Builders vs. Hecklers: Why APC’s Attack on Adekanmbi Exposes Their Own Emptiness
The recent attempt by the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Oyo State to criticise Hon. Bimbo Adekanmbi over his business interests has raised questions about the opposition’s understanding of private enterprise and its relevance to public service.
Every citizen has the right to pursue a legitimate livelihood, profession or business outside politics before aspiring to public office. Having what is often described as a “second address” is a sign of independence and responsibility, not a crime. Adekanmbi’s ownership of a construction company, reportedly alongside his wife, should therefore not automatically be portrayed as a liability.
Rather, experience in the construction industry can provide valuable insight into infrastructure development, land use, project management and job creation.
These are important areas of governance that require practical knowledge and an understanding of how businesses operate. If adequately applied in public office, such experience could contribute to policies that promote investment, employment and sustainable development in Oyo State.
What the opposition appears to overlook is that legitimate business ownership is not a disqualification for public service. On the contrary, running a business can expose an individual to the realities of managing people, meeting financial obligations, creating employment and navigating economic challenges. These experiences can be relevant to governance, although business success alone does not automatically guarantee effective leadership.
Rather than treating private enterprise as inherently suspicious, the APC should explain the specific concerns it has about Adekanmbi’s business interests and provide evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. Public scrutiny is an essential part of democracy, but it is most valuable when based on verifiable facts rather than insinuations. The people of Oyo State deserve a debate centred on competence, accountability, policy proposals and the capacity of candidates to deliver results.
The debate also presents an opportunity for the APC to subject its own candidate’s record to similar scrutiny. Voters are entitled to ask questions about candidates’ professional backgrounds, business interests, previous public offices and measurable achievements.
However, assessments of any candidate’s performance as a local government chairman or senator should be based on verifiable records, rather than broad claims of failure or political rhetoric.
Ultimately, the issue should not be whether Adekanmbi has business interests outside politics, but whether his experience, record and policy proposals demonstrate the capacity to serve the people effectively. Equally, the APC and its candidate should be prepared to explain their own records and vision for the state.
As the 2027 political season approaches, disagreements among political parties are inevitable. However, voters should be able to distinguish between legitimate scrutiny and partisan attacks designed primarily to discredit opponents. Political campaigns should provide opportunities for candidates to explain their credentials, defend their records and present practical solutions to the challenges facing the state.
Oyo State deserves a serious conversation about economic development, infrastructure, job creation, security and accountable leadership.
The contest should ultimately be between competing ideas, records and capabilities, not merely between builders and hecklers. Voters, rather than political parties, should have the final say on which candidates offer the most credible path to the state’s development.