LEADERSHIP SELECTION AND THE DEVELOPMENT QUESTION IN EDO CENTRAL: A CALL FOR A PARADIGM SHIFT
*Introduction: The Nexus Between Leadership and Development*
Since the return of democratic governance in Nigeria in 1999, the leadership selection process in Edo Central Senatorial District — like in many parts of Nigeria — has been largely skewed towards a dysfunctional process and procedure. Primordial sentiments, financial inducement, godfatherism, and political patronage have often trumped competence, character, and capacity.
The result has been predictable: stunted development, infrastructural decay, youth unemployment, and the absence of a coherent development blueprint for Esanland.
The fundamental truth remains: *A people cannot rise above the quality of their leaders.* Except we correct this anomaly by deliberately sending our _Best Eleven_ — our most competent, credible, and visionary sons and daughters — to the National Assembly and all elective positions, development may continue to elude Edo Central.
*The Cost of Dysfunctional Leadership Selection*
In the last 26 years of democracy, Edo Central has produced Senators, House of Representatives members, and State Assembly members. Yet, when measured against development indices — industrialization, quality of educational institutions, healthcare, rural roads, and human capital development — the district lags behind its potential.
Why? Because our selection process rewards loyalty to political godfathers, not loyalty to the people; it rewards ability to share money, not ability to initiate laws; it rewards noise-making, not knowledge.
*Lessons from Developed Nations: How Great Societies Choose Their Best*
The world over, developed societies have institutionalized merit-based leadership recruitment. Edo Central must learn.
*1. The United States Model: Primaries, Debates and Track Record*
In the US, leadership selection is rigorous. Aspirants must go through open primaries, televised debates, town hall meetings, and intense public scrutiny of their tax records, academic credentials, and past service. The electorate interrogates ideas, not tribes. A Senator is expected to have legislative depth, constituency engagement, and policy clarity. No one gets to the US Senate by accident.
*2. The United Kingdom Model: Party Ideology and Community Service*
In the UK, political parties are ideological institutions. You cannot emerge as a candidate unless you have a history of community service, intellectual contribution to party policy, and proven integrity. The Labour and Conservative parties have internal screening that filters out mediocrity. Your ward knows you.
*3. The Singapore Model: Meritocracy as State Policy*
Singapore, under Lee Kuan Yew, made meritocracy the cornerstone of governance. Leaders are head-hunted from top professionals, scholars, and military strategists. Leadership is not seen as a reward for thuggery, but as a call to national duty for the best and brightest. That is why a small city-state became a first-world economy in 30 years.
*4. The German Model: Technical Competence and Party Structure*
Germany’s federal system ensures that those who go to the Bundestag have proven competence in their fields — engineers, economists, educationists — not just party loyalists. The proportional representation system forces parties to present credible lists.
*The Edo Central Paradox*
Edo Central is blessed. We have Professors, accomplished businessmen, technocrats in the diaspora, seasoned administrators, and principled politicians. We have a highly educated and politically conscious population.
This is our _Best Eleven_.
Yet, our political system often sidelines them and elects the lowest common denominator. We cannot continue to do the same thing and expect different results.
*The Way Forward: Sending Our Best Eleven*
To correct this trajectory, we must:
*1. Redefine Leadership Criteria:* Move from “who has money” to “who has ideas.” Our standard must be Competence, Character, Capacity, and Compassion for the people.
*2. Institutionalize Town Hall Interrogation:* Every aspirant must face the people of Esanland in an open debate to present his/her Development Blueprint for Edo Central.
*3. Strengthen Civil Society Oversight:* Esan Development Associations, Professional Bodies, Student Unions, and the Media must set a Leadership Scorecard.
*4. Embrace Inter-Generational Partnership:* Blend the wisdom of our elders with the energy and innovation of our vibrant youth.
*5. Focus on Development-Based Representation:* Our representatives must not be bench-warmers in Abuja. They must attract federal presence, sponsor impactful bills, and give quarterly account of stewardship.
*Conclusion*
Development is not an accident; it is a consequence of deliberate leadership choices. Esanland stands at a crossroads.
In 2027 and beyond, the choice is ours. Do we continue to recycle dysfunction and complain of underdevelopment? Or do we muster the courage to send our Best Eleven to the National Assembly and other elective positions — men and women who will make Esanland the pride of Edo State and Nigeria?
History will judge us by the leaders we choose.
Let us choose wisely. Let us choose our Best Eleven.
*Ojeabulu Justice, writes from NASS, Abuja.*
