BAO Anchor Organisation Media Team
The recent article titled “Manufactured Consensus and Political Illusions: Why Ekiti Voters Would Reject Oyebanji’s Second-Term Project” reads less as a product of sober political reasoning and more as a compilation of conjectures, recycled suspicions, and emotional projections masquerading as civic interrogation. While dissent remains the lifeblood of democracy, it must be anchored on facts, not fantasies.
At the centre of this narrative is Mr. Abiodun Borisade, whose intellectual honesty and public interventions are now being mischaracterised simply because they no longer align with the expectations of certain opposition echo chambers. It must be stated clearly and without ambiguity: Abiodun Borisade has not erred in any matter particular. Political maturity allows room for reassessment when new facts emerge, governance styles evolve, and leadership demonstrates capacity beyond early scepticism. To deny this is to deny the very essence of intellectual freedom.
The Holy Scripture reminds us: “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” Those who continue to peddle the illusion of non-transparency under Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji’s administration are not engaging reality; they are day-dreaming in the comfort of political nostalgia and resentment. Governance is not a static photograph; it is a moving process. BAO’s administration has consistently demonstrated prudence, openness, stakeholder engagement, and fiscal responsibility, facts that are visible to objective observers beyond partisan bitterness.
Particularly reckless is the insinuation that Abiodun Borisade is being paid a fictitious ₦5 million monthly as a so-called “shut-up allowance.” This allegation is not only baseless but corrosive to public discourse. It is the product of a wandering imagination struggling to reconcile disagreement with reality. One must ask: paid for what portfolio? Under what budget line? Through which statutory process? Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji is not Father Christmas, doling out Ekiti State resources for idle appeasement. Government is run through institutions, processes, and accountability frameworks, not through the warped worldview of uninformed political opposition.
It is also important to clarify that the Oyebanji administration has no appetite for vindictiveness. On the contrary, inclusivity remains its defining mantra. This philosophy explains why former governors, respected political leaders, and stakeholders across party lines continue to identify with and contribute to the administration. Unity, not repression; dialogue, not intimidation, these are the values that underpin BAO’s leadership approach.
Attempts to portray the administration as authoritarian or coercive reflect a deliberate effort to weaponise misinformation. Ekiti people are discerning. They understand the difference between lawful state action and political persecution, between governance and propaganda. Sensational claims, when stripped of evidence, collapse under the weight of scrutiny.
Endorsements, stakeholder confidence, and cross-party goodwill have not emerged by coercion or manipulation but by performance, humility, and consistency of purpose. Governor Oyebanji’s calm, people-centred leadership style may frustrate those addicted to political chaos, but it resonates deeply with citizens who value stability, inclusion, and steady progress over noise.
In conclusion, Ekiti State is not governed by illusion but by intention. It is not driven by propaganda but by policy. And it is not sustained by political hallucination but by measurable trust across diverse constituencies. Those who choose to remain trapped in manufactured outrage are free to do so, but they should not confuse their frustrations with the truth.
History will not be kind to deliberate misrepresentation. Ekiti people know the truth, and the truth continues to set them free.