A legal practitioner, Tópẹ́ Tèmókùn, has criticised the African Democratic Congress (ADC) vice-presidential candidate, Rotimi Amaechi, following his verbal clash with African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, at the 66th Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Rivers State.
Tèmókùn argued that Amaechi’s reference to his political experience as a basis for dismissing Sowore’s views was misplaced.
He noted that both men had spent decades participating in Nigeria’s public affairs, albeit from markedly different positions.
The lawyer made the argument in a commentary following the heated exchange between Amaechi and Sowore during a session at the NBA conference on Monday.
According to him, Amaechi, 61, entered politics at about 22 and has spent roughly 39 years within Nigeria’s political establishment, rising through the ranks to become Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, governor and later Minister of Transportation.
Sowore, 55, he said, had also spent nearly four decades in public activism, beginning with student activism at about 18 and later becoming prominent through journalism, opposition to military rule, protests and civic campaigns.
Tèmókùn therefore maintained that the difference between the periods both men had spent in public life was marginal, insisting that the more important issue was what each had achieved during those years.
He said Amaechi’s experience represented years spent within the political establishment, while Sowore’s experience had largely involved challenging the same system and demanding accountability from those who exercised political power.
The public advocate particularly took exception to Amaechi’s response to Sowore during the NBA session, where the former Rivers governor asked the AAC candidate about his experience before telling him to remain silent while politicians were speaking.
“When politicians are talking, Sowore, close your mouth,” Amaechi had said.
Tèmókùn argued that longevity in political office should not automatically be treated as a qualification without examining the outcomes associated with such experience.
He likened the situation to a bank that had been managed by the same group of people for nearly four decades but was eventually left struggling, while another person spent years warning that the institution was being poorly managed.
He questioned whether the managers of such an institution could reasonably invoke their years of experience to silence their critics after the institution had deteriorated.
According to him, “there is a point at which longevity ceases to be a credential and becomes a question to be answered,” adding that experience should also be assessed against the record produced during the period.
The comments followed Sowore’s criticism of politicians who had previously occupied public offices, during which he argued that those who had governed should account for their records instead of making fresh promises to Nigerians.
Sowore had said he agreed with Amaechi’s earlier observation that several politicians seeking political power had governed previously but failed to deliver, stressing that such politicians should apologise to Nigerians.
“I like what Amaechi said. He said that apart from Sowore and Adebayo, the rest of them have governed before and have failed. You guys should be apologising to the Nigerian people,” Sowore said.
Amaechi, however, defended his record as Minister of Transportation under former President Muhammadu Buhari, citing the operation of railway projects during his tenure.
“In my time, Lagos-Ajaokuta railway was working. I do not know why it is not working under Tinubu. Same thing for Abuja-Kaduna rail,” he said.
He subsequently challenged Sowore to explain his experience, before making the remark that triggered the controversy.
Tèmókùn said the encounter should instead be viewed as a clash between two different forms of experience — one rooted in political governance and the other in activism and sustained opposition to the political establishment.
He argued that Sowore’s lack of experience in holding executive political office should not necessarily be regarded as a weakness, noting that his political identity had been built around challenging those who had occupied such positions.
The lawyer added that the debate should therefore move beyond the question of who had spent longer in public life and focus instead on the results produced by the respective forms of experience.
“Today the bank has failed. Who then deserves the opportunity to try something different?” he asked.
