A Golden Jubilee or a Partisan Jamboree?
Golden Jubilee anniversaries are not ordinary ceremonies. They are symbolic moments in the life of a political community—occasions for collective reflection, civic renewal, and sober assessment of the past, present, and future. Oyo State’s 50th anniversary ought, therefore, to have been a unifying civic ritual: a celebration of shared history, collective sacrifice, and common destiny across partisan, ethnic, and ideological divides.
Regrettably, what should have been a citizens’ celebration has been progressively transformed into a partisan spectacle. The Golden Jubilee of Oyo State, rather than standing above politics, appears to have been appropriated by the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) as a platform for political self-advertisement and early mobilisation ahead of the 2027 general elections. This troubling development raises fundamental questions about the politicisation of state institutions, the ethics of incumbency, and the shrinking space for inclusive civic culture in Nigeria’s subnational politics.
The State as a Common Heritage, Not Party Property
In political theory, the modern state is conceived as a neutral arbiter—an institutional framework that belongs equally to all citizens, regardless of political affiliation. From Max Weber’s conception of the state as an impersonal bureaucratic entity to contemporary democratic theory, the legitimacy of governance rests on the clear separation between the apparatus of the state and the machinery of political parties.
When state anniversaries are captured by a ruling party, this distinction collapses. Public funds, public symbols, and public spaces are subtly converted into partisan assets. The result is what scholars describe as the privatisation of the state—a condition in which incumbents behave as though electoral victory confers ownership of state institutions rather than temporary stewardship.
Oyo State’s Golden Jubilee should have projected the state as a collective inheritance built by successive administrations—military and civilian, progressive and conservative—across decades. Instead, the optics, messaging, and organisation of the celebration suggest a narrative carefully curated to amplify the image of the current administration, with party loyalists dominating the stage while dissenting or opposition voices remain conspicuously marginal.
From Commemoration to Campaign Infrastructure
The danger of turning a state anniversary into a political jamboree is not merely symbolic; it is structural. Such events become soft campaign infrastructure—vehicles for populist messaging, elite image laundering, and indirect vote canvassing under the guise of governance.
By framing the Golden Jubilee largely around the achievements and presence of the incumbent administration, the celebration risks reducing fifty years of complex history into a narrow partisan timeline. This instrumentalisation of history is intellectually dishonest and politically corrosive. It erases the contributions of past leaders, civil servants, traditional institutions, labour movements, and ordinary citizens whose collective efforts sustained the state long before the current government came into office.
Moreover, in a state grappling with unemployment, rising cost of living, insecurity, and infrastructural deficits, extravagant anniversary celebrations—especially those saturated with political branding—send the wrong moral signal. They convey a governance culture more invested in optics than outcomes, symbolism than substance.
The Ethics of Incumbency and Democratic Fairness
Democratic ethics impose higher obligations on those who wield state power. Incumbency already confers enormous advantages: access to media, visibility, and state resources. When these advantages are extended into ostensibly non-partisan civic events, the playing field becomes even more distorted.
The appropriation of Oyo State’s Golden Jubilee by the ruling party undermines democratic fairness. It blurs the line between governance and campaigning, between public service and political marketing. In mature democracies, strict conventions—and often legal frameworks—exist to prevent such abuses. State anniversaries are carefully insulated from partisan control to preserve their legitimacy as shared civic moments.
Nigeria’s democracy, still consolidating, cannot afford the normalisation of such practices. When citizens begin to perceive state events as party rallies in disguise, public trust erodes. Cynicism replaces civic pride, and politics becomes further detached from ethical restraint.
Citizenship, Inclusion, and the Politics of Exclusion
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this hijacking is its implication for citizenship. A Golden Jubilee should affirm that every resident of Oyo State—regardless of party affiliation—is an equal stakeholder in its history and future. When the ruling party dominates the narrative, symbols, and participation, it implicitly redraws the boundaries of belonging.
Opposition supporters, non-aligned citizens, and critical voices are rendered invisible or treated as outsiders in their own state. This politics of exclusion deepens polarisation and weakens the social cohesion necessary for development.
True development is not built merely on roads and buildings but on shared civic identity. By narrowing a collective celebration into a partisan affair, the state risks undermining the very social capital it needs to move forward.
Reclaiming the Jubilee: A Call for Civic Responsibility
The critique of the Golden Jubilee celebrations is not an attack on celebration itself, nor is it a denial of the right of any administration to highlight its policies through appropriate channels. Rather, it is a call for restraint, balance, and respect for democratic norms.
Oyo State at 50 should have been a mirror held up to society—a moment to interrogate past failures, acknowledge achievements across administrations, and collectively imagine the next fifty years. Such reflection requires intellectual honesty, inclusiveness, and a deliberate avoidance of partisan triumphalism.
As the state moves beyond this anniversary, citizens, civil society organisations, the media, and opposition parties must insist on clearer boundaries between state functions and party ambitions. Public institutions must be reclaimed as common property, not electoral instruments.
Conclusion: Beyond the Jamboree
Anniversaries pass, but the precedents they set endure. If Oyo State’s Golden Jubilee is remembered not as a moment of unity but as a partisan jamboree, it will represent a missed historical opportunity. More dangerously, it will reinforce a governance culture where public rituals are routinely weaponised for political gain.
Oyo State deserves better. Its history is richer than any single party, and its future should not be mortgaged to short-term electoral calculations. A Golden Jubilee should illuminate a shared path forward—not cast long shadows of partisan appropriation over a collective legacy.
— Adekola Afeez Adegoke
