The Oyo State House of Assembly has passed a bill establishing the rotation of the chairmanship of the state’s Council of Obas and Chiefs among the Alaafin of Oyo, the Olubadan of Ibadanland, and the Soun of Ogbomosoland.
The bill, passed during Tuesday’s plenary, followed the presentation of a committee report by the Vice Chairman of the House Committee on Local Government and Chieftaincy Matters, Bamidele Adeola.
Lawmakers resolved that the chairmanship position will no longer be held permanently by any single monarch but will instead rotate among the three foremost traditional rulers.
The bill had stirred debate since its second reading last Thursday, with traditional rulers and stakeholders expressing sharply divided opinions.
While representatives from Ibadanland and Ogbomosoland welcomed the move as a fair reform, others, particularly from Oyo town, expressed strong opposition.
Two lawmakers, Olorunpoto Rahman (Oyo East) and Gbenga Oyekola (Atiba), staged a walkout during the session, protesting the legislative process.
“We should be guided by the truth on whatever law we make,” Rahman told reporters. “Everyone knows the position of the Alaafin. We are not out of touch with history. Alaafin is a paramount ruler.
We should not make laws for political convenience. We should make a law that will align with history.”
He also criticised the committee for failing to conduct a public hearing or consult stakeholders.
“There is no instance where they invited anyone from Oyo to speak to this bill. I have serious issues with that,” he added.
Just a day earlier, a coalition of traditional leaders, chiefs, and cultural groups from Ibadanland and Ogbomosoland had rejected a proposal that would have madethe Alaafin the permanent council chairman.
They made their stance known in a joint statement signed by Mogajis, Baales, royal families, and prominent indigenes.
The Assembly also approved the appointment of 13 local council chairmen, including the Otun and Osi Olubadan of Ibadanland.
Despite the approval, the controversy surrounding the legislative process and historical claims suggests the issue may continue to stir debate across the state.
