Sai kayi, don’t bank on Ekiti

In Hausaland, an aspirant who is challenging an incumbent governor is egged on by his supporters with the battle cry Sai kayi, i.e. you must do it. It is a potent battle cry borrowed from traditional institutions. The story is told of a prince who went to greet an emir. With praise singers shouting “sai […]

In Hausaland, an aspirant who is challenging an incumbent governor is egged on by his supporters with the battle cry Sai kayi, i.e. you must do it. It is a potent battle cry borrowed from traditional institutions. The story is told of a prince who went to greet an emir. With praise singers shouting “sai kayi!” he forgot to remove his shoes and marched onto the emir’s carpet. With the Ekiti result goading them on, many a Nigerian challenger could soon march onto the incumbent governor’s political carpet with his shoes on.
That a sitting governor could garner only a third of the votes, lose in every local government and in nearly every polling station has gladdened the heart of every Sai kayi aspirant. The Ekiti election has proved that an incumbent governor is what Mao Zedong once called “a paper tiger;” he is not as invincible as he appears to be. Or is it? In Nigerian political terms, Ekiti Governor-elect Ayo Fayose is a miracle worker who serially defeated two incumbent governors in elections. He first defeated Governor Niyi Adebayo in 2003 and has now defeated Governor Kayode Fayemi. Both Adebayo and Fayemi belonged to parties that are historical continuations of the dominant political tendency in Yorubaland; yet Fayose defeated both of them. Still, I must remind any Sai kayi strategist that Fayose’s feat is the exception in Nigerian politics. Incumbent governors coasting home to comfortable electoral victories is the norm here.
Since 1999, we have had 152 governorship elections in this country. 35 of the 36 states have had four governorship elections each while Osun State has so far held three elections. In addition to these, there were 7 re-run elections held in Bauchi, Adamawa, Sokoto, Kebbi, Kogi, Bayelsa, Cross River and Delta plus one illegal governorship election held in Anambra. In all these elections incumbent governors were defeated in 18 cases or 12% of the total. These episodes took place in Kwara, Kogi, Kano, Gombe, Borno, Ogun, Ondo, Oyo, Osun and Ekiti in 2003; Ondo, Osun and Ekiti [after protracted court cases] in 2007; Zamfara, Oyo, Ogun and Nasarawa states in 2011 and the recent Ekiti case. We will not count cases where the ruling party was defeated with a different candidate such as Anambra in 2003, Edo in 2007 or Kano in 2011.
I once wrote about why it is difficult to defeat an incumbent governor in a Nigerian election. Though that was some years ago, I have not seen any change in the situation on the ground so let me recount some of the advantages that an incumbent governor has over his challengers.
Number One, an incumbent governor has name recognition. In politics this is worth more than a million colour posters and billboards. A man who has governed a state for some years is known in every hamlet and in every household.  To be known by just about everyone is a very valuable asset in politics because for non-incumbent aspirants, the very difficult first task is to get people to know you. Now, one can become well known in a community for the wrong reasons but in politics, even that is better than to be unknown.
Number Two, an incumbent governor has ready media access. In Nigeria, a governor is seen on television, heard on the radio or read about in the newspapers practically every day. Such saturation publicity is a big factor in politics and it is very annoying to a governor’s challengers since publicity is to a politician what water is to fish. Every appearance at a social, cultural, political or any other event, including a visit to a disaster scene, is positive campaign for the incumbent. This is a facility that a challenger does not have.
Number Three, a governor has invaluable electoral experience because he once won an election [except the governors of Kaduna and Taraba states, who inherited their seats]. If he knew how to win an election 4 years ago, chances are that he still knows how to do so. There are however cases like Fayemi’s that have since lost touch with reality.
Number Four, an incumbent governor has a record to point at. When he visits any community or when he addresses any group, he is usually able to point out at something that he did for them. It may not be much but the psychology of promises is that having done something, it usually sounds more credible when you promise to do more. That’s a heck better than being a fresh aspirant with a whole bag of unverifiable promises.
Number Five, a governor has available to him the machinery of state. That the entire state civil service, traditional rulers, the ruling party’s machinery as well as security agencies report to a man gives him several advantages over his opponents including information, logistic facilities, ready contacts, intimidatory paraphernalia and social awesome presence. An incumbent governor also has political wiggling room; when an important constituency needs something from the government, he can still rush to provide it before the election.
Number Six, which is related to number five, is that a governor has many facilities for patronage. Patronage is to Nigerian politics what mud is to an earthworm. Key political actors who deliver wards and electoral constituencies during Nigerian elections usually do so not on the basis of any ideologies or programs but based on what they got, are getting or will get. In that wise a governor can make lucrative appointments, award contracts, allocate parcels of land and award wads of money. There are many other ways to confer rewarding political patronage; a governor’s highly visible presence at a social event in the house of a leading politician often earns political IOUs.  
Number Seven, an incumbent governor is likely to have more money than his opponents. Money is the starting and also the end point of Nigerian political aspiration. In a campaign, a politician needs money to open and furnish offices; to print posters, handbills and vests; to buy, fuel and service cars and buses; to pay campaign workers; pay for radio and television airtime and newspaper space; hire halls and squares; pay legal fees and feed multitudes at campaign rallies. These are only the official costs. A candidate must put money in the pockets of party officials, returning officers, community leaders, traditional rulers, clerics and spiritualists, praise singers, noisy critics, party thugs, security agents and journalists. A candidate must also arm his ward-level campaigners with truckloads of sugar, salt and soap in order to facilitate what in Nigeria is called “house-to-house” campaign.
Number Eight, a governor is likely to have the support of security agencies in his state. This is partly due to the mentality of the Nigerian policeman who equates the governor to the state. Even though security agencies are Federal Government organs, a lot of their day-to-day financing is done by state governments. This often enables governors to exercise extra-constitutional power over them.  In Nigeria, no one knows for sure where state security ends and partisan politics begins, a muddled situation very advantageous to incumbents.
Usually, a challenger has an advantage in situations where the governor’s record in office is very poor. The problem here is that governors who provided little infrastructure or services could sometimes become very popular by building what some Ekiti voters called “stomach infrastructure.” A challenger is also at an advantage where the governor has antagonized powerful political blocs or whole sections of the state. Usually, a challenger is able to stand up to the governor if he lines up superior Federal power behind himself or if he is backed by a very popular political godfather.
So, while Ekiti was a watershed event that shed much light on the trajectory of Nigerian politics, I urge all Sai kayi aspirants not to bank on a repeat anytime soon.