Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat, Suri, and the Selective Outrage | Yusuf Olatunji Alabi

The recent criticism directed at Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat over his alleged association with Surajudeen Babatunde Adio, popularly known as Suri Ilupeju, has generated intense public debate. However, beyond the emotions and political loyalties surrounding the controversy lies a more fundamental question: are people applying the same standards of accountability to everyone involved in politics?

This article is not intended to justify violence, endorse the use of political thugs, or defend the association of public figures and politicians with individuals accused of criminal conduct. Rather, it seeks to examine the apparent hypocrisy that often defines public reactions to political associations in Oyo State.

According to recent reports, Suri was implicated in an armed robbery investigation leading to the arrest of some of his alleged associates. 
The development quickly assumed political dimensions as attempts were made to link Suri to Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat, the Accord Party governorship candidate. In response, Oriyomi Hamzat publicly distanced himself from the allegations and issued clarifications denying any involvement in criminal activities linked to Suri.

Supporters of Oriyomi Hamzat argue that the repeated efforts to associate him with controversial figures form part of a broader campaign aimed at damaging his public image and undermining his political ambition. They point to previous attempts to link him with other contentious personalities as evidence of what they describe as politically motivated attacks.

Before fitting Suri into Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat’s political circle: Who was Suri before Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat’s political declaration? Who was Suri supporting in 2019 and 2023? 
In one video, Suri Ilupeju is seen openly celebrating Governor Seyi Makinde and publicly identifying with his administration during his involvement with the Park Management System (PMS).

The significance of these materials is not that they establish criminal liability—they do not. However, they raise legitimate questions about the historical relationship between Suri and the political establishment in Oyo State.

If Suri was once publicly associated with individuals and structures linked to the Oyo State government, when exactly did that relationship change? He is here now; he was there yesterday. When did he start his criminal activities? If Oriyomi Hamzat were still aligned with the current government of Oyo State, would there still be outrage? 
These are straightforward questions that deserve factual answers.

Addressing them transparently would contribute more to public understanding than relying on political narratives or attempting to draw unrelated attention to tarnish a broadcaster’s image.

If photographs, videos, public endorsements, or political associations are considered relevant in evaluating one political figure, then the same standard should apply to all political actors. Public outrage cannot be credible when it selectively forgets yesterday’s alliances while condemning today’s associations.

It is evident that Suri was part of the PMS alongside his boss Mukaila Lamidi, popularly known as Auxiliary. Auxiliary, who was known for criminal records and once served a jail term, was discovered to be useful by Gov. Makinde in 2019. He was a known criminal as far back as 2011, and Suri Ilupeju was one of his boys.

As Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the Oyo State Park Management System (PMS) constituted by the Oyo State Government, Auxiliary became one of the most controversial personalities in Oyo politics. During his alliance with Gov. Makinde, he was repeatedly used and linked to incidents of violence, intimidation, and threats against political opponents.

In April 2021, during the PDP Southwest Zonal Congress at the WOCDIF Centre in Osogbo, former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose alleged that Auxiliary and armed loyalists had been mobilised to intimidate his faction in the struggle for control of the party structure in the Southwest. Security operatives reportedly intercepted suspects linked to Oyo State and recovered firearms, ammunition, charms, and amulets.

Around the same period, videos circulated online showing Auxiliary issuing threats against Fayose, warning him against interfering in the congress proceedings. 
Again, in August 2022, Auxiliary appeared in another viral video in which he openly threatened Senator Teslim Folarin, then the APC governorship candidate in Oyo State. In the recording, Auxiliary accused Sen. Folarin of plotting against him and warned that he would retaliate with deadly force if provoked. 
Auxiliary was used to intimidate former Oyo State Deputy Governor, Engr. Rauf Olaniyan, during the height of the political rift between him and the Governor. A petition was submitted by the former deputy governor to the Oyo State Police Command and the Department of State Security (DSS). 
Similarly, the mother of Rahmon Azeez, a graduate of Lead City University who lost his life during a violent incident involving PMS operatives and traders in Ibadan, publicly accused Auxiliary of responsibility. The allegation generated significant public concern and renewed calls for accountability.

Beyond these incidents, several allegations of arms stockpiling, public display of firearms, intimidation of transport rivals, and violent enforcement of park levies were levelled against Auxiliary and members of the PMS during that period.

All these incidents happened with Suri under his boss Auxiliary. 
Ironically, the relationship between Auxiliary and the state establishment eventually collapsed when Auxiliary was growing wings against the administration that had used him at the very beginning of the second term. 
The purpose of revisiting these events is not to sanitise the image of Suri or to excuse Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat’s association with him. The point is to take a broader view and expose Suri’s background and the hypocrisy of today’s political plotters.

If public and political figures should be scrutinised for their relationships with controversial individuals, then that scrutiny must extend to all political actors, regardless of party affiliation. It cannot begin and end with Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat.

A society that condemns political thuggery only when practised by opponents, while ignoring or rationalising it among allies, risks normalising the very culture of impunity it claims to reject.

The real challenge before Oyo State is not merely determining who took photographs with whom, or who attended whose political gatherings. It is whether the political class and the public are prepared to consistently reject the use of violence, intimidation, and thugs as instruments of political influence.

Until that happens, selective outrage will remain a poor substitute for genuine accountability.