2027: Will Seyi Makinde Become the Political Godfather He Once Criticised?

Politics has a way of confronting leaders with the very principles they once championed. For Governor Seyi Makinde, a man whose political identity was built on “independence” from entrenched political godfathers, that defining moment may now be approaching. Across Oyo State, growing speculation suggests he may have quietly settled for Bimbo Adekanmbi as his preferred successor for the 2027 governorship election. Though no official confirmation has been made, the rumour has triggered a graping and more significant question, can a leader who rose by rejecting godfatherism endorse a successor without becoming part of the very system he once opposed?

This is not merely another round of political gossip or pre-election calculations. It is a conversation that strikes at the core of political consistency, leadership philosophy, and legacy. For many supporters, Makinde represented a refreshing break from an era in which powerful political figures determined who governed and continued to wield influence long after leaving office. His rise was seen as proof that political success could be earned through public trust, competence, and strategic vision rather than through elite patronage. That is why any suggestion that he may now be positioning a successor carries profound symbolic weight.

Now, as Makinde approaches the final phase of his constitutionally permitted tenure, he stands at a crossroads that has tested many Nigerian governors before him. The decisions he makes regarding succession will shape not only the future of Oyo politics but also the way history remembers his administration. Will he strengthen his image as a democrat committed to institutional processes, or will he assume the familiar role of political kingmaker that he once openly criticised?

At the centre of this conversation lies an uncomfortable political reality, many argue that in Nigeria, no politician truly rises without some form of political sponsorship. The structure of Nigerian politics is heavily influenced by networks of loyalty, influence, financial backing, and elite alliances. Electoral campaigns require enormous resources, grassroots structures, and strategic support that often come from established political figures. This has led some analysts to argue that the idea of a politician existing entirely without a political benefactor is more myth than reality.

Even politicians who publicly reject godfatherism often benefit, directly or indirectly, from political alliances, endorsements, or strategic relationships. The difference, however, lies in the nature of that support. Political collaboration becomes dangerous when it evolves into control. There is a clear distinction between receiving legitimate political backing and becoming a product of political ownership. It is this distinction that has shaped public discourse around Makinde’s political image.

Since becoming governor in 2019, Makinde has consistently projected himself as a leader who rose to power without the backing of “entrenched political godfathers”. He has repeatedly emphasized that his success was driven by popular support, strategic planning, and personal determination. This narrative clicked strongly with voters, particularly in a political environment where Nigerians have grown increasingly critical of godfatherism and its damaging effects on governance.

Political godfatherism remains one of the most controversial features of Nigerian democracy. It refers to a system in which influential political actors sponsor candidates into office and subsequently exercise control over their administration. In such arrangements, elected leaders often become accountable not to the electorate but to the individuals who facilitated their emergence. This weakens democratic institutions and often leads to political instability.

The reason many Nigerians detest godfatherism is not merely ideological; it is rooted in repeated historical failures. Across the country, godfather-successor relationships have frequently ended in bitter conflicts that disrupt governance and expose the dangers of political dependency.

One of the clearest examples remains the crisis between Chris Ngige and his political benefactor Chris Uba in Anambra State. After helping facilitate Ngige’s emergence in 2003, Uba reportedly expected absolute political loyalty and control over state resources. When Ngige resisted, the conflict escalated into one of Nigeria’s most infamous political confrontations, including an attempted abduction of the sitting governor. The crisis paralysed governance and exposed the dangers of godfather politics.

Another major example is the prolonged conflict between Rasheed Ladoja and the late political strongman Lamidi Adedibu. What began as a political alliance eventually degenerated into a fierce battle for control of state power. The fallout destabilized governance in Oyo and remains one of Nigeria’s most prominent examples of godfatherism gone wrong.
Similarly, in Kwara State, the long-standing political dominance of the Bukola Saraki political structure became a symbol of entrenched political control before being challenged by the “O to ge” movement, a mass political resistance against godfatherism and political monopoly. Even now in 2026, there’s still the current minister of FCT, Nyelsom Wike and the current governor of Rivers, Siminalayi Fubara over the same godfatherism.

These examples explain why godfatherism is widely viewed with suspicion. It often produces conflict, weakens institutions, limits accountability, and prioritizes private political interests over public service.
Oyo State itself has a long history of succession battles and political influence struggles. Beyond the current Olubadan, Ladoja-Adedibu crisis, the administrations of Adebayo Alao-Akala and Abiola Ajimobi also operated within a political climate shaped by elite negotiations and succession calculations. It was against this background that Makinde’s emergence appeared different. He positioned himself as a departure from the old order, presenting his administration as one guided by merit, institutional governance, and independence from political imposition. This anti-godfather posture became central to his public image and one of the reasons many supporters viewed him as a reform-minded leader.

However, as he approaches the end of his tenure, Makinde now faces the same challenge confronting nearly every outgoing governor in Nigeria, succession. Outgoing governors often seek to influence who succeeds them, usually under the argument of preserving policy continuity and protecting developmental gains. In some cases, this influence is exercised democratically through open endorsement and transparent party consultation. In others, it becomes an attempt to retain control after leaving office.

This distinction is crucial. Endorsing a candidate does not automatically amount to godfatherism. In democratic systems, leaders routinely support candidates they believe are best positioned to continue their policies. Such endorsement becomes problematic only when it evolves into imposition, when party structures are manipulated, alternative aspirants are unfairly blocked, and the eventual candidate is expected to remain politically subservient.

Therefore, if Makinde eventually endorses Bimbo Adekanmbi through a transparent and competitive process, his action could reasonably be interpreted as normal political succession planning rather than godfatherism. Every political leader has the right to support a preferred candidate, provided the democratic process remains open and fair. The controversy would arise if his influence were used to suppress internal party democracy. If political pressure is deployed to force a preferred outcome, or if state structures are subtly used to discourage opposition, such actions would contradict his long-standing rejection of godfather politics.

The rumoured emergence of Adekanmbi adds another layer to this debate. He is not a political newcomer. He has built a reputation as an experienced political administrator and strategist within Oyo’s political landscape. Supporters argue that his administrative competence makes him a credible candidate capable of sustaining continuity in governance.

Critics, however, may see his emergence as evidence of elite political recycling, where a small circle of insiders continues to rotate power while presenting the process as democratic choice. This perception would become stronger if his candidacy appears to stem solely from the governor’s influence rather than broad-based consensus.

The wider issue at stake is Makinde’s legacy. History has shown that many governors celebrated for reform eventually damaged their reputations through attempts to control succession. The temptation to influence what happens after leaving office remains one of the greatest tests of political principle.
For Makinde, this is a defining moment. If he allows an open and transparent process that produces the strongest candidate through fair competition, he will reinforce his reputation as a democrat committed to institutional politics. If, however, he seeks to determine the outcome behind closed doors, he risks becoming part of the same political culture he once criticised.

At present, there is no verified evidence that Governor Makinde has officially selected Bimbo Adekanmbi or any other individual as his successor. The reports remain speculative, and his aides have denied claims of any formal endorsement. Until there is an official declaration, any definitive conclusion would be premature.
Still, the debate itself reflects a larger concern about political integrity in Nigeria. The real issue is not simply whether Makinde chooses a preferred successor. The true test lies in how that choice is made and whether democratic principles are respected.

If succession emerges through consultation, transparency, and genuine competition, Makinde will likely be remembered as a leader who upheld democratic values. But if the process reflects imposition and post-office control, then the governor who once prided himself on having no political godfather may indeed become one himself.
Ultimately, history will judge not just who succeeds Seyi Makinde, but whether his approach to succession confirms his principles or contradicts them.

Ogungbile Emmanuel Oludotun