“It’s Not About Where He’s From — It’s What He Swore To”: Marcus-Bello on Yayi’s Ancestry Row

The political quarrel over Senator Solomon Olamilekan Adeola’s ancestry has entered a new phase.

What began as a dispute over whether the APC governorship candidate, popularly known as YAYI, is genuinely from Ogun State is now being framed by his PDP opponents as a question of what he has declared in official documents over more than two decades of political life.

Former Nigerian Ambassador to Zambia and Malawi and PDP chieftain, Chief Mrs Folake Marcus-Bello, is pressing Adeola to produce records from the beginning of his political career, including his first employment records at The Guardian, his early electoral documents and the information he supplied to INEC when he first contested the Lagos State House of Assembly election.

Her central argument is that the political debate should not be reduced to whether a Nigerian is legally free to live, work or seek public office outside his ancestral state.

It is about whether a politician who has repeatedly completed official documents under oath has consistently declared the same information.

And if he has not, what does the law say about that?

‘It is not simply about where he comes from’ Marcus-Bello has maintained that Adeola is not from Yewa and says she has documents which, according to her, support her position.

During a recent television appearance, she challenged the senator to sit down with her and examine the documents.

Among the materials she has referred to is a programme from the burial of Adeola’s father in Ekiti State, which she says contains information about his lineage, Oriki and family background.

Adeola has rejected the allegations as false and defamatory. Through his media adviser, Chief Kayode Odunaro, he gave Marcus-Bello and suspended APC member Abayomi Hunye 24 hours to produce evidence backing claims that he is originally from Ekiti State or face legal action.

Adeola said the allegations were “assertive and outrageous lies” and demanded documentary proof.

Marcus-Bello has not backed down. Neither has PDP governorship candidate Ladi Adebutu, who has also challenged Adeola to go to court so the competing documents can be examined.

But Marcus-Bello’s latest argument goes further than ancestry.

The Lagos question

Adeola’s political history provides the reason the question of earlier records has become central.

Publicly available biographical records show that Adeola began his legislative career in Lagos State.

He represented Alimosho State Constituency 2 in the Lagos State House of Assembly from 2003 to 2007 and was re-elected for another term from 2007 to 2011.

He then moved to the House of Representatives in 2011, representing Alimosho Federal Constituency, before becoming Senator for Lagos West from 2015 to 2023.

He has represented Ogun West in the Senate since 2023. His professional history is also well documented.

Adeola’s own biographical material says he was born in Lagos, attended schools in Alimosho and spent 12 years working with The Guardian Newspapers, where he rose to become an accountant.

He later worked with Olatunji Omoyeni & Co before establishing SOOTEM Nigeria Limited, a tax consultancy business.

That history is precisely why Marcus-Bello is asking questions about his earliest electoral paperwork.

Her argument, as presented by the PDP side, is straightforward: If Adeola was already a politician in Lagos from 2003 and had to complete statutory electoral documentation for successive elections, what state did he identify as his state of origin in those documents?

Was it Lagos? Was it Ogun? Was it another state?

And did the answer remain the same each time?

Those are questions that cannot be settled by political speeches. They can be settled by certified documents.

Where the perjury argument enters

The latest argument from Adeola’s opponents has moved the controversy into potentially more serious legal territory.

Victor Olamide, legal adviser to Abayomi Hunye, has argued that the dispute is not primarily about whether Adeola is from Ogun or Ekiti.

His contention is that the crucial issue is whether Adeola made materially different declarations in documents submitted under oath during different stages of his political career.

The argument is significant because Adeola’s legislative career in Lagos stretches back to 2003. If certified electoral documents eventually establish that he declared one state of origin in earlier sworn documents and another in later sworn documents, the question would become whether the discrepancy was material, whether the statements were knowingly false and what law applies to the particular declaration.

That is where the word perjury has entered the political debate. But there is an important legal line.

Perjury is not established merely because two documents appear different.

Nigeria’s Criminal Code defines perjury around knowingly giving false testimony on oath in a judicial proceeding or for the purpose of instituting such a proceeding, on a material matter.

Section 118 provides the punishment for the offence. So, even if contradictory electoral declarations exist, whether they amount to the criminal offence of perjury would depend on the precise documents, the oath under which they were made, their legal purpose, the materiality of the information and the facts established before the appropriate court.

That distinction matters.

An allegation of perjury is not the same thing as proven perjury.

What Section 42 actually says

The political argument has also brought Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution into the conversation.

Section 42 protects Nigerian citizens from discrimination on grounds including community, ethnic group and place of origin. It also says a citizen should not be subjected to disability or deprivation merely because of the circumstances of birth.

That provision is important because being born, raised or previously resident in Lagos does not, by itself, extinguish a person’s constitutional rights elsewhere in Nigeria.

But Section 42 does not answer the separate question of what somebody declared on an official electoral form.

Nor does it automatically establish eligibility for the Ogun governorship.

Section 177 sets out the constitutional qualifications for governor: Nigerian citizenship by birth, attainment of 35 years, membership and sponsorship by a political party, and education to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.

The Supreme Court has treated these provisions as the relevant constitutional qualification requirements.

That is why the PDP’s present argument needs to be understood carefully.

It is not simply saying that somebody from another state cannot become governor of Ogun.

The argument being advanced by Marcus-Bello and her political allies is that if an aspirant made a materially false declaration under oath in an earlier official process, that is a separate issue from the constitutional protection against discrimination based on origin.

Marcus-Bello’s new demand

Marcus-Bello is therefore challenging Adeola to open up the paper trail. She wants his earlier INEC records examined. She wants the public to know what he declared when he entered electoral politics in Lagos. She wants his employment history at The Guardian and subsequent professional history examined.

And she has raised another question that goes beyond ancestry: how did Adeola build the wealth that has made him one of the most financially visible politicians in the Ogun 2027 contest?

Adeola’s published biography does provide a professional explanation of his pre-political career. It lists his 12 years at The Guardian, his work in accountancy and auditing and the establishment of SOOTEM Nigeria Limited, a tax consultancy company.

Marcus-Bello, however, is asking for greater transparency about his business interests and sources of income beyond remuneration from public office.

That is her political challenge, not an established finding that Adeola obtained his wealth improperly.

Why the argument matters to PDP

For the PDP, the issue has become a way of shifting the conversation from ethnic or regional identity to documentation and accountability.

Marcus-Bello has repeatedly said the qualities required of anyone seeking the governorship should include transparency, sincerity and integrity.

She has also argued in previous public comments that voters should examine the background, source of revenue and means of livelihood of people seeking public office rather than simply following party labels.

The PDP’s Ladi Adebutu has adopted a similar confrontational position, challenging Adeola to take the dispute to court rather than threatening those making the allegations.

Adebutu says he has evidence to support the PDP’s position.

Adeola’s camp, however, maintains the opposite position. His media adviser says the allegations about his origin are false and libellous and has demanded evidence, threatening legal action against Marcus-Bello and Hunye.

An APC chieftain, Kayode Oladele, has separately dismissed Marcus-Bello’s ancestry argument as legally indefensible and libellous.

The document that could change everything

The most consequential evidence in this dispute may therefore not be a family burial programme or a political rally. It may be the official documents.

If the alleged earlier INEC declarations are produced, authenticated and shown to contain materially different answers about state of origin, the controversy would move beyond competing political narratives.

It could become a matter for legal interpretation.

If no such contradiction exists, the same documents could equally weaken the allegation.

That is why Marcus-Bello’s challenge is more consequential than another exchange over who belongs to which ethnic or ancestral community.

She is effectively asking: What did YAYI write when nobody knew he would one day seek the governorship of Ogun State?

And, if what he wrote then differs materially from what he is declaring now, why?

Those are questions that political speeches cannot answer.

Only the records can.

For now, the claims remain contested. Adeola denies the allegations and has threatened legal action.

Marcus-Bello and the PDP say they are prepared to defend their claims and produce evidence.

As the 2027 Ogun contest moves into a more combative phase, the dispute has therefore shifted from “Where is YAYI from?” to a potentially more consequential question: “What did YAYI declare under oath throughout his political career, and do those declarations remain consistent?”

That is a question for documents, INEC and, where necessary, the courts, not political assumption. ValidViewNetwork reports.