By Charles Pemu 
UROMI, EDO STATE – A firestorm of political irony has erupted in Edo State following Governor Monday Okpebholo’s controversial warning to Peter Obi, the Labour Party Presidential candidate, forbidding his entry into the state without the Governor’s explicit clearance. This aggressive stance stands in stark contrast to Governor Okpebholo’s recent cross-regional pleas advocating for the unhindered movement of citizens, notably after the contentious killings of alleged Northern ‘hunters’ (widely suspected to be bandits) in Edo State.
Governor Okpebholo issued his stunning directive yesterday in Uromi, during a reception marking the defection of Hon. Marcus Onobun from the PDP to the APC.
“The man wey say e no get ‘shishi’, I am sending a direct message to him” He cannot come to Edo without telling me. A new Sheriff is in town,”
Okpebholo declared, accusing Obi of hypocrisy for a reported N15 million donation to a nursing school, which he controversially linked to a subsequent crisis that allegedly claimed three lives.
He further attacked unnamed opposition figures, accusing them of corruption, derailing national projects, and being “insecurity merchants.”
However, this categorical demand for ‘clearance’ from a major opposition figure directly clashes with Governor Okpebholo’s own recent political outreach. Following incidents in Edo where alleged Northern ‘hunters’ were killed, a situation that sparked significant regional tension and concern over banditry – Governor Okpebholo reportedly traversed Northern states to engage with governors, fervently asserting every citizen’s constitutional right to movement across Nigeria. His current threat to Peter Obi, a Southern politician and a significant voice in the opposition, reveals a glaring double standard that has ignited fierce debate.
The Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP) and Labour Party chieftain, Chief Peter Ameh, swiftly condemned Governor Okpebholo’s statement as “despicable and unconstitutional.” Ameh branded the warning a “direct assault on the democratic principles of freedom of movement and expression enshrined in Nigeria’s Constitution,” going as far as to describe it as a “veiled death threat” unacceptable from a sitting governor. He lambasted Okpebholo for “dangerous ignorance” and a “shameful display of governance” that undermines the very democratic values he is sworn to uphold.
This brazen attempt to control the movement of a prominent Nigerian citizen by a sitting governor, especially given his own recent advocacy for such rights, casts a long shadow over political freedom and fair play in the run-up to future elections. It underscores a deepening partisan divide and raises critical questions about the limits of executive power and the selective application of constitutional rights.