Party Supremacy, Not Palace Politics: The Case for Oba Elegushi’s Neutrality in APC Primaries
The attempt to drag Oba Saheed Ademola Elegushi into the controversy surrounding the APC primaries calls for serious scrutiny, restraint, and a proper understanding of both political realities and traditional institution dynamics in Lagos State.
An Oba, by sacred tradition, cultural responsibility, and public duty, is a father to all , irrespective of political affiliation, personal loyalty, ideology, or electoral interest. The throne is not an annex of any political party, faction, or aspirant.
It is a revered institution of unity, stability, and communal leadership.
To recklessly reduce such an institution to the level of partisan combat not only distorts reality but risks undermining the dignity of traditional authority.
Let it be stated without ambiguity: Oba Saheed Ademola Elegushi has vehemently denied any form of interference in the APC primary process.
The monarch has categorically rejected the allegations as unfounded, politically motivated, and entirely inconsistent with his longstanding posture of neutrality and statesmanship.
Standing firmly behind their son and royal father, the Elegushi Royal Family has equally rejected attempts to politicize the throne, insisting that the honour, neutrality, and integrity of the palace must not be sacrificed on the altar of political frustration, internal party disagreements, or post-primary recriminations.
Beyond emotions, insinuations, and political rhetoric, one undeniable reality must be acknowledged: the APC runs on the doctrine of party supremacy.
This is neither new nor controversial.
Within Lagos APC politics, party decisions, leadership consensus, and internal calculations have repeatedly superseded personal ambition, popularity, and even electoral victories. Aspirants rise and fall within that structure.
Such outcomes are products of party machinery and not palace intervention.
Indeed, history itself provides perhaps the strongest defence of Oba Elegushi’s neutrality.
During a previous political contest, Oba Elegushi’s own younger brother reportedly emerged victorious in a primary process but was nevertheless asked to step aside in deference to party arrangements. Crucially, the monarch did not challenge party authority, mobilize palace influence, or wage a public confrontation against the party’s decision.
He accepted the supremacy of the party structure.
That fact alone destroys the logic of the present accusations.
If Oba Elegushi did not interfere when the political interest of his own biological brother was at stake, on what rational or evidential basis can anyone convincingly argue that he would manipulate outcomes for another political actor?
The contradiction is glaring.
It is equally important to note that Hon. Noheem Babatunde Adams has not been a stranger to the goodwill, accessibility, and cordial disposition of Oba Elegushi. Within political circles, the monarch has consistently maintained supportive and respectful relationships across divides, including with Hon. Adams himself.
But politics has limits and party politics has rules.
Where party supremacy takes centre stage and internal party decisions become binding, personal relationships, goodwill, and informal influence often give way to institutional realities. In such circumstances, there is little or absolutely nothing a traditional ruler can do to overturn party decisions.
Party mechanisms remain party mechanisms.
Internal contests inevitably produce victories and disappointments. However, political disappointment must not become a license to drag traditional institutions into disputes that properly belong within party structures.
More troubling are public insinuations and statements capable of inflaming passions, personalizing political outcomes, and damaging reputations without demonstrable proof.
Democratic disagreements should be resolved through established party channels, lawful engagement, and political negotiations, not by assigning blame to a traditional institution whose constitutional and cultural mandate is to unite communities rather than divide them.
Oba Saheed Elegushi’s publicly stated position remains clear, consistent, and in line with the expected conduct of a traditional ruler: openness to all, support for peace, commitment to community development, and respect for the legitimate choices and processes of democratic politics irrespective of tribe, religion, or political affiliation.
The issue, therefore, appears far less about palace politics than about the enduring and often uncompromising reality of party supremacy within APC politics ,a system that has repeatedly demonstrated that no personal relationship, emotional expectation, political sentiment, or individual ambition automatically overrides party authority.
It is also worth noting that Hon. Noheem Babatunde Adams has served as a member of the Lagos State House of Assembly since 2017, having first emerged through the September 30, 2017 bye-election to represent Eti-Osa Constituency I. His political experience and understanding of party structures make it reasonable to assume familiarity with the complexities, negotiations, and realities that often shape internal party contests.
As Lagos inches toward another political cycle, preserving the line between party disputes and traditional institutions is not merely advisable it is necessary for protecting democratic engagement, institutional respect, and the enduring dignity of the throne.
Party supremacy, not palace politics. That distinction matters.
0 Comments