Columnists
Buhari, so what has changed?
By PRINCE EMEKA OBASI
In less than a week, it will be one full year since the President came to office on a platform of change. Whereas one year is a very short time in the life of any nation; in politics as the ancient saying goes, it can be an eternity. There are some who would contend that one year is too short a time to make an objective assessment of the administration of President Mohammadu Buhari. Such people would be right; there are others who may argue that one year is sufficient enough as an indicative assessment of the trajectory of the administration. Such people would equally be right. The truth really is that one year is neither too short nor insufficient enough to say effectively how a government has performed.
The best one can do objectively speaking, is to assess the general direction of the administration and project how well it would do in the long run. It has not been easy for Nigeria and Nigerians, in the opinion of many, things have become incrementally more difficult. The standard of living has steadily eroded and the purchasing power of many Nigerians has declined sharply, and the optimism index, an index measuring the hope and expectations of a better life by many Nigerians carried out by this newspaper revealed strikingly the despair and anxiety many Nigerians harbour. Indeed, by weight of considered evidence; it would be tempting or inevitable to conclude that the administration has failed so far.
Many of those who have lost their jobs or those who are in employment but are not paid regularly or in full may come to starkly different conclusions. The economy does not tell the whole story, it was very clear that the Nigerian economy was going to get into trouble, it did not matter who won the 2015 Presidential Election.
The indicators were already apparent in the period leading up to the election or immediately after. With the sharp decline in the price of oil and the steady erosion of our foreign reserve, it was crystal clear that the economy was heading for turbulence. So, it really did not matter who won the election; there were going to be problems.
However, the difference would have been in the handling of these problems. President Goodluck Jonathan, the immediate past President, and indeed some other past Presidents would have handled the situation differently in order to mitigate the harsh socioeconomic realities, we may never really know.
That supposition for now remains in the realm of conjecture.
The path of realism dictates that we deal with the situation at hand, and that situation is that President Buhari is currently the man in charge.
He came to power on a three-pronged mission, one to fight corruption, two to fight insecurity and three to create jobs. It was on those premises that Nigerians voted for him. Anything else will be wrong.
It is certainly unacceptable to judge a student or a candidate in examination on questions that are not asked. President Buhari promised during the campaign that he would fight corruption, the question to ask a year after assuming office is: has he fought corruption or is he fighting corruption? The answer is a deafening yes.
The campaign against corruption by this government is the most sustained effort in the history of Nigeria to combat what many Nigerians have virtually agreed to be a cancer in the body politick of the nation. In the view of many Nigerians, corruption is the number one enemy of Nigeria.
It is the reason why Nigeria has been stunted; corruption is a reason why we have such infrastructure deficit. Corruption is a reason why there is such a gap, a sharp gap between the rich and the poor, so any government that pursues the anti-corruption crusade with such rigour would earn the respect and admiration of many Nigerians. Indeed, Buhari”s abiding popularity among a section of Nigerians has derived from his campaign against corruption in his first coming as military Head of State in the early-eighties. Many Nigerians still think that the disruption of that administration is part of the reason why the country has not found its footing.
There is a lingering belief in many quarters that if that administration had been allowed to continue Nigeria would have sorted itself out long before now. In his second coming, president Buhari has remarkably not disappointed, he has launched a massive anti-corruption crusade targeting the high and the mighty.
Some people may quarrel with certain aspects of the anti-corruption programme, they may be right. The issue of the rule of law, the issue of selective adherence to court judgement, the issue of executive high handedness and the overzealousness of the security officials are all matters of due concern.
I agree with those who say that corruption cannot be fought with corruption, in other words, you cannot fight illegality with illegality. I have always maintained that undisciplined and lawless security officers are as much a threat to the nation as a corrupt public servant.
None of the above should be encouraged, in the quest to fight corruption; we must adhere to the laws of the land. The laws of a nation-state are and should be sacrosanct, these laws include the law against corruption and the law against executive high handedness, nevertheless, it is only right and proper to give credit to whom it is due. On the issue of fighting corruption president Buhari has acquitted himself well.
Two, the fight against Boko Haram and insecurity, despite occasional skirmishes, it is clear that the Boko Haram has been largely routed. President Buhari has delivered on his mandate to fight Boko Haram.
For confronting frontally one of the most dreaded terrorist organisations in the world, Buhari lived up to his campaign promise and should be commended , however, it has emerged that Boko Haram is not the only security threat facing the nation.
While the president has succeeded in fighting Boko Haram, insecurity across the land has escalated. Kidnapping, murders, assassinations and general insecurity of lives and property have become rampant. The security architecture which the President designed appears to have been very narrow since it was mostly tailored to contain Boko Haram insurgency; there is therefore a need for a more comprehensive security programme that would speak to all manners of insecurity in different parts of the country. The protection of lives and property is at the heart of government. It is the core responsibility of government anywhere in the world to ensure the welfare of its citizens. A government that fails to create a secure environment for her citizens is a government that has lost its fundamental charter.
Part of the novel security threat is the Fulani herdsmen which has become a growing menace in various parts of the country, Fulani herdsmen have become a nuisance and a nightmare. Globally, it is now ranked as the fourth most dangerous terrorist organisations spreading death, destruction and sorrow in the areas it strikes. The administration has curiously failed to respond to this new security threat with the same zeal with which it responded to the Boko Haram insurgency. It took public uproar, especially over the Enugu massacre for President Buhari to issue the first official reaction to the issue. Without belabouring the point it is important to state that insecurity in any part of Nigeria is insecurity in all parts of Nigeria. Government should not allow the issue of Fulani herdsmen to mutate into another Frankenstein monster and become a national threat that Boko Haram did. A stitch in time as the saying goes saves nine. There are those who would even argue that it is already too late to contain the Fulani herdsmen menace, government ought to have acted more swiftly and firmly. On that score president Buhari has not performed creditably well.
The third mandate of his campaign promise is the issue of job creation. On this one, some would argue that the less said the better. One year of course is too short for any government to create sufficient jobs, especially in an economy like Nigeria. But it is still enough time to lay the foundation. Sadly, the administration has not performed very well on the issue of economic policy management. You cannot create jobs in a vacuum. Jobs are created within the context of an economy, after observing the administration within this one year, the reasonable conclusion of a keen observer would be that it was not initially concerned about economic policies management as it were with other aspects of governance. That lack of attention has become very apparent and has proved to be the Achilles’ heel of this administration. The petroleum crisis is a case in point. Economic policy management or job creation is at the heart of governance anywhere in the world.
Jobs provide the citizens with meaningful engagement, and are at the heart of government. Government must create the environment for enterprise to thrive and any government that fails to do that will find itself at the mercy of its citizens. In the next one year, one would expect that the administration would sit up and embrace the challenges of making the Nigerian economy buoyant again. For those who think the administration has not succeeded the economy would be their reference point. But I do not think the administration has not succeeded. There are things that the administration could have done differently and even better, its choice of staffers to man strategic ministries leaves much to be desired, such as putting a square peg in a round hole. Perhaps, it would not be out of place for the government to reappraise its staffing policies and make some adjustments. Governance is not an easy undertaking. That is why it is not given to everybody. Life in the opposition is usually easier, for as the saying goes; it is easier to destroy than to build, running a government is a different kettle of fish from leading an opposition party or movement.
