When former Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose recently suggested that he, the Olubadan of Ibadanland, Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja, and other political actors would work together against Governor Seyi Makinde’s camp in future political battles, the statement immediately generated controversy across Oyo State. To some, it was merely another provocative Fayoseremark. To others, it confirmed what many had quietly suspected for months, that the Olubadan throne may be increasingly entangled in the political realignments ahead of 2027. But perhaps the real question is not whether the Olubadanhas returned to politics.Perhaps the more important question is whether politics has refused to leave him alone. The distinction matters.

Because unlike most traditional rulers in Nigeria, the current Olubadan did not arrive at the palace from the civil service, academia, business, or the military. Oba Rashidi Ladoja arrived at the throne as one of the most accomplished politicians in OyoState’s history. Before becoming the 44th Olubadan of Ibadanland, Ladoja had been a senator, a governor, a political strategist, a party leader, a kingmaker, and one of the most influential voices in South-West politics.

For decades, he was not merely participating in politics. He was shaping it. And that reality creates a unique challenge for the throne he now occupies. Can a man who spent most of his life navigating political intrigues suddenly become politically invisible because he now wears a crown? Or is it unrealistic to expect politics to disappear from the life of a man whose influence helped shape the modern political history of OyoState? These questions have become increasingly relevant in recent months. The Fayose controversy did not emerge in isolation.

Earlier this year, Fayose publicly alleged that Governor Seyi Makinde was plotting to remove the Olubadan from the throne, a claim strongly denied by both the Oyo State Government and the Olubadan’s palace. The monarch’s media aides described the allegation as baseless, while the state government dismissed it as political propaganda. Fayose nevertheless doubled down, even paying a solidarity visit to the monarch in Ibadan.  What made the episode remarkable was not necessarily the allegation itself. It was the fact that the Olubadan suddenly found himself at the centre of a political confrontation involving some of the most influential political figures in the South-West.

Within days, the public conversation was no longer about governance. It was about where the Olubadan stood. Was he with Makinde? Was he against Makinde? Was he being used by Makinde’s opponents? Or was he simply a traditional ruler being dragged into battles he did not create?

The irony is that the Olubadan himself has repeatedly rejected attempts to portray him as a political actor. At one point, the palace publicly cautioned against dragging the revered throne into partisan politics and dismissed reports linking the monarch to efforts to destabilise the state government. However, perception in politics often becomes reality. And this is where the issue becomes bigger than Fayose.

The Olubadan institution occupies a unique place in Yoruba political culture. Long before colonial rule, Yoruba monarchs were not ceremonial figures. They were political authorities. Kings exercised executive powers, settled disputes, directed military affairs, administered territories, and influenced economic decisions. The modern expectation that monarchs remain politically neutral is largely a product of constitutional democracy. Traditional rulers today possess enormous moral influence but very limited constitutional power.

Their authority depends less on law and more on legitimacy. That legitimacy is built on one critical foundation: neutrality. The Olubadan is expected to be the father of all Ibadan people. Not the father of PDP members. Not the father of APC members. Not the father of Governor Makinde’s supporters. Not the father of Makinde’s opponents. The father of everyone. The moment a traditional ruler begins to be seen as belonging to one political camp, the institution risks losing part of the moral authority that makes it powerful in the first place. This is why every public disagreement involving the palace attracts extraordinary attention.

In truth, the relationship between Ladoja and Makinde has always been politically fascinating. The two men have, at different times, been allies, collaborators, competitors, and independent power centres within Oyo politics. Their political journeys have intersected repeatedly over the last two decades. There have been periods of cooperation and periods of disagreement.

Questions surrounding chieftaincy reforms, the elevation of high chiefs, succession matters, and broader issues concerning traditional institutions have occasionally placed both camps on opposite sides of public debates. Even before ascending the throne, Ladoja had found himself in legal and political disputes connected to chieftaincy matters involving the state government and the Olubadan system. None of this automatically proves political hostility. However, it helps explain why observers are quick to interpret every interaction through a political lens. And that lens will only become stronger as 2027 approaches.

Clearly, Oyo State moves closer to the 2027 governorship election, the political significance of the Olubadan institution becomes even more obvious. Governor Seyi Makinde cannot contest for another term, and the struggle over who succeeds him has already begun quietly. Political camps are emerging and potential candidates are positioning themselves. Old alliances are being reassessed, political partnerships are being explored. In such an atmosphere, every influential institution becomes politically valuable. And few institutions in Oyo State possess the symbolic influence of the Olubadan throne. This creates a delicate situation for the palace.

Politicians naturally seek legitimacy, and associating with respected traditional institutions can provide that legitimacy. A photograph, a visit, a statement, or even a rumour can become a political weapon. The result is that traditional rulers are often dragged into political contests whether they intend to participate or not. This reality is even more complicated in the case of Oba Ladoja because of his political history.

Unlike many monarchs who enter the palace after retiring from public service, he arrived with decades of political relationships. His friends remain politicians, his allies remain politicians even his former rivals remain politicians. Many of those seeking political relevance in 2027 were either his associates, opponents, protégés, or contemporaries. Expecting complete political isolation may therefore be unrealistic. However, the responsibility of kingship demands restraint as politics requires competition. Kingship requires balance and a politician succeeds by choosing sides. A monarch preserves his authority by standing above them. This is why the current debate deserves graving reflection.

The issue is not whether Oba Ladoja has political opinions. Every citizen has political opinions. The issue is not whether politicians will continue to seek his audience or support. They certainly will. The real question is whether the Olubadaninstitution can continue to command universal respect if sections of the public begin to perceive it as a participant in political struggles. The greatest threat to traditional institutions is not always direct confrontation. Sometimes, it is perception. Once neutrality becomes questionable, every action becomes political. Every visitor becomes suspicious. Every statement becomes interpreted as a political message. Every disagreement becomes evidence of alignment. And even silence can be interpreted as support for one side or another.

Another layer that adds complexity to this debate is the relationship between Oba Rashidi Ladoja and Senator Sharafadeen Alli, a prominent Oyo politician whose name has continued to feature in discussions surrounding the 2027 governorship race and the opposition’s political calculations. Alli, a former Secretary to the Oyo State Government during Ladoja’s administration and a serving senator under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), shares a long political history with the Olubadan.

Their relationship predates Ladoja’s ascension to the throne. It was built during years of political interaction, shared experiences, and participation in Oyo State’s political ecosystem. However, because one of the individuals involved now occupies the revered Olubadan throne, every interaction between the monarch and active politicians naturally attracts greater scrutiny.

For supporters of Governor Seyi Makinde, such relationships raise questions about whether old political networks are being revived ahead of the 2027 succession battle. They argue that the presence of influential opposition figures around the Olubadancould create the perception of an emerging political coalition against the governor’s influence.

However, another perspective exists. Those close to the palace may argue that the relationship between a monarch and politicians should not automatically be interpreted as political alignment. A traditional ruler who spent decades in public life will naturally have relationships across political divides. Maintaining contact with politicians, according to this argument, is part of the responsibility of a monarch who must engage leaders, stakeholders, and citizens for the development of his people.

The question, therefore, is not whether the Olubadan knows politicians. That would be almost impossible to avoid. The real question is whether those relationships create the perception that the palace has moved from being a neutral institution into becoming a political centre. And in the highly competitive atmosphere of Oyo politics, perception alone can become a powerful political force.

Interestingly, when Oba Rashidi Ladoja became the Olubadan of Ibadanland, he publicly stated that he was no longer a politician but a father to all. That declaration reflected the traditional expectation that once an individual ascends the throne, personal political history must give way to the larger responsibility of representing the entire community. However, concerns about maintaining the dignity and neutrality of the throne have continued to surface.

Some traditional leaders and stakeholders have advised the monarch to protect the sanctity of the institution by avoiding situations that could be interpreted as partisan. The Balogun of Ibadanland, Oba Ajibola, for instance, previously urged the Olubadan to uphold the dignity and neutrality of the office, stressing that the throne represents unity and should not become entangled in political conflicts.

Similarly, the Central Council of Ibadan Indigenes (CCII) has consistently emphasised that the Olubadan stool is a unifying institution that belongs to all Ibadan people, regardless of political affiliation. These concerns are not necessarily accusations against the monarch. Rather, they reflect the enormous responsibility attached to the throne. The higher the respect an institution commands, the greater the caution required to protect it.

Now this recent televised interview by Ayo Fayose intensified the debate. In what many interpreted as a declaration of political confrontation against Governor Makinde’s camp, Fayose stated that in the coming election, “we will work against you,” while referencing the Olubadan and other individuals perceived to be opposed to Makinde’s political structure. The statement immediately generated reactions across Oyo State. For some, it was simply Fayose using influential names to strengthen his political message. For others, the fact that the former Ekitigovernor publicly mentioned the Olubadan in that context raised serious questions.

The silence of the palace following the statement also became a subject of public discussion, with some wondering whether the monarch’s silence was deliberate or simply an indication that he did not wish to engage in political controversy. However, silence should not automatically be interpreted as agreement. Traditional rulers often choose restraint precisely because responding to every political statement can drag them deeper into political conversations. However, the controversy reveals a larger reality. The Olubadan institution has become too influential to escape political interpretation.

The Final Question-Can the Olubadan remain above politics? Ultimately, what is at stake is bigger than Ayo Fayose. It is bigger than Seyi Makinde. It is bigger than the 2027 governorship election. What is at stake is the perception and future credibility of one of Nigeria’s most respected traditional institutions. Oba Ladoja’s political history is undeniable. His relationships with politicians are undeniable. His influence is undeniable. But the challenge of kingship is that influence must be exercised carefully.

The Olubadan does not derive his greatest strength from political power. He derives it from moral authority. And moral authority depends on trust. The debate, therefore, is not simply whether the Olubadan is back to politics. Perhaps the deeper question is whether politics will allow the Olubadan to remain only a king.

When former Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose recently suggested that he, the Olubadan of Ibadanland, Oba Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja, and other political actors would work together against Governor Seyi Makinde’s camp in future political battles, the statement immediately generated controversy across Oyo State. To some, it was merely another provocative Fayoseremark. To others, it confirmed what many had quietly suspected for months, that the Olubadan throne may be increasingly entangled in the political realignments ahead of 2027. But perhaps the real question is not whether the Olubadanhas returned to politics.Perhaps the more important question is whether politics has refused to leave him alone. The distinction matters.

Because unlike most traditional rulers in Nigeria, the current Olubadan did not arrive at the palace from the civil service, academia, business, or the military. Oba Rashidi Ladoja arrived at the throne as one of the most accomplished politicians in OyoState’s history. Before becoming the 44th Olubadan of Ibadanland, Ladoja had been a senator, a governor, a political strategist, a party leader, a kingmaker, and one of the most influential voices in South-West politics.

For decades, he was not merely participating in politics. He was shaping it. And that reality creates a unique challenge for the throne he now occupies. Can a man who spent most of his life navigating political intrigues suddenly become politically invisible because he now wears a crown? Or is it unrealistic to expect politics to disappear from the life of a man whose influence helped shape the modern political history of OyoState? These questions have become increasingly relevant in recent months. The Fayose controversy did not emerge in isolation.

Earlier this year, Fayose publicly alleged that Governor Seyi Makinde was plotting to remove the Olubadan from the throne, a claim strongly denied by both the Oyo State Government and the Olubadan’s palace. The monarch’s media aides described the allegation as baseless, while the state government dismissed it as political propaganda. Fayose nevertheless doubled down, even paying a solidarity visit to the monarch in Ibadan.  What made the episode remarkable was not necessarily the allegation itself. It was the fact that the Olubadan suddenly found himself at the centre of a political confrontation involving some of the most influential political figures in the South-West.

Within days, the public conversation was no longer about governance. It was about where the Olubadan stood. Was he with Makinde? Was he against Makinde? Was he being used by Makinde’s opponents? Or was he simply a traditional ruler being dragged into battles he did not create?

The irony is that the Olubadan himself has repeatedly rejected attempts to portray him as a political actor. At one point, the palace publicly cautioned against dragging the revered throne into partisan politics and dismissed reports linking the monarch to efforts to destabilise the state government. However, perception in politics often becomes reality. And this is where the issue becomes bigger than Fayose.

The Olubadan institution occupies a unique place in Yoruba political culture. Long before colonial rule, Yoruba monarchs were not ceremonial figures. They were political authorities. Kings exercised executive powers, settled disputes, directed military affairs, administered territories, and influenced economic decisions. The modern expectation that monarchs remain politically neutral is largely a product of constitutional democracy. Traditional rulers today possess enormous moral influence but very limited constitutional power.

Their authority depends less on law and more on legitimacy. That legitimacy is built on one critical foundation: neutrality. The Olubadan is expected to be the father of all Ibadan people. Not the father of PDP members. Not the father of APC members. Not the father of Governor Makinde’s supporters. Not the father of Makinde’s opponents. The father of everyone. The moment a traditional ruler begins to be seen as belonging to one political camp, the institution risks losing part of the moral authority that makes it powerful in the first place. This is why every public disagreement involving the palace attracts extraordinary attention.

In truth, the relationship between Ladoja and Makinde has always been politically fascinating. The two men have, at different times, been allies, collaborators, competitors, and independent power centres within Oyo politics. Their political journeys have intersected repeatedly over the last two decades. There have been periods of cooperation and periods of disagreement.

Questions surrounding chieftaincy reforms, the elevation of high chiefs, succession matters, and broader issues concerning traditional institutions have occasionally placed both camps on opposite sides of public debates. Even before ascending the throne, Ladoja had found himself in legal and political disputes connected to chieftaincy matters involving the state government and the Olubadan system. None of this automatically proves political hostility. However, it helps explain why observers are quick to interpret every interaction through a political lens. And that lens will only become stronger as 2027 approaches.

Clearly, Oyo State moves closer to the 2027 governorship election, the political significance of the Olubadan institution becomes even more obvious. Governor Seyi Makinde cannot contest for another term, and the struggle over who succeeds him has already begun quietly. Political camps are emerging and potential candidates are positioning themselves. Old alliances are being reassessed, political partnerships are being explored. In such an atmosphere, every influential institution becomes politically valuable. And few institutions in Oyo State possess the symbolic influence of the Olubadan throne. This creates a delicate situation for the palace.

Politicians naturally seek legitimacy, and associating with respected traditional institutions can provide that legitimacy. A photograph, a visit, a statement, or even a rumour can become a political weapon. The result is that traditional rulers are often dragged into political contests whether they intend to participate or not. This reality is even more complicated in the case of Oba Ladoja because of his political history.

Unlike many monarchs who enter the palace after retiring from public service, he arrived with decades of political relationships. His friends remain politicians, his allies remain politicians even his former rivals remain politicians. Many of those seeking political relevance in 2027 were either his associates, opponents, protégés, or contemporaries. Expecting complete political isolation may therefore be unrealistic. However, the responsibility of kingship demands restraint as politics requires competition. Kingship requires balance and a politician succeeds by choosing sides. A monarch preserves his authority by standing above them. This is why the current debate deserves graving reflection.

The issue is not whether Oba Ladoja has political opinions. Every citizen has political opinions. The issue is not whether politicians will continue to seek his audience or support. They certainly will. The real question is whether the Olubadaninstitution can continue to command universal respect if sections of the public begin to perceive it as a participant in political struggles. The greatest threat to traditional institutions is not always direct confrontation. Sometimes, it is perception. Once neutrality becomes questionable, every action becomes political. Every visitor becomes suspicious. Every statement becomes interpreted as a political message. Every disagreement becomes evidence of alignment. And even silence can be interpreted as support for one side or another.

Another layer that adds complexity to this debate is the relationship between Oba Rashidi Ladoja and Senator Sharafadeen Alli, a prominent Oyo politician whose name has continued to feature in discussions surrounding the 2027 governorship race and the opposition’s political calculations. Alli, a former Secretary to the Oyo State Government during Ladoja’s administration and a serving senator under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), shares a long political history with the Olubadan.

Their relationship predates Ladoja’s ascension to the throne. It was built during years of political interaction, shared experiences, and participation in Oyo State’s political ecosystem. However, because one of the individuals involved now occupies the revered Olubadan throne, every interaction between the monarch and active politicians naturally attracts greater scrutiny.

For supporters of Governor Seyi Makinde, such relationships raise questions about whether old political networks are being revived ahead of the 2027 succession battle. They argue that the presence of influential opposition figures around the Olubadancould create the perception of an emerging political coalition against the governor’s influence.

However, another perspective exists. Those close to the palace may argue that the relationship between a monarch and politicians should not automatically be interpreted as political alignment. A traditional ruler who spent decades in public life will naturally have relationships across political divides. Maintaining contact with politicians, according to this argument, is part of the responsibility of a monarch who must engage leaders, stakeholders, and citizens for the development of his people.

The question, therefore, is not whether the Olubadan knows politicians. That would be almost impossible to avoid. The real question is whether those relationships create the perception that the palace has moved from being a neutral institution into becoming a political centre. And in the highly competitive atmosphere of Oyo politics, perception alone can become a powerful political force.

Interestingly, when Oba Rashidi Ladoja became the Olubadan of Ibadanland, he publicly stated that he was no longer a politician but a father to all. That declaration reflected the traditional expectation that once an individual ascends the throne, personal political history must give way to the larger responsibility of representing the entire community. However, concerns about maintaining the dignity and neutrality of the throne have continued to surface.

Some traditional leaders and stakeholders have advised the monarch to protect the sanctity of the institution by avoiding situations that could be interpreted as partisan. The Balogun of Ibadanland, Oba Ajibola, for instance, previously urged the Olubadan to uphold the dignity and neutrality of the office, stressing that the throne represents unity and should not become entangled in political conflicts.

Similarly, the Central Council of Ibadan Indigenes (CCII) has consistently emphasised that the Olubadan stool is a unifying institution that belongs to all Ibadan people, regardless of political affiliation. These concerns are not necessarily accusations against the monarch. Rather, they reflect the enormous responsibility attached to the throne. The higher the respect an institution commands, the greater the caution required to protect it.

Now this recent televised interview by Ayo Fayose intensified the debate. In what many interpreted as a declaration of political confrontation against Governor Makinde’s camp, Fayose stated that in the coming election, “we will work against you,” while referencing the Olubadan and other individuals perceived to be opposed to Makinde’s political structure. The statement immediately generated reactions across Oyo State. For some, it was simply Fayose using influential names to strengthen his political message. For others, the fact that the former Ekitigovernor publicly mentioned the Olubadan in that context raised serious questions.

The silence of the palace following the statement also became a subject of public discussion, with some wondering whether the monarch’s silence was deliberate or simply an indication that he did not wish to engage in political controversy. However, silence should not automatically be interpreted as agreement. Traditional rulers often choose restraint precisely because responding to every political statement can drag them deeper into political conversations. However, the controversy reveals a larger reality. The Olubadan institution has become too influential to escape political interpretation.

The Final Question-Can the Olubadan remain above politics? Ultimately, what is at stake is bigger than Ayo Fayose. It is bigger than Seyi Makinde. It is bigger than the 2027 governorship election. What is at stake is the perception and future credibility of one of Nigeria’s most respected traditional institutions. Oba Ladoja’s political history is undeniable. His relationships with politicians are undeniable. His influence is undeniable. But the challenge of kingship is that influence must be exercised carefully.

The Olubadan does not derive his greatest strength from political power. He derives it from moral authority. And moral authority depends on trust. The debate, therefore, is not simply whether the Olubadan is back to politics. Perhaps the deeper question is whether politics will allow the Olubadan to remain only a king.