The political landscape of Benue State, Nigeria, has been marked by a contentious exchange between the immediate past governor, Samuel Ortom, and his successor, Hyacinth Alia. The central issue revolves around the persistent challenge of herdsmen attacks and the resulting loss of life, with both leaders offering conflicting narratives about the severity of the problem and the effectiveness of their respective administrations in addressing it. Governor Alia, speaking at a church service, claimed to have brought peace to the state, asserting that the frequent attacks and mass burials that characterized Ortom’s tenure had ceased under his leadership. He further accused Ortom of fabricating a 2021 assassination attempt. These pronouncements ignited a sharp rebuttal from Ortom, who, through his media aide, detailed numerous instances of mass burials under Alia’s administration, accusing the incumbent governor of concealing the truth about the ongoing violence.
Ortom’s response painted a starkly different picture of the security situation in Benue State. He cataloged a series of attacks by herdsmen across various zones of the state, including Ukum, Logo, Katsina-Ala, Kwande, Gwer East, Gwer West, Guma, Makurdi, Agatu, and Otukpo, leading to numerous mass burials. This directly contradicted Alia’s claim of having achieved peace and security. By highlighting these incidents, Ortom sought to expose what he perceived as a deliberate attempt by the Alia administration to downplay the ongoing violence and create a false impression of stability. The contrasting narratives presented by the two leaders underscore the deep divisions within the state’s political sphere and raise questions about the true extent of the security challenges facing Benue State.
The heart of the dispute lies in the divergent approaches of the two governors towards addressing the recurring clashes between farmers and herders. Ortom emphasized his unwavering stance against what he termed the “expansionist agenda” of pastoralists seeking to occupy Benue lands. He highlighted his administration’s enactment of a law banning open grazing, a move that drew the ire of those advocating for open grazing rights. This policy, Ortom argued, was a key factor in the threats and intimidation he faced, including an alleged assassination attempt. He presented himself as a staunch defender of the interests of Benue’s people, willing to withstand pressure from the federal government to protect the state’s land. In contrast, Alia’s approach, while not explicitly detailed in the initial exchange, appeared to focus on achieving peace through other means, though the specifics remained unclear.
Ortom’s statement further served to defend his legacy and justify his actions while in office. He insisted that he had no regrets about the decisions he made, particularly his firm stance against open grazing. He portrayed himself as a courageous leader who prioritized the well-being of his people, even in the face of significant pressure and personal risk. By highlighting the alleged assassination attempt and the challenges he faced from the federal government, Ortom aimed to solidify his image as a principled leader who stood up for his constituents. He contrasted his actions with Alia’s alleged attempts to downplay the ongoing violence, suggesting a lack of transparency and accountability on the part of the current administration.
In a concluding remark that carried a tone of both advice and subtle rebuke, Ortom urged Alia to focus on fulfilling his promises to the people of Benue rather than dwelling on the past. He emphasized the transient nature of political power, reminding Alia that he too would one day become a “former governor.” This served as a call for Alia to prioritize the needs of the people and deliver on the promises he made during his campaign. Ortom suggested that instead of criticizing his predecessor’s actions, Alia should concentrate on leveraging the current opportunity to improve the lives of the people of Benue and address the ongoing security challenges effectively. He implied that dwelling on the past was a distraction from the important work of governance.
The public exchange between Ortom and Alia reveals a deeper underlying tension within Benue State, highlighting the complexities of the farmer-herder conflict and the political maneuvering surrounding it. The conflicting narratives offered by the two leaders raise crucial questions about the true state of security in the region and the effectiveness of the respective administrations’ policies. Furthermore, the accusations and counter-accusations point to a potential struggle for political control and influence within the state. The situation calls for a thorough and impartial investigation into the ongoing violence and a commitment from all stakeholders to finding lasting solutions to the farmer-herder conflict in Benue State. Ultimately, the well-being and security of the people should be the paramount concern, transcending political posturing and personal agendas.
