AFAS DECIDES 2020: OF MANIFESTOES NIGHT OR ‘MANIFESWOES’

Moderator:  Afasites do you have any questions for the aspirants?Pls we would just take two questions(he takes the mic to an honourable who signifies)

Honourable: My name is …..I just want to say that Moses Aderemi is the right man for the job. Vote Moses Aderemi. That’s all, I actually do not have any question.

It had all appeared like a drama only to unfold in a jungle of AFAS manifesto night. One would have rightly assumed, with no exaggeration, that he had walked through the deepest oceans to experience the devil at first hand. The devil, in quote, had decided to lay his workshop at the intended AFAS Manifesto night—the sheer essence or purpose of the manifesto night was defeated within a twinkle of an eye and replaced by a whole junk of illaudable scheme. At the end when we have to pen down our thoughts, we are only made to combat the unwillingness of our intellect to drive home our points, yet again, to AFASITES.

AFAS electioneering process had begun on the 11th of January with the screening stage as conducted by the electoral committee. The screening result, as expected, was met with so many disapproval from AFASITES who felt the committee were out to get their favourite aspirants and threw subtle tantrums such as the parameters for disqualifying or zeroing out one or most of the aspirants were invalid. How invalid did the results get with the press conducting their own assessment process of these aspirants?

From observation, both results were closely similar. However, it would not be fair to accurately pass on an objective remark on the press night result as there was no accurate yardstick to measure or sample pressmen questions and mode of individual grading. All, in the true fulfillment of election exercise, is most genuine in the best interest of those who are to be governed or lead.

As stated in preceding editorial piece, at the deciding end of the whole electioneering process are members of this prestigious faculty. YOU, I and collectively WE who wield the final power to decide who will best lead the interest of the association. It was stated explicitly that if by all means the electoral screening and the press night results do no justice to convince us on the right candidate to vote for, it will be fool handy to be led by prejudice, apathy and undue refrainment from presidential and manifesto night were we ought to see these aspirants reel out their plans and directly ask them questions. Quite sadly, what played out at the manifesto night gave no room for AFASITES to ask questions as they should have. It was all a swishing moments of pandemonium and rickety bandwagons of supporters resisting so hard not to choke up one another.

While it appeared like the candidates had their manifestoes well rehearsed and delivered on stage, the average AFASITE who was hell-bent on catching witty lines and posing questions to them was at total loss to the unfolding of events. The larger lot of AFASITES present on the other hand, showed less interest to the authencity of candidates’ manifestoes and groveled along with the crowd’s booing, jeering and cheering.

When room was eventually given for questions to be asked, it was most appalling that an honourable member would claim the microphone to campaign on behalf of his chosen aspirants rather than pose logical questions of which reason he was given the mic to do in the first place. What happened to the legislative-state of mind or ensuring that the house have lesser problems to deal with by asking questions ?

Most certainly, AFASITES, honourables inclusive, have every right to campaign for whosoever they want to and constitute a cheer-leading forum for them but won’t it do us a lot of good at this stage of past experience(s) of fraudulent activities  to separate disillusionment from reality?

The bandwagon of supporters, if asked, tend to give the manifesto night a bit of the whole election vibe and energy but to what extent do they need to assert their allegiance to a particular aspirant and cause an uproar? Rather than recount and ponder on candidates plans painstakingly heard, we would only be recounting woes of heated arguments, excessive hypes, fights and flings of threats.

Thousands of disheartening articles and comments may trail after the flawed electoral committee or the provocative and overzealous pressmen at press night, but drastic fate will be sealed in the stead of complaints and articles if we allow ourselves to be lead by our emotions and not intellect. How can it be said that we have allowed our so-called friendship with any of these aspirants to delude our judgment or sense of reasoning? If the basis of our friendship with any aspirants is on a firm ground, we would not want to be a party to publicly put such a friend to shame when he or she is to function appropriately in that office.

Apparently, election by cheap popularity and cordial relationships with candidates have always done the trick for many AFASITES but when blames are to be apportioned, many will most likely not want to have a share of it. Nonetheless, in a few hours from now, the stage to cast our votes will be set. All eyes will be on us to make the right decision. Do let us make the best of it.