicial system to the Supreme Court.

On May 7, 2021, the Supreme Court declared their premature removal unlawful and ordered the payment of the salaries and allowances they would have earned for the remainder of their tenure. The judgment transformed what might have remained a political disagreement into a binding financial obligation on the state government.

Consider the financial consequences. The Oyo State Government subsequently estimated the entitlements at approximately ₦4.875 billion. It paid ₦1 billion in 2021 and authorised another ₦1.5 billion in 2022. Following further litigation, the outstanding debt became the subject of additional court orders. In December 2023, the Court of Appeal dismissed Makinde’s appeal against an earlier ruling concerning the debt and awarded ₦50 million in costs against him. In April 2024, Makinde announced another ₦2 billion payment, declaring an end to the prolonged dispute.

The lesson is difficult to escape: the administration’s decision to remove elected officials did not make their financial entitlements disappear. Instead, the state spent years in litigation before paying billions of naira in obligations that could have been avoided had the original decision respected the legal limits of executive power.

The irony is particularly striking. The government had to meet its financial obligations to the former chairmen and councillors while also administering local government councils under a different political arrangement. The state’s taxpayers ultimately bore the consequences of the confrontation. The money used to settle the judgment debt could otherwise have supported healthcare, education, rural roads, water supply and other public services. The tragedy is not merely that billions were paid; it is that a preventable political confrontation became an expensive public liability.

Now comes another election budget of ₦4.278 billion, with litigation already underway. To be clear, the pending case has not established that the forthcoming election is unlawful. Every government has a responsibility to conduct local government elections in accordance with the law, and a lawsuit does not automatically invalidate an electoral timetable. But responsible governance requires more than the confidence that an election can proceed. It requires prudent financial planning, legal preparedness and an appreciation of the cost of getting things wrong.

Makinde’s administration should therefore explain the legal and financial safeguards put in place before approving this expenditure. What happens if the court ultimately restrains the election or requires substantial changes to the process? Will additional public money be needed to repeat electoral activities, revise arrangements or defend further litigation? What contingency measures exist to protect the funds already committed?

These are not unreasonable questions. They are questions that any government entrusted with public funds should be prepared to answer. There is also a deeper issue of priorities. Oyo State continues to face serious challenges in education, healthcare, infrastructure and social development. At a time when every naira should be deployed efficiently, the government must demonstrate that its expenditure decisions are guided by necessity, legality and measurable public benefit rather than political impatience.

Makinde cannot claim that his administration is committed to prudent management while ignoring the lessons of a costly legal dispute. Nor should he expect residents to regard every new financial commitment as justified simply because the executive council has approved it. Approval is an administrative step, not proof that an expenditure is wise or that every foreseeable risk has been addressed.

The governor must also recognise that there is a difference between political victory and responsible governance. A politician may insist on his position, fight opponents in court and eventually settle the resulting liabilities. But the public cannot be expected to applaud a process in which taxpayers repeatedly pay for decisions that expose the state to avoidable legal and financial risks.

The ₦4.278 billion election budget may ultimately finance a lawful and successful exercise. But until the pending litigation is resolved, the government owes the people a convincing explanation of how it intends to safeguard the expenditure and prevent another costly confrontation. Oyo State is not short of competing demands on its treasury. Its people need functioning schools, adequately equipped hospitals, better roads and stronger public services. They do not need an administration that appears willing to learn expensive lessons repeatedly.

Makinde’s greatest failure in the Ajimobi council-chairmen saga was not simply losing a legal battle; it was allowing a political decision to mature into a multibillion-naira burden on the people he was elected to serve. The latest election expenditure now demands a higher standard of caution, transparency and accountability. The governor should remember that public funds are not an unlimited resource for testing political resolve in court. Every avoidable liability is money diverted from the needs of ordinary citizens.

Oyo State deserves better than a cycle of political decisions, courtroom defeats and expensive settlements. It deserves a government that thinks through the legal consequences of its actions before committing public money, rather than explaining the cost after the damage has been done.

The question is no longer whether Makinde can afford another political confrontation. It is whether the people of Oyo State should be made to pay for one.