By Bilesanmi Abayomi
For any society to experience measurable growth and sustainable development, every stakeholder must play its role effectively. A functional democracy requires not only a ruling party but also a vibrant opposition, active civil society organisations (CSOs), responsible community-based organisations, an informed media, and engaged residents.
In Kosofe, however, the burden of demanding accountability appears to have fallen largely on residents and sections of the media, while opposition parties and many CSOs remained conspicuously silent for years. Critical social, economic, and political issues affecting governance were repeatedly brought to public attention by concerned citizens and media practitioners, yet those expected to serve as institutional watchdogs were largely absent.
Ironically, the vacuum created by inactive opposition parties and civil society groups was reportedly filled by aggrieved members within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Internal party members allegedly assumed opposition roles by filing petitions to agencies such as the EFCC and ICPC, engaging legal counsel, and pursuing cases in magistrate and high courts.
Yet, once party leaders intervened and settlements or compensations emerged, many of those issues suddenly transformed from public-interest matters into what was described as “family affairs.” This development raises broader questions about consistency, sincerity, and the motivations driving political confrontations within the system.
No society can truly progress when individuals and groups remain silent in the face of obvious concerns, only to become vocal when personal interests are threatened. Advocacy loses credibility when it surfaces mainly during election seasons or when political calculations demand it.
The prolonged silence of many opposition parties and civil society organisations over the last three years has also drawn criticism from political observers and residents alike. Democracy, analysts argue, cannot thrive where opposition politics becomes seasonal activism, emerging only a few months before elections.
The responsibility of opposition parties and CSOs is continuous: to commend government when necessary, provide constructive criticism, offer alternatives, and challenge policies or actions that fall below public expectations.
Residents, too, have responsibilities. Civic engagement cannot be outsourced entirely to politicians, activists, or journalists. Communities thrive when citizens remain consistently interested in governance beyond campaign periods.
As another election cycle approaches, there are growing calls for reflection among all stakeholders. Regardless of the outcome of future elections, opposition parties and civil society groups are being urged to avoid returning to what some residents describe as the “Beautiful Sleep Syndrome” — a culture of silence, inactivity, and selective engagement.
At the same time, recognition has been given to individuals and groups who have continued to advocate for accountability and good governance despite pressure, sentiment, or political interests. Their efforts, observers say, demonstrate that genuine civic responsibility remains essential to democratic development.
Ultimately, democracy functions best when accountability is not seasonal, criticism remains constructive, and public interest is placed above personal gain or political convenience.