By Elempe Dele
On 6th June 2025, it was reported in the news that Akwa Ibom State Commissioner for Special Duties and Ibom Deep Seaport, Mr. Ini Ememobong, formally resigned following Governor Eno’s defection to the All Progressive Congress, APC.
In a Facebook post on Friday, Ememobong explained that his resignation was in accordance with the Governor’s directive that any political appointee unwilling to join the APC should step aside.
“Today, I have tendered my resignation to the Governor in compliance with his directive that his appointees who are unwilling to join him on the political journey to the APC should resign,” he stated.
Ememobong, a member of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, emphasised that his decision was guided by his principles and long-standing opposition to the APC, which he said is validated by majority of Nigerians.
He was generally hailed as a man of ‘integrity’ across different social media platforms. In my lucid intervals during the period, I had reason to think the act was not necessarily a matter of integrity, from his explanation, but that of conviction. Politicians decamp if they feel their former party no longer align with their interests or if there is internal conflicts. They also decamp for political expediency, dissatisfaction with the former party and or lack of ideology.
The issue of rational choice theory comes to play in making political choices such as decamping. Rational choice theory, is a concept used to understand and predict human behaviour by assuming individuals make decisions based on logical reasoning and self-interest, weighing potential benefits against costs to maximize their outcomes. This theory suggests that individuals are rational actors who make choices that best serve their own interests. Just like the governor, Ememobong, the ex-commissioner made his choice which he feels will serve his own interest.
Decamping from one party to another has been a political culture in Nigeria even before the emergence Fourth Republic. Politicians do it for several reasons, not always necessarily out of lack of integrity or out of conviction as well. There are two notable figures in Nigeria with large following who top the ranks of those who had formally decamped serially in Nigeria. Alhaji Abubakar Atiku and Mr. Peter Obi. Atiku was one of the founding members of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. In 2006, he left to join Action Congress, AC. In 2009, he returned back to PDP. In 2013, he defected to APC. He moved back to PDP in 2017. Today, he is one of the arrow heads of the Coalition that is said to be fine-turning plans to register it as All Democratic Alliance, ADA.
Mr. Peter Obi contested as the governor of Anambra State as a member of the All Progressive Grand Alliance, APGA. In 2019, he decamped to PDP and became a member of the Labour Party in 2022 till date.
No one can strongly criticize both of these political actors for being lacking in integrity for decamping, especially Mr. Obi. In fact, he is one of the few politicians in Nigeria that integrity can be ascribed to for his records as a public servant.
In simple terms, integrity is the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles. It encompasses being truthful and sincere in one’s actions and words. People with integrity are dependable and can be relied upon to act ethically and responsibly. In my subjective view, the commissioner’s refusal to decamp to another party with the governor was not necessarily a matter to be tied to the apron of integrity, rather it was a matter of professed belief in his opposition to APC and conviction. Tossing the word ‘integrity’ vicariously under this context to me is a matter of moralistic fallacy – an invalid conclusion from a purely faulty evaluative premise. For example, it amounts to invalid conclusion to think “everyone who went to bed last night must wake up.”
People basically create their own values, not because they possess integrity, perhaps because of preservation. What makes people great is not fundamentally because of their beliefs, but their ‘valuing’ conduct and actions. This philosophical thought is a common premise in politics and its understanding, which should be absorbed within contextual meanings of deployed terms. It is disingenious to merge the opinions of others with critical reasons. How can we quickly frame the puzzle of one man decamping or not decamping under the context of lack of integrity and integrity without falling into the pits of fallacy? We are in an era where knowable truth must be sort, which will lead us eventually to evaluating reasons for people’s actions. No doubt, there is a huge conflict between morality and politics, and it is this dichotomizing conflict that will sooner or later lead us to any valuation of political actions. Without this painstaking thought-process, we will loose meanings of words like ‘integrity’ as associated with political actions.
