By 2027, Ebonyi State will once again face a choice that goes beyond political parties, personalities and geographical interests.
The fundamental question before the people should be simple: Who is the most capable person to govern Ebonyi State and take it to the next level?
In my opinion, that should be the starting point of every serious conversation about the 2027 governorship election.
The debate has increasingly centred on the contest between the incumbent Governor, Francis Nwifuru of Ebonyi of the All Progressives Congress from Ebonyi North and the Peoples Democratic Party governorship candidate, Chief Ifeanyi Odii of Ebonyi South. Much of the argument surrounding the election is already being framed around the state’s informal zoning arrangement.
Supporters of Nwifuru argue that the existing political understanding requires Ebonyi North to retain the governorship for another four years. On the other side, supporters of Odii contend that the governorship should not be treated as the permanent entitlement of any geographical zone and that voters should be free to choose whoever they consider most competent.
I believe the second argument deserves serious consideration.
Zoning can promote fairness, but it should not replace competence.
Zoning is not inherently wrong.
In a politically diverse state such as Ebonyi, an understanding that power should rotate among the three senatorial zones can promote inclusion, reduce feelings of marginalisation and give different communities a sense of belonging.
But there is an important distinction between using zoning as a political arrangement for inclusion and turning zoning into a qualification for leadership.
Those are not the same thing.
A candidate does not become competent because he comes from Ebonyi North. Neither does a candidate become incompetent because he comes from Ebonyi South.
Geography tells us where a person comes from. It does not tell us whether that person can manage a state economy, attract investment, create jobs, improve infrastructure, strengthen institutions or provide effective public services.
That is why I believe Ebonyians should be careful not to let the phrase “it is our turn” become more important than the question, “Who can govern best?”
The governor of Ebonyi State should ultimately be the governor of all Ebonyians, not the political representative of one senatorial zone.
One phrase that has become prominent in the current political conversation is “4 plus 4”.
But I think we should ask a more fundamental question: What exactly has been achieved during the first four years, and what is the compelling reason for another four?
Incumbency should not automatically translate into entitlement.
A sitting governor seeking re-election should be able to place his record before the people and say, “This is what I inherited. This is what I promised. This is what I have delivered. This is what remains unfinished. And this is why I deserve another opportunity.”
That is the standard by which every incumbent should be judged.
If the record is convincing, voters will have every reason to support the incumbent. But if the principal argument is simply that a particular zone has not completed its turn, then we have moved away from performance-based democracy and towards geographical entitlement.
For me, the proper response is simple: defend the record, not merely the zone.
There are several reasons I believe Ebonyians should resist making zoning the overriding consideration in 2027.
First, excessive reliance on zoning can make geography more important than competence.
When voters are repeatedly told that a particular zone is “next,” the quality of the individual candidates can become secondary. The question shifts from who can govern Ebonyi best to whose turn it is.
That is not the best way to choose a state chief executive.
Second, it can discourage capable people from offering themselves for service.
Imagine a highly qualified Ebonyian with a strong professional record, an economic programme capable of attracting investment and a demonstrated commitment to the people. If the only response is that the person’s geographical zone is not entitled to produce the governor, then competence has effectively been placed below geography.
Third, zoning can weaken accountability.
When supporters begin to see an elected official primarily as the representative of their zone, legitimate criticism of that official can be interpreted as an attack on the zone itself. That is dangerous for democracy.
A governor should be questioned when policies fail, praised when they succeed and held accountable when public resources fail to produce the expected results.
Finally, an overemphasis on zoning can unintentionally create room for mediocrity.
If belonging to the “right” zone is enough to create political advantage, politicians have less incentive to compete on ideas, competence, integrity, economic vision and measurable results.
A healthy democracy should encourage politicians to ask: What can I offer the people?
It should not encourage them to ask only: Which zone am I from?
This is where the Odii question becomes important.
The case for Odii should not be based simply on the fact that he is from Ebonyi South.
That would contradict the very argument being made here.
The stronger case for Odii is that his candidacy can be evaluated on experience, enterprise, philanthropy, economic vision and his understanding of the challenges facing Ebonyi.
Odii is not entering the political conversation as someone whose only credential is geographical origin.
He comes with more than two decades of experience in business and private-sector management.
In his recent interview with Tribune, he argued that leadership requires vision, competence and the ability to deliver results, pointing to his experience in building businesses, creating jobs and managing complex organisations.
Running a state is obviously not the same thing as running a private company. Government requires political judgement, public accountability, institutional discipline and an understanding of the complexities of public administration.
But private-sector experience can nevertheless provide useful leadership skills—particularly in areas such as financial discipline, project management, entrepreneurship, investment attraction, job creation and efficient use of resources.
And these are precisely the areas Ebonyi needs to strengthen if it is to reduce dependence on federal allocations and build a more productive economy.
Odii’s economic argument deserves serious attention.
Perhaps the most important part of Odii’s case is not his political rhetoric but the economic direction he is proposing.
His Anyi G’Emeya agenda places economic diversification and industrialisation at the centre of his vision, alongside infrastructure, human-capital development, institutional reform, security and the rule of law.
This matters because Ebonyi cannot afford to remain an economy driven primarily by government spending.
The state has considerable agricultural potential, solid mineral resources, a growing urban economy and opportunities in tourism and small-scale enterprise. The real challenge is turning these resources into sustainable wealth.
Odii has spoken specifically about mechanised agriculture, agro-processing, irrigation, access to finance and creating value chains around crops such as rice, cassava and maize. His stated objective is not simply to produce agricultural commodities but to process them within Ebonyi, thereby creating jobs, businesses and additional revenue.
That is the kind of conversation I believe Ebonyi needs.
The question should no longer be merely how many roads a government can construct.
We should also be asking:
How many sustainable jobs are being created?
How many businesses are being attracted to the state?
How much local production is taking place?
How much agricultural value is being retained within Ebonyi?
How many young people are becoming employers rather than permanent job seekers?
These questions will determine Ebonyi’s economic future.
Another reason I believe Odii deserves serious consideration is the Ebele and AnyiChuks Foundation’s record.
The foundation’s documented activities include education, healthcare, youth and women’s empowerment, community development, shelter and grassroots sports. Its own records cite scholarships, educational materials, school infrastructure and livelihood support among its interventions.
Independent reporting also covers its humanitarian activities.
The Guardian reported that the foundation donated a school building and empowerment materials to people in Ebonyi, while The PUNCH reported that the organisation had constructed houses for indigent residents of the state.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the foundation also announced a N150m donation through Odii and reported additional contributions to health authorities and vulnerable households.
These interventions do not, by themselves, qualify anyone to become governor.
That distinction is important.
Philanthropy is not the same thing as governance, and private generosity cannot substitute for the ability to manage a government.
But philanthropy can reveal a person’s priorities, willingness to invest in people, and understanding of community needs.
In Odii’s case, that record is relevant because it predates his current political ambition.
The argument from proximity to the people.
I also find the argument about grassroots engagement compelling.
Odii has said that his experience across Ebonyi has taken him into communities and brought him into contact with farmers, traders, artisans, professionals, students and traditional rulers. He argues that leadership should begin with listening and ultimately produce practical solutions.
That is an important principle.
A governor does not govern statistics. A governor governs human beings.
The farmer wants to know whether he can get his produce to market.
The trader wants an environment where his business can survive.
The young graduate wants an economy that creates opportunities.
The artisan wants access to finance and customers.
The student wants quality education.
The elderly and vulnerable want dignity and basic social protection.
The investor wants security, infrastructure and a predictable business environment.
The civil servant wants institutions that reward professionalism rather than political loyalty.
The traditional ruler wants development to reach communities rather than remain concentrated in the state capital.
The best governor will therefore be the person who can connect government policy to these everyday realities.
Competence must also mean measurable delivery
This is where I believe Odii’s candidacy should be tested most rigorously.
It is not enough for him to say that he is competent.
He must demonstrate how that competence will translate into measurable outcomes.
He should tell Ebonyians how many jobs he intends to create, how he will attract private investment, how he will finance infrastructure, how he will improve education and healthcare, how he will modernise agriculture and how his administration will increase internally generated revenue without suffocating ordinary citizens.
He should also explain how his government will be transparent, how it will administer public contracts, and how citizens will be able to measure his performance.
In other words, Odii should be held to the same standard he is asking voters to apply to the incumbent.
That is the essence of democracy.
And if he can demonstrate that his experience, programme and capacity provide a stronger path for Ebonyi’s future, then voters should not be told to reject him simply because of the senatorial zone from which he comes.
The zoning debate will probably continue.
It should.
Political agreements matter, and nobody should dismiss the concerns of people who believe that rotation has contributed to political stability in Ebonyi.
But zoning should be treated as a political arrangement—not as a substitute for democratic choice.
Ultimately, the people of Ebonyi should decide.
If the incumbent has performed exceptionally, let him defend his record.
If another candidate has a better programme, stronger capacity and greater credibility, let him present that case.
Let the people compare.
Let them ask questions.
Let them examine the records.
Let them debate the programmes.
And then let them vote.
That, in my opinion, is a healthier democracy than telling citizens in advance that geography has already determined their choice.
Why I believe Odii deserves the opportunity
My support for the argument in favour of Odii is therefore not based on the simplistic idea that “South should produce the governor.”
I believe that argument is too narrow.
The stronger argument is that Ebonyians should have the freedom to choose the candidate they believe can deliver the best government—and Odii has presented himself as a serious contender with a combination of private-sector experience, grassroots engagement, philanthropic intervention and an economic development agenda that deserves to be tested against those of his opponents.
Indeed, the political reaction to his candidacy demonstrates that the debate is no longer merely about zoning. Recent reporting shows that groups on both sides of the divide have publicly disagreed over whether zoning should determine the 2027 contest, while the Ebonyi State League of Professionals has endorsed Odii and urged voters to place competence, integrity and performance above zoning.
That tells me a larger question is emerging in Ebonyi.
It is the question of what kind of leadership the state needs for the next phase of its development.
And my answer is straightforward.
Ebonyi needs leadership that can create wealth, not merely distribute government resources.
It needs leadership that can attract investment, not merely celebrate government projects.
It needs leadership that can empower young people to become economically independent.
It needs leadership that understands agriculture as a business, not simply as subsistence.
It needs leadership that can turn the state’s natural resources into opportunities for its people.
It needs leadership that listens to communities and measures its success by outcomes.
Above all, Ebonyi needs leadership that can unite the three senatorial zones around a common future.
The next governor should not be presented to Ebonyians as the governor of North, Central or South.
He should be presented as the governor of Ebonyi State.
That is why, as I look ahead to 2027, I believe the debate should move beyond “whose turn is it?” and focus squarely on “who is most prepared to lead?”
For me, that is where the case for Ifeanyi Chukwuma Odii becomes compelling.
Not because of where he comes from.
Not because of political slogans.
Not because of zoning.
But because I believe his experience, his record of private-sector enterprise and community intervention, and his vision for a more diversified and productive Ebonyi make him a candidate worthy of serious consideration.
In the end, the people must decide.
But they should decide on the basis of competence, character, capacity, vision and results—not geography alone.
Ebonyi’s future is too important to be reduced to “whose turn is it?”
The question should be: Who can take Ebonyi forward?
And I believe Odii has made a credible case that he is that man.
Dr Yahaya writes from Kaduna State via nyahaya@gmail.com
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).
