The recent visit of His Royal Majesty, Oba Ewuare II, the Oba of Benin, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, has raised pertinent questions regarding the delicate balance between cultural authority and constitutional democracy in Edo State. While the monarch’s intentions may appear benign, the optics and implications of his drive for foreign investment, stating that he has parcels of, warrant closer scrutiny within the framework of modern democratic governance.
In a viral video widely circulated across social media platforms, the Oba was seen directly urging foreign investors to consider Edo State as a viable destination for investment. This well-publicised call, however, risks presenting the monarch as a political supremo or de facto governor, an image that stands in direct conflict with Nigeria’s constitutional order. 
As Walter Bagehot aptly noted, “A constitutional monarch is the dignified part of the government, not the efficient part.” This distinction is vital in understanding the boundaries between ceremonial symbolism and executive authority.
While the cultural and traditional significance of the Oba within Edo South is uncontested, the notion that his traditional jurisdiction encompasses the entirety of Edo State lacks constitutional legitimacy. The Benin monarchy, revered as it is, does not extend its legal authority beyond its ancestral senatorial district. The act of engaging foreign investors, particularly without clear gubernatorial backing, not only contravenes protocol but may also encroach upon the functions designated to the elected executive.
A critical point of inquiry remains whether this overseas engagement was sanctioned by the Governor or the Local Government Council under whose jurisdiction the Oba resides. If formal consent was granted, what precise mandate was issued? Was the monarch acting on a state-sanctioned economic development mission, or was this an individual initiative cloaked in traditional authority? These questions bear serious weight, especially considering Nigeria’s principle of federal supremacy and the primacy of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The role of traditional institutions in complementing governance must not be misconstrued as a license to circumvent or duplicate the responsibilities of democratically elected officials. The former administration of Governor Godwin Obaseki was notably assertive in maintaining this demarcation, ensuring that the Palace did not evolve into a parallel authority structure within the state. The current situation, therefore, risks regressing into a constitutional aberration.
Edo State is not, and must not become, a monarchy by proxy. The spectacle of a traditional ruler seemingly asserting administrative leadership over the state challenges the very essence of democratic rule. Such developments threaten to distort institutional roles and compromise public perception of governance. As James Madison once stated, “The accumulation of all powers… in the same hands… may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
The circulation of seven video clips depicting the monarch’s Dubai engagements strongly suggests a portrayal that undermines the position of the incumbent Governor, Senator Monday Okpebholo. This portrayal, whether intentional or accidental, could be interpreted as a strategic effort by palace loyalists to compel the Governor into symbolic submission, thereby weakening the integrity of the gubernatorial office.
It is particularly instructive that such assertions of influence did not occur during Governor Obaseki’s administration, an administration led by a Benin indigene who, while culturally deferential, remained politically firm. The question then arises: why now? Is this a calculated manoeuvre exploiting perceived political vulnerability in a Governor from a different ethnic extraction within the same state?
Governor Okpebholo must, therefore, act with constitutional clarity and political courage. While respect for tradition remains essential in Nigeria’s pluralistic society, the line must be drawn when traditional influence threatens to overshadow constitutional governance. Governance must be administered from Osadebey Avenue, not from the throne room.
The broader implication of allowing traditional figures to assume quasi-executive roles without legal mandate is the potential erosion of democratic institutions. The politicisation of traditional roles not only fuels ethnic tensions but also jeopardises the principle of representative governance, where leaders derive their legitimacy from the electorate, not from ancestral lineage.
Furthermore, the risk of state identity being used for personal ventures cannot be ignored. The misrepresentation of state-sanctioned objectives in foreign engagements may lead to diplomatic misunderstandings or even exploitation. The administration must therefore be vigilant in regulating the use of official state symbols and narratives by non-state actors.
In conclusion, Edo State must remain steadfast in upholding the supremacy of constitutional democracy. While traditional rulers like Oba Ewuare II are esteemed cultural custodians, their influence must be exercised within the bounds of law and convention. Anything less would not only destabilise governance structures but would also set a dangerous precedent for other federating units within Nigeria.
Deacon Darlington Okpebholo Ray, a Fellow of the British College of Journalism, Publisher/Editor-in-Chief of Truth Live News International, Sociopolitical Activist writes from London, England.