A comprehensive analysis of the Lagos Assembly crisis where former Speaker Mudashiru Obasa’s dramatic return clashes with the majority’s support for Speaker Mojisola Meranda, exposing deep political rifts within Lagos.
LAGOS, Nigeria — In a dramatic twist that has sent shockwaves throughout Nigeria’s commercial capital, the Lagos State House of Assembly has become the epicentre of a fierce leadership battle. Former Speaker Mudashiru Obasa’s contentious return and subsequent self-proclamation during a plenary session—attended by a mere four lawmakers—has ignited a firestorm of political debate.
Meanwhile, 36 of his colleagues have categorically rejected his claim, reaffirming their support for incumbent Speaker Mojisola Meranda. This bitter divide not only underlines the intensity of intra-party discord but also raises serious questions about the stability of Lagos’ legislative arm at a time when national political scrutiny is at its peak.
A Contest for Legitimacy
Obasa’s recent appearance at the Assembly complex was nothing short of theatrical. Accompanied by a retinue of heavily armed security operatives, he stormed into the Speaker’s office in an ostentatious display of defiance.
His dramatic re-entry, which occurred under the cover of forceful intervention by security personnel, was designed to assert his longstanding claim to the speakership—a claim that has been vehemently denied by a majority of his colleagues.
“He was not elected as Speaker by his constituency,” asserted one anonymous lawmaker, encapsulating the sentiment of those who have long regarded his leadership style as authoritarian and counterproductive.
In stark contrast, Speaker Mojisola Meranda—Nigeria’s first female to hold the position in Lagos—has emerged as a beacon of democratic resilience. Despite Obasa’s forceful reappearance, Meranda’s supporters, numbering 36 out of the 40-member House, have resolutely stood by her.
Speaking at the assembly complex, Stephen Ogundipe, Chairman of the House Committee on Information, Strategy, and Security, denounced Obasa’s unilateral actions.
“We are not happy; we have been law-abiding, and we demand to be shown the respect that our mandate deserves,” he declared, adding that the leadership should engage directly with lawmakers rather than resort to such political theatrics.
A Plenary Session Turned Farce
The gravity of the situation was further underscored during a plenary session presided over by Obasa, attended by only four lawmakers—a stark contrast to the full complement expected at such a meeting.
The session, forced open by security operatives, became a microcosm of the Assembly’s deep divisions. Over 26 lawmakers boycotted the session, gathering instead in the Assembly garden to reaffirm their vote of confidence in Meranda, which was previously cast on February 17.
The defiant stand taken by these legislators not only underscores their rejection of Obasa’s bid for power but also signals a broader discontent with the manner in which political protocols are being subverted.
The spectacle of a former Speaker attempting to commandeer proceedings with such minimal support is both symbolic and alarming. It reveals a legislative body that is splintered along factional lines, with members appearing to prioritise political posturing over the functional governance of Lagos State.
Critics argue that such chaos undermines the very essence of democratic practice, casting doubt on the Assembly’s ability to effectively legislate and serve its constituents.
The Political Underpinnings and Wider Implications
At the heart of this power struggle is a complex interplay of loyalty, ambition, and political opportunism. Obasa, who held the speakership since June 2015 before his impeachment on allegations of gross misconduct and financial impropriety, now claims his removal was procedurally flawed.
His assertion that “there is nothing like impeachment”—as he once famously declared during a press briefing—has not convinced the majority.
Instead, the overwhelming support for Meranda suggests that his tenure is widely viewed as marred by autocratic tendencies, perpetual tardiness, and a disregard for the democratic ethos expected in legislative leadership.
The crisis in the Lagos Assembly is not merely an isolated incident but a reflection of deeper fissures within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
With President Bola Tinubu’s intervention already having been a subject of intense scrutiny, many analysts believe that the leadership crisis could have far-reaching consequences, particularly with the general elections looming on the horizon.
The internal discord has prompted calls from within the party for a more inclusive and consultative approach to governance—one that acknowledges the mandates of the various constituencies and respects the democratic process.
Political insiders contend that the very fabric of Lagos politics is being tested as never before. While some APC stalwarts, including prominent figures such as former governors and senior party executives, have attempted to mediate the dispute, the entrenched positions of both factions suggest that a swift resolution is unlikely.
The symbolism of a four-member plenary session presided over by Obasa—a man who once commanded a full chamber—serves as a stark reminder of the diminishing influence of those who fail to adapt to the evolving expectations of legislative accountability.
Sensational Drama or Deep-Rooted Political Crisis?
The Lagos Assembly crisis has, undoubtedly, provided ample fodder for sensational headlines. Yet, beneath the spectacle lies a more troubling narrative about the state of democratic institutions in Nigeria’s most populous city.
The use of armed security operatives to facilitate Obasa’s return, the subsequent withdrawal of security details from Speaker Meranda, and the overt defiance by a significant number of lawmakers all point to an environment where political might often trumps institutional process.
Critics argue that such displays not only erode public trust in the legislative body but also set a dangerous precedent for political conduct.
The Lagos Assembly, once celebrated as a model of democratic governance in the region, now finds itself at a crossroads—torn between the old guard’s penchant for unilateral action and a new generation of lawmakers demanding transparency, accountability, and respect for due process.
This confrontation is being closely monitored by civil society organisations, legal experts, and the international community alike.
Many fear that if left unresolved, the crisis could precipitate a broader erosion of democratic norms not only in Lagos but potentially across other Nigerian states where similar power struggles simmer beneath the surface.
What Lies Ahead?
As the dust begins to settle, the critical question remains: what will be the outcome of this bitter contest for legitimacy?
With indications that the APC leadership is leaning towards reinstating Obasa—albeit with conditions that might see him resign on a “soft landing”—the possibility of a power-sharing arrangement seems to be emerging as a compromise. However, such a solution may prove to be merely a temporary bandage on a much deeper wound.
For many lawmakers and political observers, the true test will be whether the Assembly can restore its credibility and function as an independent, democratic institution.
The coming weeks are likely to witness high-level negotiations, possible judicial interventions, and perhaps even a reconfiguration of the Assembly’s internal structure to prevent future crises of this magnitude.
In the meantime, the Lagos Assembly remains a volatile arena where every move is laden with political symbolism.
For the people of Lagos—and indeed for the broader Nigerian polity—the unfolding events serve as a sobering reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions when personal ambition and partisan politics take precedence over collective responsibility.
