Former Ekiti State Deputy Governor, Prof. Kolapo Olusola-Eleka, has delivered a scathing and unapologetic response to ex-Governor Ayodele Fayose, tearing into what he described as a dangerous mindset of political ownership and entitlement.
Fayose had earlier claimed that if Eleka had won the 2018 governorship election under his backing, he would have “repaid him with evil” a remark that has now sparked a fierce rebuttal from the former deputy governor.
In a strongly worded statement, Eleka did not hold back. He challenged Fayose’s assertion as baseless, speculative, and rooted in a troubling belief that political support translates into lifelong control.
“At the heart of this issue,” Eleka fired, “is the false notion that sponsorship equals ownership that a leader must surrender his conscience, independence, and constitutional duty to the whims of a political benefactor. That idea is not only wrong; it is dangerous to democracy.”
Eleka reminded Fayose and the public that the same man now casting doubts on his character once trusted him enough to appoint him as deputy governor and later hand him the PDP governorship ticket in 2018.
“You cannot, in one breath, present a man to the people as competent, loyal, and worthy of leadership, and in another breath, years later, paint him as someone capable of betrayal without a single shred of evidence,” he stated.
In what appeared to be a direct jab at Fayose’s credibility, Eleka questioned the sudden shift in narrative, suggesting that the former governor’s comment says more about his own political expectations than about any proven conduct.
“This is not about history because history is clear. This is about revisionism, where facts are replaced with personal disappointment and unfounded assumptions,” he added.
Eleka went further, dismantling Fayose’s claim as nothing more than a hypothetical attack built on events that never happened.
“I never governed Ekiti State. There is no record, no decision, no action to judge. So what exactly is this claim of ‘evil’ based on? Imagination? Suspicion? Or simply the fear of a leader who would not be controlled?” he asked pointedly.
The former deputy governor stressed that democracy thrives on independence of thought, not blind loyalty, warning against a political culture where leaders are expected to remain permanently subservient to their predecessors.
“Mentorship is not servitude. Support is not a lifetime contract of obedience. Leadership demands courage, principle, and accountability to the people — not to any individual,” Eleka declared.
In closing, Eleka’s response sent a clear and unmistakable message: he refuses to be reduced to a political appendage or judged by speculative narratives.
His words underscore a deeper clash — not just between two political figures, but between two ideologies: one rooted in control, the other in independence.
And in that battle, Eleka has made it clear where he stands.
