A recent Facebook post by Rikwense Muri, a known critic of Governor Agbu Kefas and TY Danjuma, has ignited a fiery debate on social media. Muri claimed that Gov. Kefas is the only governor in Nigeria who has former Senators, Ministers, Ambassadors, Speakers, and Retired Federal Permanent Secretaries as aides. He suggested that relying on connections rather than capacity would ultimately lead to failure, and implied that such positions should be lobbied for by the governor’s children.
The link of the post https://www.facebook.com/100000951567949/posts/pfbid0fqx4GdcVjk52rypn2y6wach9Bx7J5rq1CoAWkjB8ZuPtXhE3yJXyQUKvv1Zs2PeEl/?app=fbl
In response to Muri’s post, Abdulhakeem Idris, a supporter of Gov. Kefas, provided a detailed rebuttal:
“First, your claim that Gov. Kefas is the only governor in Nigeria with such high-profile aides needs verification. Many governors and high-ranking officials often surround themselves with experienced and influential individuals to leverage their expertise and connections for governance. Secondly, the assertion that these appointments are purely based on connections rather than capacity is speculative and lacks evidence. High-profile individuals usually bring a wealth of experience and skills that can be invaluable in governance. It is important to consider the contributions these aides might make, rather than dismissing them outright based on their past titles.
Thirdly, your suggestion that relying on connections will lead to a downfall and that such positions should be lobbied for by children is problematic. It implies a disregard for merit and experience, suggesting that positions should be reserved through lobbying rather than earned through qualifications and capability. This perspective undermines the principles of meritocracy and good governance. Your argument appears to be based on unverified assumptions and overlooks the potential benefits of having experienced aides. It’s crucial to assess the performance and contributions of Gov. Kefas’s team objectively rather than making blanket judgments about their appointments.”
The exchange highlights the ongoing debate over the use of political connections versus merit in government appointments, with strong opinions on both sides.
