The 21st Century Chronicle’s detailed comparison of governance between Nigeria’s recent presidents starkly underscores the deficiencies of the current administration, particularly when viewed through the lens of broader principles championed by those committed to political inclusiveness and constitutional integrity.
A glaring departure is evident in the choice of running mates: whereas the previous leader made a conscious effort to bridge Nigeria’s religious divide by selecting a southern Christian as his deputy, the current president’s selection of a fellow Muslim ally has exacerbated regional and religious polarization, deepening societal divides at a time when unity should be paramount.
In shaping ministerial appointments, the contrast could not be clearer. The former administration’s pragmatic inclusion of qualified southerners at the helm of key ministries reflected a commitment to fair national representation. By contrast, the current government’s concentration of power within a narrow circle aligned closely with the president risks alienating vast swathes of the country, undermining cohesion and sowing resentment in northern regions.
Respect for constitutional process appears alarmingly eroded. The previous president upheld transparency and legal protocols in power transitions during absences, reinforcing stable governance. The present leader’s sidestepping of these norms—eschewing formal handovers and veiling travel plans—raises worrying questions about the erosion of democratic accountability and risks setting dangerous precedents for unchecked executive power.
Of equal concern is the brazen familial interference in governance. Unlike his predecessor who kept kin removed from official duties, the current presidency has blurred lines between family interests and state affairs, with the president’s son evidently wielding unofficial influence in government operations. Such nepotism conflicts with democratic ideals and fosters perceptions of personal fiefdom rather than national stewardship.
Institutional integrity and meritocracy have likewise suffered. The previous administration, for all its shortcomings, placed a premium on honest, candid counsel and professionalism. The current leadership’s apparent preference for cronies and loyalists—exemplified by key figures embroiled in controversies involving massively overpriced contracts—erodes public confidence and exacerbates governance inefficiencies.
High-profile political insiders rewarded with patronage highlight an unseemly pattern that has deepened mistrust between government and citizens. This approach starkly contrasts with the ethos of accountable governance, which calls for competence and transparency rather than factional loyalty.
Ministerial competence is another casualty. Seasoned professionals led critical portfolios before; now, mismatched appointments have resulted in operational dysfunction and weakened service delivery, further exposing the administration’s governing deficiencies.
Given these deteriorations, it is imperative to champion political movements advocating for genuine inclusiveness, constitutional adherence, and merit-based governance rather than entrenched interests. Increasing democratic engagement and civic vigilance are crucial to steering the nation away from the current trajectory marked by personalism and fragmentation. Only through steadfast commitment to these values can Nigeria reclaim effective governance rooted in national unity and public trust.
Source: Noah Wire Services