The recent statement attributed to the Chairman of Kuje Area Council is not merely a political comment that should be dismissed as rhetoric. It raises serious questions about the chairman’s understanding of democracy, constitutional governance and the responsibilities that come with occupying public office.
The chairman was quoted as saying:
“I have said in my area council, it’s either you are doing APC or leave the area council; I’m not hiding that. With confidence, I’m saying it. You know why, I cannot have President and Minister doing what they are doing and on the day of election, you will want to match me. It’s either you are with us, or you are out.”
If these words were accurately reported and spoken in the context attributed to him, they are deeply unfortunate coming from an elected local-government chairman.
There is nothing wrong with a chairman being a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), campaigning for his party or persuading residents to support the party. That is part of democratic political competition. What becomes problematic is when an elected public official appears to suggest that citizens must belong to his political party or risk being excluded from the area council.
That is where the line between partisan politics and public administration becomes important.
Nigeria is a multiparty democracy
Nigeria is not a one-party state. The Constitution recognises the country as a democratic state, and Section 14(1) expressly provides that the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a state based on the principles of democracy and social justice.
More importantly, Section 14(2)(a) provides that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government derives its powers and authority, while Section 14(2)(c) provides that the participation of the people in government shall be ensured.
This means political power ultimately belongs to the people—not to a political party, not to an elected chairman and certainly not to an individual office holder.
Section 40 of the Constitution goes even further. It guarantees every person the right to freely associate with others and specifically recognises the right to form or belong to a political party, subject to the constitutional framework governing political parties.
Consequently, a citizen of Kuje does not lose his or her constitutional political identity simply because the chairman belongs to the APC. A resident may support APC, PDP, Labour Party, NNPP or another legally recognised political platform. The citizen may also choose not to identify with any political party.
The chairman is entitled to persuade such people politically. He is not entitled to redefine the political rights of the people he governs according to his personal or partisan preference.
“It’s either you are with us, or you are out” is the troubling part
The most disturbing portion of the statement is not that the chairman supports APC. It is the declaration:
“It’s either you are with us, or you are out.”
That language is incompatible with the basic spirit of democratic governance.
An elected chairman is chairman of the entire council—not chairman only of members of his political party. Once elected and sworn into office, his responsibilities extend to supporters, opponents, undecided citizens and people who may have voted against him.
Government is not a private club where membership is determined by political loyalty.
If “leave the area council” is intended literally, the statement becomes even more troubling because a public official cannot simply declare that citizens who disagree politically with him have no place in the community. And if it was merely political rhetoric, it was still extraordinarily irresponsible rhetoric for an elected official, because words from people in positions of authority carry consequences.
Political loyalty should never replace public service
There is also a fundamental distinction between party loyalty and public responsibility.
A chairman can be an enthusiastic APC member. He can campaign for the President. He can praise the Minister. He can criticise opposition parties. He can ask voters to support his party.
But the most effective way to persuade citizens should be through performance.
Build the roads.
Improve healthcare.
Support education.
Provide clean water.
Create opportunities.
Maintain public infrastructure.
Make the council work.
Let the people look at the results and say: This administration deserves another mandate.
That is democratic politics.
Telling citizens that they must support your party because the President and Minister are doing something is not the same thing as earning their votes. Elections are ultimately about the consent of the people.
The Constitution does not make political disagreement an offence
Nothing in the democratic structure of Nigeria gives a local government chairman the authority to determine which political party residents of his council must support.
Indeed, the constitutional protection of association exists precisely because democracy requires room for disagreement.
The existence of opposition is not evidence that democracy has failed. Opposition is one of the mechanisms through which democracy functions.
A healthy democracy allows the governing party to govern, the opposition to criticise, citizens to choose and voters to change their minds.
The moment political leaders begin to suggest that citizens must either support the ruling party or leave their community, democracy begins to resemble political coercion rather than political persuasion.
That is why statements of this nature should not simply be laughed off as “politics.”
The chairman should remember the office he occupies
There is another important dimension to this matter.
The Constitution’s Fifth Schedule provides, under the Code of Conduct for Public Officers, that a public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities.
Political affiliation is not, by itself, a conflict of interest. But an elected official must constantly distinguish between serving a political party and serving the public.
The moment partisan interest begins to influence how a public official treats citizens because of their political choices, serious questions arise about the proper use of public office.
The chairman therefore needs to understand that the office he occupies is bigger than the political party that sponsored him.
APC gave him the platform. The electorate gave him the mandate. The Constitution and applicable laws define the limits of his authority.
What about opposition parties “leaving Kuje”?
There is also an economic and political contradiction in the idea that opposition supporters should leave the area council.
People who belong to opposition parties are still residents, workers, business owners, taxpayers, consumers and members of the community. Their economic activities contribute to the local economy regardless of which political party they support.
If opposition politicians, businessmen, professionals and ordinary residents were somehow driven away because of their political affiliations, Kuje would not become stronger. It would become more politically intolerant and potentially economically weaker.
The chairman should therefore be thinking about how to make Kuje attractive to every resident and investor, regardless of political affiliation.
A local government should be a place where political differences can coexist—not a territory controlled by one political identity.
Leadership requires restraint
Perhaps the bigger issue here is leadership.
A leader does not have to respond to every political disagreement with confrontation. A leader should have the confidence to tolerate opposition.
In fact, the strength of a political leader is demonstrated not by how effectively he silences his opponents, but by how confidently he allows them to exist.
If the chairman believes APC has performed well, then he should make the case to the people.
If he believes the President and Minister have performed well, he should explain their achievements.
If he wants the people of Kuje to vote APC, he should persuade them.
But the ballot belongs to the voter.
The chairman’s job is to govern. The citizen’s job is to decide who deserves his or her vote.
Those roles must not be confused.
This is bigger than APC
This argument is not an attack on APC.
The same principle would apply if the chairman belonged to PDP, Labour Party, NNPP or any other political party.
Imagine an opposition chairman telling APC supporters, “Either you join us or leave the area council.” We would rightly condemn that statement too.
Democracy cannot be defended selectively.
If we condemn political intimidation when it is directed at our own supporters but celebrate it when directed at our opponents, then we are not defending democracy—we are merely defending our side.
The chairman should clarify his statement
Rather than allowing this controversy to deepen, the chairman should clarify exactly what he meant.
If “leave the area council” was simply an unfortunate political expression, he should say so.
If he meant that residents who support opposition parties should actually leave Kuje, then he needs to explain the legal and constitutional basis for such a position.
And if the statement was made in anger or as political banter, that should also be acknowledged.
Public office requires a higher standard of speech because public officials do not speak merely as private citizens. Their words can influence how supporters behave and how citizens perceive their security, rights and place within the community.
In summary
The chairman’s loyalty to APC is his right.
The people’s right to support whichever political party they choose is equally important.
The chairman can campaign.
The people can disagree.
The chairman can persuade.
The people can reject his argument.
The chairman can praise his party’s achievements.
The people can demand more.
That is democracy.
What Nigeria does not need—at the federal, state or local level—is a political culture in which public office becomes a weapon for demanding political conformity.
Kuje belongs to all its residents, not to one political party.
And the chairman, as an elected public official, should be the first person reminding everyone of that principle.
Good governance should make people want to support your party. Political intimidation should never be the substitute for performance.
Follow BwariTimes on Facebook for more updates, public opinions, views and concern. Contact us for media coverage, event and press conferences.
