After Tinubu, Then What?
Dialogue With Nigeria By AKIN OSUNTOKUN
DIALOGUE WITH NIGERIA By AKIN OSUNTOKUN
I was at Ada, Osun state, the other day, for the funeral ceremony of the founder and proprietor of the iconic Micom Golf and Hotel Resort, Prince Michael Ayantunde Ponle. Naturally, I went to commiserate with the widow, former deputy governor of Osun state and my admission officer at the faculty of social science, University of Lagos 46 years ago, Mrs Titi Laoye-Tomori. As is often the case anytime I ran into her, she took delight in reminding me of our prior relationship (student /admissions officer) at the Unilag. She asked me why I no longer write frequently. I attributed the lapse to the recurrent nature of the sociopolitical life of Nigeria; the same subjects of commentary keep repeating themselves. The subject of my column today on the primacy and priority of constitutional reforms typifies this attribute.
At the instance of the snap transition to civil democratic rule programme of the General Abdusalam Abubakar military administration, there ensued the debate within the ranks of the pro democracy group (National Democratic Coalition, NADECO) on the option to take between participating in the transition programme (oblivious of the nitty gritty of the 1999 constitution) and declining participation pending prior constitutional reforms. As it transpired, the former (option) won the day-to the eternal regret of the Pan Democrats. At the full maturity of the dysfunctional nature of the quasi unitarist 1999 constitution, it has been remorse galore.
Matters, predictably, have come to a tipping point, once again. At the heart of the problem is the internally inconsistent logic of over-centralisation of power (at the centre) in an inherently federalist polity. A centre that should ordinarily be viewed with tempered equinanimity has increasingly become the object of desperate, obsessive covetousness. Given the extant North/South rotation principle, it is considerate of Peter Obi to pledge that he would do only one term in office if elected. Others make it sound like rapists whispering among themselves on how many rounds they want to ravage the object of their lust.
In tandem with the regionalist letter and spirit of the Independence constitution, Sir Ahmadu Bello had chosen to remain as Premier of the Northern region and delegated his lieutenant Abubakar Tafawa Balewa to the federal government as Prime Minister. To the contrary, one of the ironies of post colonial Nigeria was the (reverse) spectre of the federalism personified Chief Obafemi Awolowo abdicating his Premiership of the Western region to embark on a near-obsessive aspiration to become the Prime Minister of Nigeria.
Otherwise full of insight into the Nigerian union, such as the prescience of proposing the incorporation of self-determination clause into the Independence constitution, it is difficult to reconcile this insight with his practical positions which often seems oblivious of limitations to the possibilities of Nigeria.
Inadvertently and by omission, Awolowo’s singular focus on the aspiration to become the President of Nigeria denied Nigeria the service he could have rendered for the sustenance of federalism in Nigeria. The Nigeria that emerged after the counter coup of July 1966 and survived to this day was decidedly anti-federalist, never mind the nominal proclamations of federalism. The philosophy that ensued from the civil war was that the might (of the federal government) is right, that the unity of Nigeria (understood as unitarist centralisation of powers) is non-negotiable.
Recall my earlier observation on the (what is new) recurring nature of Nigeria’s dilemma and corresponding commentaries. To substantiate this I will now represent what I wrote nine months ago to which I need not add or subtract a jot.
“In an election that is shaping up to become a Tinubu vs Islamic North blowout, the South West electorate is under duress to provide a block vote for one of their own. Given the operative philosophy of what is dubbed the ‘turn by turn’ Nigeria Ltd, it is unpardonable naivety and ignorance to think otherwise”.
“I have been hoping for Nigeria to reach this point of inflection in which the throw of the dice is between two fight-to-finish power players in a balance of terror situation. As they say, you cannot make omelette without breaking eggs”
“If we cannot agree that the present constitutional structure is irredeemable then let the logic of gridlock force a resolution. Any constitution that enables Nigerian presidents to indulge in a nation shattering power grab, is, by definition, a very bad constitution and deserves not a second longer of survival”.
“In addition to the legacy of a repetitive countrywide poor governance and other historical inhibitors, government patronage and largese is the critical life support. Unfortunately, the prevailing neo liberal economic dispensation has targeted much of the Nigerian free booty. Hence, (subjectively speaking), the North has got more axe to grind with the harbinger of this ‘misfortune’”
“Increasingly, the utility of Nigeria’s power politics players, for me, lies in their capacity to accelerate Nigeria towards the appointment we have with fate. I’m less interested in the governance capacity or lack of it than Tinubu’s preparedness to provoke a balance of power breakdown of the system. Those who are bitter with him and desperately want him out of power will only get my acknowledgement with an immediate sign up to the return of Nigeria to constitutional sanity. I’m not at all in any hurry to trade Tinubu for a reconditioned Buhari or any Northern or Southern power monger”.
“For those who want Nigeria to constitutionally remain in situ, they need to suffer the consequences and partake of the degradation and pain others have endured within a country that is structurally rigged against rationality.
For all I care, Tinubu may decide to fill all federal government vacancies with the people of Lagos state, if this is the catalyst required to spark a constitutional crisis and political meltdown (that will provoke a constitutional overhaul) then so be it”.
Is it not significant that beyond the criminalisation of Tinubu no presidential aspirant has deemed it fit to espouse constitutional reforms as a kernel of his campaign? When I was informed that an Arewa Consultative Forum has been going round the South West to seek an anti-Tinubu coalition. I said, well, did you ask them of their position on constitutional reforms?.
It has been said that Tinubu is worse than Abacha. If indeed he is, then the response should be what are the contents in the constitutional rules of the road that enables him to operate a dictatorship. Abacha could do all he did because he was running a military dictatorship. Is the Nigerian constitution at par with a dictatorship manual?
One of the good returns of this political season is the mainstreaming of the South East as represented by the national appeal of Peter Obi, yet as it has been noted elsewhere, would a potential President Obi not have to deal with a political status quo National Assembly and Judiciary? Systems matter more than individuals.
I am not the only one who has taken judicious note of the escalation of the ongoing campaign of ungovernability, its regional colouration and peculiarity of the new focus on military officers which seemed calculated at inciting a military mutiny. This is against the background that “in January 2026, the Nigerian military confirmed a foiled 2025 coup plot targeting President Bola Tinubu, reversing earlier denials. Over 30 officers, largely of Northern Nigerian extraction, were arrested for plotting to seize power, with reports highlighting regional grievances over military leadership and economic issues”.
Senator Shehu Sani recently remarked
“Each time election season draws near, bandits and terrorists in the North increase attacks. If your hatred for Tinubu has gotten to the point where you think killing and destroying your own people is a political strategy, then you have completely lost it”.
“You are not fighting Tinubu neither are you fighting for Nigerians. You burn communities, create chaos and then turn around to blame insecurity on the govt just to score cheap political points. That’s not activism, that is wickedness” .
“You are busy turning wives into widows, husbands into widowers, and children into orphans, all in a desperate attempt to push a narrative. But Nigerians are not blind. The truth is simple; you cannot blackmail a nation into rejecting a leader by inflicting pain on innocent people”.
“Tinubu is not your problem, your mindset is. And at the end of it all, while you are busy destroying your own people, the reality will still hit you hard because the Tinubu you think the best way to intrude his govt is by escalating security tension will be re-elected”.
This is not a new trend. There were speculations that the intensification of the Boko Haram crisis from 2013 was not a coincidence but orchestrated to stampede President Goodluck Jonathan out of office. Whether the speculation is true or not, the fact is that, more than any other factor, Jonathan owed his exit from office to the Boko Haram crisis.
What is not speculation was that there was no logic to the Sharia crisis (of 1999/2000) other than being fomented to subvert the Obasanjo presidency.
According to the Social science research gate, “Many observers considered the adoption of Sharia a “populist response” by the northern political elite to maintain influence after losing federal power to a Southern Christian, Olusegun Obasanjo, in 1999. The 1999 Sharia expansion is considered a crucial factor in strengthening religious divides, reducing security in the region, and acting as a precursor to the rise of Boko Haram”.
In the words of the chief orchestrator of the political Sharia “I can die for the cause of Islam if necessary. We are prepared to fight another civil war. We cannot be blackmailed into killing Sharia.” “I will continue to show openly and inside me the total commitment to the Sharia movement that is sweeping all over Nigeria. God willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementation of the Sharia in the country.”
On a lighter note
There has been this theory of Aso rock instrumentality to the occasional errant behaviour of the occupants. Elaborated by my brother, Reuben Abati, the thesis is that the presidential villa complex
is haunted by mysterious and maleficent forces casting their pall over all who dwell therein including especially the chief tenant. The point Abati laboured to make was that his principal, President Goodluck Jonathan took some decisions that could only be explained by recourse to the extraordinary. In a society as steeped in pseudo-religiosity and the occult as Nigeria is, Abati cannot be taken lightly. My experience and extrapolation is that all Nigerian Presidents would have taken one or two decisions which, upon subsequent reflection, leave them stupefied!
I will be taking a two months break from this page
Akin Osuntokun
24-04-26
