APC Attributes Rift Between Obaseki And Oshiomhole To Leadership Tensions
On Sunday, Kassim Afegbua, the Media Director of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Campaign Council, criticized Edo State Governor, Godwin Obaseki, for his claims about the reason behind his fallout with his predecessor, Adams Oshiomhole. Obaseki had asserted that the disagreement stemmed from the state burial he organized for the late Tony Anenih, former Minister of Works and Housing, during his tenure as governor.
Obaseki made these remarks while addressing supporters of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) ahead of the September 21 gubernatorial election, stating that Oshiomhole disapproved of his decision to hold a state burial for Anenih, questioning the rationale for honoring someone who was not an elected official. Obaseki justified his decision by arguing that Anenih’s contributions to the state were substantial and warranted such recognition.
However, Afegbua dismissed Obaseki’s claims as false and an attempt to score political points. In a detailed statement, he pointed out that the conflict between Obaseki and Oshiomhole had begun in 2017, well before Anenih’s death in October 2018. Afegbua described Obaseki’s narrative as “ungodly and devilish,” accusing the governor of using the late Anenih’s death for political gain.
Afegbua recounted personal efforts to mediate between Obaseki and Oshiomhole, stating that the rift had little to do with the burial and more to do with Obaseki’s desire to assert independence from his predecessor. He alleged that Obaseki made disparaging remarks about Oshiomhole during attempts at reconciliation and refused to engage in meaningful dialogue. According to Afegbua, the burial was only being used as a political cover for deeper disagreements that had already surfaced.
Afegbua concluded by criticizing Obaseki for his alleged opportunism, accusing him of attempting to profit politically from Anenih’s death. He expressed disappointment in the governor’s leadership and decision to invoke the burial as a reason for the political divide, suggesting it was part of a larger strategy to manipulate public perception ahead of the election.
