As political conversations begin to gather momentum ahead of the 2027 general elections, a familiar debate has resurfaced within the Akure North/Akure South Federal Constituency, the question of zoning and alleged marginalization.
A recent public appeal claimed that Akure North has been denied representation at the House of Representatives since 1999 and therefore deserves exclusive consideration for the 2027 ticket. The argument framed the situation as a moral injustice requiring urgent political correction.
However, a closer historical and political examination reveals that the marginalization claim does not stand up to scrutiny.
The Historical Record Contradicts the Narrative
The core of the marginalization argument rests on the assertion that Akure North has never produced a federal lawmaker. Yet available political records tell a different story.
Several individuals who have represented the Akure North/South Federal Constituency have direct roots in communities located within Akure North Local Government.
Among them:
Hon. Akin Omoseebi — contested from Igbatoro in Akure North under the Alliance for Democracy (AD).
Hon. Ifedayo Sunday Abegunde — from Igbatoro, Akure North.
Hon. Mayokun Lawson-Alade — from Iju, Akure North.
Senator Farukanmi — from Iju, Akure North.
Senator Tayo Alasoadura — also from Iju and linked to the Osupa ruling house.
These are not peripheral figures in Akure politics; they are central actors who held elective mandates across the constituency.
The suggestion that Akure North has been entirely excluded from federal representation therefore collapses under historical review. The constituency has, at various times, elected candidates whose origins trace directly to Akure North communities.
Electoral Mathematics: Winning Despite Lower Vote Strength
Another key point often overlooked in the zoning debate is electoral arithmetic.
Akure South historically commands significantly higher voter turnout than Akure North. In many election cycles, total votes recorded in Akure North communities have been estimated at under 10,000, while Akure South delivers substantially larger figures.
If elections were decided purely on local government strength, Akure South would consistently dominate representation — much like Ibadan’s dominance in Oyo State politics due to numerical advantage.
Yet that has not always been the outcome.
Candidates from Akure North communities have won constituency-wide elections despite the numerical disadvantage of their immediate local government base. This suggests that:
Voting patterns are not strictly divided along North–South lines.
Electoral success has depended on cross-community appeal rather than rigid zoning.
The constituency operates as a political whole rather than two competing blocs.
The fact that candidates with Akure North roots secured victory in a constituency where Akure South has stronger voting numbers directly undermines claims of systemic exclusion.
Akure Beyond Administrative Boundaries
Perhaps the strongest counter-argument is cultural and historical rather than electoral.
The division between Akure North and Akure South is an administrative creation — a product of local government delineation. Traditionally and historically, Akure is one community.
Families, ruling houses, and lineages span both local governments. It is difficult to find an Akure indigene whose ancestral ties are confined strictly to one side of the administrative divide.
Communities such as Iju, Igbatoro, Oda, Itaogbolu, Osi, and others reflect intertwined histories. Political leaders often have maternal, paternal, or extended family connections cutting across both LGAs.
Even traditional structures predate the local government system. The Deji of Akure’s authority encompasses the broader Akure community, reinforcing the concept of unity rather than division.
From this perspective, zoning based strictly on local government identity risks oversimplifying a historically interconnected society.
The Politics of Perception
The marginalization narrative appears to rely more on perception than verifiable exclusion.
It is true that some election cycles have produced representatives popularly identified with Akure South. However, identity in Akure politics is layered — involving community, lineage, residence, political structure, and cross-family affiliations.
Labeling representation as “Akure South domination” without acknowledging the Akure North origins of several past lawmakers presents an incomplete picture.
Moreover, democratic elections are ultimately decided by voters across the entire constituency, not by administrative quotas.
Unity Versus Zoning
The debate ultimately boils down to two competing philosophies:
Zoning as a tool for balancing representation, or
Merit-based, constituency-wide electoral competition within a unified Akure identity.
Those opposing zoning argue that institutionalizing a North-versus-South rotation could deepen divisions where historically there has been fluidity. They maintain that Akure’s political strength lies in its interconnectedness, not segmentation.
In their view, the constituency has functioned as a single political ecosystem, where candidates must build alliances across communities to win.
Conclusion: A Case Yet to Be Proven
While calls for fairness in representation are legitimate in any democracy, the specific claim that Akure North has been historically shut out of federal representation does not align with documented political history.
Multiple past lawmakers trace their roots to Akure North communities. Electoral victories have been achieved across local government lines. Cultural and biological ties bind both LGAs into one traditional entity.
As the 2027 political season approaches, the more pressing question may not be whether Akure North has been marginalized, but whether framing the constituency in rigid zoning terms risks distorting a long-standing tradition of political unity.
For now, the evidence suggests that the marginalization claim struggles to stand on historical and electoral ground.
