Earlier, party stakeholders from several wards in Boki I had appealed to the State Chairman to guide the Governor and party leaders on what many described as a “sensitive” issue affecting the future of Boki’s representation at the federal level.
The stakeholders argued that with concerns over underdevelopment and poor infrastructure in parts of Boki I, there is a growing need for “fresh leadership” if Boki is to retain relevance in the Ikom/Boki Federal Constituency.
However, the statement has now opened up a wider debate among political observers and concerned citizens, with sharply divided opinions emerging.
Strong Reactions Trail Stakeholders’ Position
Reacting to the development, Awaabuon Fidel openly criticized the approach taken by the stakeholders, describing it as misplaced and overly dependent on external political direction.
“I’m tired of this subservience! How can you ask people who’ve abandoned you what to do?” he said.
Fidel questioned why Boki leaders would look outward for direction instead of focusing on internal political strength, insisting that the solution lies in accountability at the ballot box.
“What happened to voting out underperforming leaders? From the Governor down, nobody deserves a second term based on what we’ve seen in Boki,” he added.
He also rejected arguments around political balancing and appointments, maintaining that electoral contests should remain open and competitive.
Democracy vs Political Bargaining
On his part, John Otu pushed back strongly against what he described as attempts to reduce governance to “simple political arithmetic.”
According to him, the idea of tying the House of Representatives seat to other political positions undermines democratic principles.
“Governance and representation are not reduced to arithmetic bargaining. The House of Representatives and State Assembly are separate mandates with independent electoral processes,” he argued.
Otu emphasized that no group has the constitutional authority to “zone” or conditionally allocate the federal seat, warning that such arrangements could weaken democratic integrity.
He further noted that the Ikom/Boki Federal Constituency is a joint mandate between two local government areas and should not be treated as an internal Boki negotiation tool.
Debate Over Equity and Political History
The conversation also brought up long-standing arguments around equity and historical political arrangements between Boki and Ikom.
Fidel, in a follow-up reaction, dismissed claims of imbalance in representation, arguing that political opportunities have rotated over time.
He pointed to past arrangements where Boki held the House of Representatives seat for extended periods while Ikom occupied the senatorial position, suggesting that current demands must be viewed within that broader context.
“What if Ikom had demanded both Senate and Reps at the same time? Is that equity?” he queried.
He also insisted that issues like State Assembly representation, particularly for areas like Kakwagom/Bawop, should be addressed independently and not tied to broader political negotiations.
Growing Political Awareness in Boki
The unfolding debate highlights a growing wave of political awareness and participation among Boki citizens, with more voices demanding accountability, fairness, and transparent leadership processes.
While stakeholders continue to push for direction from party leadership, the strong reactions from within the community suggest that the conversation may go beyond party decisions and shape future political alignments in the area.
Post A Comment: