The King of Iwo, Oba Adewale Akanbi, is under public scrutiny following comments he made dismissing native doctors and traditional Yoruba spiritual practices. In a widely shared video, the monarch questioned why anyone would entrust their life to a Babalawo, stating that such individuals cannot carry out medical operations. His remarks were delivered during a public appearance, though the exact date and location were not specified. Oba Akanbi emphasized modern medicine over indigenous healing systems, sparking backlash across social media platforms. Many users criticized the king for disrespecting cultural heritage, while others supported his stance on scientific healthcare. The Yoruba traditional religious community has responded with outrage, calling the comments insensitive and uninformed. No formal statement has been issued by the royal palace since the video surfaced. The controversy has reignited debate over the role of traditional beliefs in contemporary Nigerian society.
Oba Adewale Akanbi's dismissal of Babalawos as incapable of performing medical operations cuts deeper than a simple critique of traditional medicine—it reveals a growing tension between modernity and cultural identity in Yoruba society. By framing native doctors solely through the lens of surgical capability, the king reduces centuries of spiritual and holistic practice to a reductive standard they were never meant to meet.
The backlash is not just about respect for tradition; it reflects anxieties among older generations and cultural custodians who see such remarks as erasure. For many in Iwo and beyond, Babalawos are not alternatives to surgeons but custodians of knowledge, mediators between the physical and spiritual worlds. The king's position, as a traditional ruler, makes his rejection of these roles particularly jarring—his authority itself is rooted in the same cultural framework he now appears to undermine.
Ordinary Nigerians, especially in rural Yorubaland, rely on a dual system where hospitals and native doctors coexist. This comment risks alienating those who navigate both worlds without seeing them as mutually exclusive. It also emboldens a top-down narrative that delegitimizes indigenous knowledge.
This is not an isolated incident but part of a recurring pattern where traditional leaders make sweeping statements without acknowledging the complexity of the roles they are critiquing.
