Nigeria is passing through another gate of hell on mother earth after surviving eight-year misrule, 2015-2023 in the firm grip of a platform hurriedly cobbled as a political party, named All Progressives Congress (APC) that trumpeted a claimed change mantra.
Unknowingly, the change meant from bad governance to a worse government. Then from a, worse exited government to the worst ever as corruptly installed by the worst public institutions.
Nigerians are steadily walking consciously and unconsciously into the trap of second slavery under an insincere and kleptomaniac administration piloted by Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) hue.
In history, Nigerians had never gone near the gate of hell, but now compelled to tolerate their artificially created worrisome situation under the claim of a Renewed Hope Agenda crafted to silence the voice of reason.
APC is governing Nigeria by deceit, not by sincerity, experience and intelligence. Nigerians are now conquered slaves working on APC plantation with Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the ruthless Sheriff that cares more for his nuclear family members, regional disciples and party sycophants suffering in silence but tirelessly beating the drums of reelection for expected patronage of falling rotten crumbs.
Tinubu said, APC is now the largest political party in Africa from the series of ‘forced’ defections ongoing towards the total annihilation of the democracy. That’s a straight confession of his efforts for the hatchet plan of destroying Nigeria for the benefit of his party cronies.
Not only that, corruption has been elevated to the highest under the watch of a Tinubu presidency. We are watching how party chieftains are swimming in public funds against national development. How contracts and appointments are awarded to fronts and sycophants against national interest.
A sample opinion on the leadership style of APC reveals volumes. Out of over one million Nigerians contacted on the streets, market places, hospitals; correctional centres, stadiums and other places in a period of three months, opined that APC is not the ideal party for the progress, security and unity of Nigerians. It was a party cobbled for those domiciled at the bottom pit of dustbin of history but mistakenly and through banditry threats, allowed to access leadership in 2015.
The more Nigerians look, they more they realize that almost every national disappointment—-unabated corruption, unemployment, escalating insecurity, decaying infrastructure, ethnic tension, hunger spiced with scorching poverty and lopsided appointments, traces back to one simple reason not farfetched: a chronic deficit of quality and sincere leadership of the APC.
APC accessed power in 2015 with the support of a deceitful propaganda of change and imported mercenaries. The real meaning of their change was shrouded in secrecy until when in power Nigerians came to know the meaning. It was a change from good living to beggar status.
From self-reliance to dependence on scanty donated palliatives periodically released to selected constituents with the intent of cushioning the artificially created hardship under a fictitious economic recovery.
After independence in 1960, Nigeria has experimented several conceivable forms of rule—-civilian, military, parliamentary, presidential—and yet only but one produced a sincere and committed government with vision and discipline that almost transformed its immense potential into prosperity. That was the first civilian government led by Benjamin Nnamdi Azikiwe as ceremonial president with Abubakar Tafawa Balewa as prime minister.
Since then, the country remains an enduring paradox: abundant human and material resources coexisting with endemic poverty, and mismanagement.
But why are Nigerian leaders always failing so consistently? Is it because of how they usually emerge to power—through godfathers, ethno-religious arithmetic, or military coups rather than through merit? Is it because they lack the required capacity, conventional education, needed experience, inbuilt sincerity, and moral grounding? Or is the system itself so corrupted that even good and honest people become captives of bad institutions?
The answers lie deep with Nigeria’s political evolution and social fabric. Leadership failure here is not an accident of history; it is a predictable outcome of how the nation recruits, rewards, and remembers its leaders. Nigerians in most cases sell their conscious to their under developers by electing mediocrity and renowned thieves and rogues into positions of authority not minding the aftermath of their sheepish endorsement.
In classical political thought, leadership means vision, integrity, and the ability to mobilize people toward a collective good. But in Nigeria under APC style, leadership has been reduced to the raw exercise of power. It is all about control, unmerited patronage, and absence of accountability, or sincerity accompanied with foolery and deceit. An average Nigerian politician in an elective office swims in a world of illusion, rated—–and often sees himself/herself—–not as a servant of the people that elected him/her but as a “big man or woman” in possession of authority and stolen public monies and living above his/her legitimate earning maintaining a horde of hangers-on, pimps, prostitutes, concubines, praise singers, clowns and rogues. His/her praises are sung for what is expected from the sleaze funds not that he/her is sincerely loved or genuinely respected for anything by the majority. He/she is in- directly a milking cow of those parasites and pretenders hovering around him/her saying Yes Sir to directives and orders politely but pretentiously to fool the fool for what he/she has for an offer.
The political lexicon itself reinforces this: people “capture power,” hold office,” and “share the national cake.” Power to APC is a trophy to be possessed, not a trust to be administered with sincerity.
This distortion has historical roots. Colonial rule accustomed Nigerians to authority that was distant, extractive, and unaccountable. The British governed indirectly through warrant chiefs and native authorities who ruled by decree, not consent.
When independence came, the colonial machinery of domination remained intact—-only the operators changed. Leadership continued to mean domination rather than representation.
After independence, the military entrenched this ethos even further. From 1966 – 1999, soldiers ruled Nigeria for nearly three decades. The barracks culture of obedience and command seeped into political life. Decision-making became top down, debate was seen as insubordination, and power was centralized in the presidency. These structural legacies created a leadership culture where power is personalized, accountability is optional, and followers are expected to obey rather than question. It is this mindset—-rather than just corruption or incompetence—–that continues to cripple Nigeria’s leadership class under APC.
The roots of leadership failure are visible in how Nigerian leaders always emerge through corruption infested election. In a functional democracy, leadership is filtered through merit, vision, and the consent of the governed. In Nigeria, most especially under APC, it is filtered through money, patronage, and manipulation. The colonial government empowered local elites who served British interests. APC is empowering clowns, mercenaries and touts to serve its interest.
At independence, these elites—-mostly from regional political parties—-were more preoccupied with ethnic, dominance than nation building as replicated today by APC. The 1960 First Republic collapsed under the weight of alleged corruption, electoral malpractice, and ethnic rivalry, culminating in the first military coup of 1966 that claimed the lives of the Prime Minister, Premiers of Northern and Western regions, Finance Minister and few other prominent politicians with integrity. It was more or less a regional cleansing. Politicians of Eastern region were spared the bullets by the coup plotters for obvious reasons not far from ethnic sentiment.
Gen. Johnson Thomas Umanakwe Aguiyi Ironsi who emerged as Military Head of State, had a short span in government. He was gruesomely murdered along with his host, the Military Governor of Western Region in Ibadan in retaliation which was followed by the emergence of Jack Yakubu Gowon in 1966.
Gowon was then just a youthful military officer at age 31. He became a military head of state not through deliberate selection or public mandate but by military consensus in a moment of crisis. He was the best bet for a stable Nigeria.
His nine-year rule was defined by both reconstruction and monumental waste. After the unfortunate civil war (1967-1970), Nigeria experienced unprecedented increase in oil revenue, but instead of, laying good and solid foundations for educational, industrial and agricultural growth, Gowon embarked on extravagant spending as if there was no tomorrow. When he declared that Nigeria’s problem was not money but how to spend it, he reflected his leadership’s lack of fiscal foresight that has continued to haunt the nation for decades.
The 1979 transition that gave Nigeria Shehu Shagari, whose emergence was shaped less by ideology than by elite compromise within the National Party of Nigeria (NPN). Shagari was a humble and decent politician but a weakling in leadership. He was surrounded by super corrupt politicians in a rat race for illicit wealth accumulation, and was indecisive in the face of economic decline. His government was overwhelmed by graft and patronage beyond reason. He had no moral justification of remaining in power beyond tolerance.
When Gen. Muhammadu Buhari booted out the NPN leadership style in December 1983, there were celebrations all over Nigeria—–mistaking another coup for deliverance. Several corrupt politicians were thrown into jail for their sins while few hurried into exile to avoid carrying their crosses.
Buhari’s military government demonstrated the dangers of authoritarian zeal without political sensitivity. His “War Against Indiscipline” had good intentions and timely for Nigerians but executed with arrogance and repression. He was kicked out of power by an over ambitious military officer, Gen. Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, who introduced an era of political manipulation dressed in the attire of reform.
Babangida perfected what can rightly be called “the culture of political deceit.” He introduced a two-party system and pretended to nurture the cobbled parties. Elections were conducted but without sincerity of his exit from power.
Babangida remain famous for annulling the June 12, 1993 presidential election—-the fairest in Nigeria’s political history—-thereby destroying public faith and trust in transition programs.
Under him, corruption became systemic; public contracts were inflated, and the military elite became multi millionaires overnight through corrupt practices.
By the time democracy returned to Nigeria in 1999, the country’s leadership recruitment system had been thoroughly corrupted. Politics suddenly became a lucrative investment; the cost of running for elective office soared, and political godfathers emerged as power brokers.
The Fourth Republic, beginning in 1999 with Obasanjo, was supposed to reset Nigeria’s leadership trajectory. Instead, it recycled many of the same discarded habits.
Obasanjo, a former head of a military government emerged a civilian president by providence, began reformist energy—–debt relief, anti-corruption drives, and economic restructuring. Yet by his second term in office, his reform momentum fizzled out and gave a pathway to authoritarian impulses. His attempt for a Third-term amendment in 2006 laced with heavy bribes spearheaded by former deputy senate president Ibrahim Nasiru Mantu and Sen. Jonathan Silas Zwangina, epitomized Nigeria’s recurring leadership flaw: the inability to let go of power. The timely rejection of the Third-term plan by the Senate under Sen. Ken Nnamani and House of Representatives under Ghali Umar Na’Abba, saved Nigeria from going into a second slavery period. If it had been the present collection in the 10th Senate and 10th House of Representatives, Obasanjo could have easily succeeded with his plan with neither resistance nor rejection. It could have been On Your Mandate We Stand!
Obasanjo’s successors——Umaru Musa Yar Adu’a, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, Muhammadu Buhari, and now Bola Ahmed Tinubu—-each illustrate different facets of leadership dysfunction, from ill-health and indecision to corruption, incompetence and ethnic partisanship.
The truth is simple but bitter: Nigeria is yet to produce desired leaders; it produces desperate power mongers, opportunity seekers and agents of self-enrichment. The process rewards cunning, not competence. Elections in Nigeria have transformed to wars of attrition fiercely fought with money and sponsored crime, propaganda, hate, misuse of compromised security personnel and manipulation under the albatross to good governance, APC. By the time the victor emerges through manipulation, he becomes authoritarian, a baggage and a complete disaster to the people. The only way out of the quagmire is for Nigerians to unite in thoughts and actions to chase APC and its agents out of power by all means possible. Allowing anything APC close to power spells disaster and catastrophe.
When you see something, say something. When, you do good you see good. When, you do bad you see bad twice. Do not say I did not tell you after you become a victim of APC shege and wuru-wuru! I Salute You All and Merry Christmas in Advance!
Muhammad is a commentator on national issues
