Faleke’s Hamzat Pronouncement and the Dangerous Normalisation of State Capture in Lagos Politics
James Abiodun Faleke’s public directive urging Ikeja residents and by extension Lagosians to support Dr. Kadri Obafemi Hamzat for the 2027 governorship is not merely an endorsement gone too far. It is symptomatic of a far deeper and more troubling pathology within Lagos politics: the creeping normalisation of elite-managed democracy and the dangerous assumption that the political destiny of the state can be predetermined by a closed circle of insiders.
What Faleke communicated was not support. It was preselection.
His remarks conveyed the unmistakable impression that the contest for the highest office in Lagos may already be treated in certain quarters as an internal arrangement to be ratified, not a democratic process to be contested.
That is precisely how democratic institutions are hollowed out not by military force, but by the gradual substitution of public choice with elite consensus.
Ikeja, as the administrative capital and symbolic political centre of Lagos, cannot and must not become the staging ground for what increasingly resembles a managed succession system. To use Ikeja as the launchpad for an early coronation of a preferred candidate is to reduce one of the state’s most politically conscious constituencies to a ceremonial instrument in a broader architecture of political choreography.
Implications extend far beyond Ikeja.
Faleke’s pronouncement reflects a troubling belief within sections of the political establishment that Lagos can continue indefinitely under a quasi-feudal arrangement in which a narrow network of insiders determines leadership outcomes in advance, rotates power internally, and presents the electorate with carefully managed inevitabilities rather than genuine choices.
That model may have endured in the past. It is now under growing strain.
Lagos in 2027 is not Lagos of old.
Its electorate is younger, more informed, more impatient, and increasingly hostile to the perception that democratic outcomes are scripted before campaigns even begin.
What makes Faleke’s intervention especially provocative is not simply its substance, but its posture the confidence of a political actor speaking not as though he were participating in democratic debate, but as though he were announcing the decision of a governing board.
Such rhetoric deepens public cynicism and reinforces the perception that electoral politics in Lagos is becoming less about persuasion and performance, and more about elite certification.
It also reopens broader questions about legitimacy, inclusion, and who gets to define the political future of Lagos. In a state where debates over representation and political belonging remain highly sensitive, it is politically tone-deaf for any actor particularly one whose roots lie outside the indigenous political fabric of the state to assume the posture of gatekeeper over its future.
Political relevance in Lagos does not confer proprietary rights over Lagos.
If Dr. Hamzat seeks to govern, he should present himself to the electorate through open democratic competition, defend his record, articulate his vision, and earn the mandate of the people. Any perception that his candidacy is being assembled through insider endorsements before the race has even properly begun does him no favours and undermines the legitimacy of his ambitions.
The core issue here is larger than Hamzat. Larger than Faleke.
It is whether Lagos will continue down the path of managed democracy where power is circulated within a protected elite ecosystem or whether it will embrace a more open and genuinely competitive political order.
That is the real debate Faleke has inadvertently triggered and the answer from Lagosians should be unequivocal.
No politician can pre-allocate the future of Lagos.
No constituency not even Ikeja exists to validate elite succession plans.
The governorship of Lagos is not the property of any caucus, clique, or political syndicate.
Democracy loses meaning when leaders are effectively selected before voters are consulted.
If Lagos is to remain the democratic pace-setter it claims to be, then its people must resist every attempt subtle or overt to convert elections into coronations.
Faleke’s comments should therefore be treated not as a routine endorsement, but as a warning signal: a revealing glimpse into how sections of the political elite still view Lagos not as a republic of citizens, but as an enterprise to be managed from above.
That mindset must be rejected.
Because once a political class begins to believe it can choose leaders without consequence, democracy itself becomes little more than theatre.
~ Ayo Olusegun writes from Alausa.
