Leadership, according to thinkers from Plato to modern scholars, is a sacred trust. Plato defined it as the harmonization of conflicting interests within society, while political scientist Michael Smith sees it as sacrificial, selfless, and inclusive, a role grounded in service rather than lordship.

A true leader earns authority through diligent service, extensive consultation, and a commitment to justice and inclusion. Decisions such as zoning, power rotation, and equitable distribution of leadership roles must arise from collective consensus, not the whims of a few power-hungry individuals. When leadership becomes the playground of a manipulative clique, it devolves into a dangerous form; rogue leadership.

In Nigeria, former President Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan stands as an example of principled leadership. Faced with the rot of a petroleum subsidy cartel, he chose reform over complicity. Despite the backlash, including civil unrest and political sabotage he prioritized national unity over personal ambition, even conceding defeat in the 2015 election with grace and integrity. His declaration that his ambition was “not worth the blood of any Nigerian” remains a defining moment in our political history.

Rogue leadership, on the other hand, is the antithesis of all that leadership should be. As Smith aptly noted, a rogue leader abuses power, acts unilaterally, and manipulates institutions to serve narrow personal interests. Such figures erode democratic norms, suppress dissent, exploit division, and develop cult-like personalities. History offers chilling examples: Hitler’s Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s fascist Italy, and imperial Japan’s militarism in the 1930s and 40s.

Unfortunately, signs of this rogue leadership have begun to emerge in our own backyard specifically, Cross River North. A political faction has emerged, arrogating to itself the exclusive right to allocate political offices without regard for tradition, community input, or democratic process. This group, operating more like a secret cult or cartel, ignores the time-honored customs of village-square deliberation, town hall consensus, and communal decision-making.

Instead of fostering inclusive dialogue about equitable leadership distribution, this group dictates terms, driven by personal gain rather than collective good. They have bypassed the community’s traditional structures, families, age grades, and social groups which once ensured that leadership choices were fair and representative.

In this region, we have always practiced a balanced rotation of power, guided by history, equity, and mutual respect. Conversations typically begin with questions of fairness: Who has held what position before? Who hasn’t? Why must one group or person monopolize power? A rogue leader ignores such dialogue, instead sowing discord and mistrust to maintain control. He manipulates systems, loots public resources, and serves personal rather than public interests.

In one glaring instance, a supposed public servant transformed into a timber merchant, decimating forest reserves for private profit. He diverted constituency projects, refurbished instead of building new infrastructure, and still had the audacity to lobby for a third term. These are not the actions of a servant-leader, but of a man possessed by ambition and greed.

Rogue leadership is often desperate. It cannot survive outside the corridors of power and is willing to go to extreme lengths even violence to remain relevant. The political violence that claimed the life of Emmanuel Ololo Ushemen, the pioneer PDP Chapter Chairman in Obanliku, is a tragic example of the consequences of unchecked rogue ambition.

But rogue leadership can only thrive with rogue followership. When citizens trade their rights for a plate of pepper soup and a bottle of beer, they become complicit. A society that fails to challenge rogue leadership when it first rears its head is on a path to self-destruction.

Thankfully, there is a glimmer of hope. Across the streets of Obudu, I hear a new song, a declaration from the people that when it is Obudu’s turn, the people will decide. For now, it is Obanliku’s turn, and so it must remain. The principle is simple: what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Second terms should be earned, not by manipulation or force but by service and consensus. Senator Jarigbe Agom Jarigbe and Hon. Peter Akpanke have demonstrated leadership that meets these standards. Their continued representation is a reflection of public confidence, not backroom deals.

Let the natural, communal way of handling leadership in Northern Cross River prevail over rogue ambition. Let us reject manipulation and restore the values that once guided our political journey.