As is often the case with leaders who have governed a nation, Muhammadu Buhari's most profound feelings are rooted in the millions he once guided. These sentiments extend back to the years when he gathered followers under the banners of various political parties, each time falling short and disappointing both himself and his supporters, until he eventually reached the pinnacle of power in 2015. It is now sobering to realize that he had unknowingly conveyed the same sentiment in his famous inaugural speech, where he stated, “I belong to everybody and I belong to nobody.” My reflections here strongly align with this statement, as it serves as a clear framework for evaluating his presidency. Alongside this, the slogan of "Change," which his party used to secure electoral success, stands out. Among other pledges, Buhari made significant commitments to reform.
At the start of his first term, he expressed his desire to reform public institutions, promote unity, and, most importantly, address corruption. At that moment, no other promises would have been more appealing to Nigerians. A recession was clearly in progress. Goodluck Jonathan had failed in managing insecurity and economic challenges. Combined with a serious personality and effective efforts by political strategists to remove any negative image from the incoming president, no candidate seemed more suitable. Nevertheless, the election result was likely more divisive than many were willing to admit. For one thing, Buhari was a candidate from a coalition party, which could now efficiently rally support and promote his candidacy across the mainly Muslim northern region. On the other hand, the 2011 contest between Buhari and Jonathan resulted in hundreds of deaths following the latter's win, indicating that both sides had strategic and harmful tactics to employ on their path to power.
It wasn't helpful that Buhari had used intense language, claiming in 2012 that baboons and dogs would all be covered in blood if the 2015 elections followed the same pattern as the previous year. Therefore, when, at the conclusion of the presidential election, Jonathan admitted defeat and quietly stepped back from national politics, everyone felt a great relief. Buhari's team making security and corruption their main focus was wise. Studies conducted around that time revealed that almost 90 percent of Nigerians were worried about corruption and crime, with more than 70 percent concerned about Islamic extremism. Who else could be better suited to address these issues than someone whose leadership experience extended beyond just military to include political aspects?
Unfortunately, however, the Buhari image was not meant to last. The man, through both intention and coincidence, started to contradict everything he had previously created as a representation of the type of leader that Nigerians desired. Initially, there was his decisiveness. The Buhari who led the 'War Against Indiscipline' in the 1980s with such brutal intensity that Wole Soyinka described it as being carried out "to sadistic levels," now hesitated when choosing the right subordinates to continue the work of governance, which everyone agreed required immediate attention. This behavior earned him the nickname 'Baba Go Slow,' and came at a cost to the country in terms of administrative effectiveness. It is standard for foreign investors to assess the quality of individuals appointed to key government positions, especially those in economically crucial areas, during the early stages of new administrations. These appointments set the tone for the kind of national policy that would follow before they even began their roles, and thus served as indicators of the much-mentioned 'investor confidence.' Therefore, even if he had referred to ministers as "noisemakers" who left the real work to civil servants and technocrats in a private conversation with French journalists, such hesitation was unlikely to gain him allies among them.
However, this was just one of many dark clouds that consistently surrounded the man who had been heavily promoted as a reformed democrat. Occasionally, his true views on Nigeria's situation and solutions to its problems would surface. There were also broken promises, although some significant ones, especially concerning security and the economy, seemed to stem from pure imagination in the first place. Buhari had notably questioned the value of the fuel subsidy program. He criticized it as corrupt and designed to facilitate the theft of the country's resources. When he took office, there was hope that he would address a major source of revenue loss for the federal government. This goal, however, turned out to be unrealistic. Buhari was very sensitive to the already fragile feelings of Nigerians and ended up letting the scheme continue under his administration, even as prices kept increasing.
This is where Chinese President Xi Jinping's expression of sympathy seems particularly appropriate for his followers. The Chinese leader characterized the former president as adhering to policies that were suitable for "national conditions." This statement holds some truth, as Buhari indeed faced opposition that would have arisen from any significant economic changes. If he had completely eliminated the fuel subsidy, food prices—already rising due to increasing hunger and alarming levels of unemployment—would have increased further. However, this does little to justify the risks his stance created from a leadership perspective. With multiple warning signs indicating the Nigerian economy was deteriorating rapidly, Buhari remained unmoved.
Even worse, he implemented a mix of unconventional temporary measures and excessive borrowing. With Central Bank Governor Godwin Emefiele by his side, his administration gradually pushed Nigeria to the edge. Interestingly, this same individual had criticized his predecessor during the initial years of his tenure for mishandling the economy. It then turned into a scene of hypocrisy as the man once seen as Nigeria's path to stability began to fall apart.
In addition, examining Buhari through the same puritan framework he was marketed with highlights concerning deficiencies. It is natural for a person who claims to be fighting corruption to represent the values that make him credible. These, naturally, consist of transparency, responsibility, and respect for basic human rights. The Buhari administration repeatedly pledged to reveal the names of individuals backing terrorism, yet his team kept coming up with different justifications for not disclosing this information. The president also targeted strong opponents of his government, especially journalists. During Buhari's leadership, the nation saw several direct attacks on press members who were merely performing their legal responsibilities.
Because his administration was known for questionable appointments, including individuals accused of the very corruption he had pledged to combat, he found himself engaged in a complex struggle to eliminate opposition. His determination was evident, yet it seemed to focus more on maintaining power than on eradicating the problems he had vowed to address. Although he publicly stated his commitment to protecting press freedom, the actions of his government indicated a different priority. In this regard, his time in office can be described as a chaotic rush to avoid responsibility. Even the First Lady, Aisha Buhari, appeared unable to resist taking advantage of the lack of accountability. In 2022, a student from the Federal University of Dutse, Aminu Adamu, posted a photo of the former first lady on Twitter with the caption, “Mama is eating fat off the poor people's money.” Her reaction was a silent abduction by the secret police and a two-week detention. During this time, he reportedly endured torture and mistreatment, which Amnesty International openly condemned as a clear violation of his human rights. His government marked his term with the enforced disappearance of critics, often under fabricated charges conveniently covered by the controversial Cybercrimes Act. The disregard for human rights and the rule of law inevitably spread to his subordinates, who freely used state resources to suppress opponents. At one point, the former Inspector-General of Police, Usman Alkali Baba, told officers involved in a new initiative to tackle insecurity in the Southeast to focus less on human rights violations while carrying out their duties. Throughout the Buhari era, such situations were common. Except for the fact that it was a completely different time compared to over forty years earlier, the strategies remained largely the same. It is true that only ardent supporters of the president would still believe that the former general had changed his ways.
Although Buhari significantly damaged his reputation with his remarks, the group most impacted would be the younger generation. His statement implying that Nigerian youth were a group of lazy individuals waiting for handouts from the government was one of several actions that caused discontent. The president clearly failed to recognize the level of effort put in by the large population of young people competing on an international level. He also refused to acknowledge the institutional obstacles that this demographic constantly faces in order to achieve success. Moreover, even when they do succeed, they encounter challenges in maintaining their position. If the president had known nothing else, he should have been aware of the significant outflow of talent to other countries in an attempt to escape the oppressive national environment he now led. Buhari's dismissive attitude toward young people became more apparent in 2020 during the #EndSARS protests. At that time, the military shot at protesters holding the Nigerian flag while singing the national anthem, and for a long time, denied it. Even Buhari's ministers participated in the farce by staging a humorous attempt at investigation. The inquiry panels that followed had varying degrees of success, with accountability remaining elusive for those responsible for the massacre. Each year, people return to the Toll Gate to remember those who lost their lives under the watchful eyes of police. #EndSARS cannot be ignored for many reasons.
The president's approach was already common and expected at that time. Previously, he had completely dismissed public demands for action from the presidency, maintaining a silence so profound that the office might as well have been nonexistent. For example, as the farmer-herders conflict escalated into something more horrifying, Buhari's silence caused many to question whether he was prioritizing his ethnic loyalties over the nation. On occasions when he finally spoke, his responses were clearly unenthusiastic. Directly provoking young people was his decision to ban the popular social media platform X, which was then called Twitter, for several months. The trigger was the app's removal of his inflammatory tweet about Biafra — "Many of those acting improperly today are too young to know about the destruction and loss of life during the Biafra war. Those of us who endured 30 months in the fields, who lived through the war, will respond in the language they understand." This statement caused outrage because it touched on sensitive issues related to the civil war that still remain painful. So, when Twitter removed the post, stating it violated its "abusive behavior" policy, the government quickly imposed a ban on the app two days later. It was one thing for a back-and-forth to occur between the president and the major social media company, but another to impose a total ban on a tool that served as both a source of income and a way for many Nigerians to cope. Considering there were already numerous reasons to be upset, including the strikes by the Academic Staff Union, Buhari only managed to highlight his shortcomings further.
However, if Buhari's inability to attract young people had increased the desire for the end of his term, his naira design policy made that outcome more certain. The man's interest in ensuring that Tinubu, the godfather who had helped him into power, did not take over himself led to a descent into absurdity. The Central Bank ordered a currency redesign with the official reason being routine, aimed at combating kidnapping, vote-buying, and promoting a shift towards a cashless economy, but all while failing to recognize significant capacity gaps. Furthermore, the majority of transactions in Nigeria's largely informal economy are done in cash. Implementing a redesign within an extremely short period of three months was therefore a call for a frantic rush.
As situations grew increasingly disordered, information surfaced indicating that the leadership had not thoroughly examined all consultation methods and possible consequences prior to initiating the redesign. The data was evident: a large number of individuals depended on cash, and there were insufficient banks, particularly in remote regions. There were also serious dangers to the financial system if the policy continued. Nevertheless, the CBN proceeded until the Supreme Court intervened, halting it at least temporarily. It is hard to envision a more turbulent manner for someone who had been in power for eight years to leave their mark.
In my view, the late former president had minimal involvement in the decision-making processes of his government during its final stages. As he frequently mentioned in the last months, he was keen on returning to the quiet life that Daura provided. Therefore, if any issues or problems arose amidst the turbulent challenges facing Nigeria, attributable to the actions of a government associated with him, they were acceptable once he stepped down. This does not imply that his administration lacked achievements. Indeed, Buhari initiated what is likely the most significant infrastructure development in the country's history. His contributions to Nigeria's railway and road systems are evident for everyone to observe. He is also well-known for his efforts in settling pensions and gratuities, where expectations had been low.
In terms of politics, Buhari has left behind millions of loyal supporters in northern Nigeria. Once a dependable ally in his repeated battles within Nigeria's electoral landscape, they now serve as a crucial base for both the current administration and the opposition. It will be interesting to see how each side tries to win over this group and the risks they take in aligning their objectives with the country's broader interests, but the Buhari era will not be easily forgotten. By this, I am not just referring to 2015; I also mean the highly significant nineteen months of his authoritarian rule. These two periods, shaped by the events that defined them, are certain to remain in our shared memory.
Falola is a historian and an academic specializing in African Studies. He holds the distinction of being a member of the Historical Society of Nigeria and the Nigerian Academy of Letters, and has previously led the African Studies Association.
RELATED STORY: Buhari's critics will be forgotten like stray dogs, as stated by Fani-Kayode
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).
Posting Komentar