Editorial
Ministers’ Sack: Just Not Enough
Just when Nigerians have largely given up and merely marking time for the present Federal Government to roll up its acts in the next one year and eight months or so, the President, Muhammadu Buhari, emerged from the blues to relieve two cabinet ministers of their appointment, last week.
Addressing the Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting on Wednesday, September 1, 2021, President Buhari gave a synoptic overview of the aspirations of his administration, especially since August, 2019 and how desirous he was to bequeath legacy achievements by the terminal date of the government.
To this end, he said, he had decided to respond to identified weaknesses and strengths in his government with a view to making positive impact in the existential condition of Nigerians.
“Accordingly, a few cabinet changes, marking the beginning of a continuous process, have been approved,” he said, adding that Mohammed Sabo Nanono, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and his counterpart in the Ministry of Power, Engr Sale Mamman would be marking “their last participation in the Federal Executive Council deliberations”.
“Two years and some months into the second term, the tradition of subjecting our projects and programme implementation to independent and critical self-review has taken firm roots through sector reporting during cabinet meetings and Retreats.
“These significant review steps have helped to identify and strengthen weak areas, close gaps, build cohesion and synergy in governance, manage the economy and improve the delivery of public good to Nigerians”, he said, declaring that “As we are all aware, change is the only factor that is constant in every human endeavour and as this administration approaches its critical phase in the second term, I have found it essential to reinvigorate this cabinet in a manner that will deepen its capacity to consolidate legacy achievements.”
In an attempt to explain the president’s action, Femi Adesina, Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity said on national television that “The president must have what he wants to achieve in those who areas within the 20 months left in government and maybe that is why he did what he did. But it was by no means a red card on their performance”.
He, however, admitted that the spheres of supervision of the sacked ministers could not have been without need for improvement and revamping.
“Matter of fact is that the President said he had reviewed the performance of the cabinet and needed to reinvigorate for the last run. He said he wanted to consolidate on legacy performance and projects”, the presidential spokesman emphasized, adding that “If you look at the nine priority areas, you will see that, as much as the ministers did, in my own esteem, there are areas of improvement in those two sectors.”
After more than six years in office, and with less than two years to breast the tape in May, 2023, not a few Nigerians are impressed that the president is suddenly waking up to the need to rework his machinery to deliver governance that addresses the fundamental needs of the people.
They say it probably took the president this long to realize what he should have done years ago because he had not seemed to be sufficiently bothered about improving the quality of life of the Nigerian masses.
Nigerians, over the years, have had to endure a president who had not only been seemed to be aloof, indifferent and non-challant but had also not demonstrated sufficient sensitivity to their socio-economic emasculation as their lives progressively deteriorated.
The feeling among Nigerians is that the targeting of only two ministers on the basis of performance or non-performance is not only diversionary but an exercise that is too fickle, feeble and not intended to achieve any results that could change the calamitous circumstances of the majority of our countrymen that are daily buffeted and broken by poverty, hunger, disease and insecurity.
“After six years of weak performance by his government, President Buhari has reportedly fired two Ministers (Agriculture and Power) who, presumably in his judgement deserved to go. It’s the correct decision but very late in the day,” said Kingsley Moghalu, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and former presidential candidate of Young Progressive Party (YPP) in the 2019 general elections.
In its own reaction, the main opposition party in the country, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), described the president’s action as “a ludicrous and ineffective attempt to cover for his failures in office”.
In a statement issued by its National Publicity Secretary, Kola Ologbodinya, the PDP said “the manifest inefficiency of the Buhari administration is a product of the President’s myopic and divisive approach to governance, as well as the impunity and corruption deeply imbedded in his administration and party, the All Progressives Congress (APC)”.
The PDP said it was its considered opinion that the president must have had other motives for sacking the ministers apart from the ones expressed by the presidency, adding that Nigerians were not swayed by the action, but could scarcely wait for 2023 to show the Aso Rock Villa occupant and his party out of power.
Stakeholders in the agricultural sector while hailing the president for the action said the minister should have been let go much earlier, noting that the sector had not performed well in the past 10 years.
Describing the performance of Nanono as selfish, dishonourable and below average, the Chairman of the All Farmers Association of Nigeria (AFAN) in Kano State, Mr Abdulra-sheed Magaji said “He handled the ministry like a personal outfit unprofessionally”.
According to Mr Rotimi Oloye, former president of Catfish and allied Fish Farmers Association of Nigeria (CAFFAN), “The man was a colossal failure on his assignment. He was a mismatch for the big job. He was all about his private agenda and vendetta,” noting that he messed up all efforts of the government through his biased relationship with stakeholders.
National President of Agriculture Bureau Association, Suleiman Dikwa pointed out that recent data ranked Nigeria fifth in the world on the food affordability index while another report showed that about $6.7 billion is lost annually to poor post-harvest handling.
Dikwa lamented that most of the funds and farm inputs did not get to the farmers because they were allegedly cornered by politicians who have connections at CBN.
“He has not shown any leadership in the sector. He did not show the capacity to drive up the performance of the agencies and entities in the market”, was the assessment of Dr Sam Amadi, former Chairman of the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) on the sacking of Engr. Mamman, submitting that the minister “basically failed “ and had a “woeful” performance.
However, in the view of the civil rights advocacy group, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA), Engr. Mamman and Nanono are not the only ministers that should have been shown the way out on account of equally dismal execution of their assignments.
The National Coordinator of HURIWA, Emmanuel Onwubiko said those also deserving of the big stick of the president include the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, his Defence Counterpart, as well as the National Security Adviser (NSA).
“The NSA should have been sacked about two years ago. The country has never had it so bad in terms of security threats”, he said.
Other ministers that have had Nigerians openly demanding for their ouster from office include Chris Ngige, Minister of Labour and Osagie Ehanire, Minister of Health for their handling of the protracted industrial crisis in the health sector.
“I want to ask Nigerians to tell those that are the cause of the strike and have not done their work, that they should be sacked or resign from the positions they hold”, the President of the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD), Dr Uyilawa Okhuaihesuyi said.
There is no denying the fact that the President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration has not lived up to its promise to Nigerians in the overall. The President must therefore go beyond just cabinet reshuffle, no matter the scale, (and there many who believe that the entire cabinet should have been removed) wake up from his reverie to the fact that the only way he could avoid ending up a failure (as he fears) is to jettison ethno-political and sundry considerations in favour of integrity, competence and capacity to deliver in the remaining part of his administration.
By: Opaka Dokubo
The recent massacre in Yelewata, Benue State, ranks among Nigeria’s deadliest attacks of
2025. While official figures put the death toll at 59, media reports and Amnesty International estimate between 100 and 200 fatalities. This atrocity extends a decade-long pattern of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, where Beacon Security data records 1,043 deaths in Benue alone between May 2023 and May 2025.
President Tinubu’s visit on 18 June—four days after the 14 June attack—has drawn sharp criticism for its lateness. This delay echoes a history of inadequate responses, with Human Rights Watch documenting similar inaction in Plateau and Kaduna states since 2013, fuelling a culture of impunity. The attack lasted over two hours without meaningful security intervention, despite claims of swift action.
The violence bore hallmarks of genocide, with survivors recounting systematic house burnings and executions. More than 2.2 million people have been displaced in the region since 2019 due to comparable attacks. Data show Benue’s agricultural output falls by 0.21 per cent in crops and 0.31 per cent in livestock for every 1 per cent rise in violence.
Security forces continue to underperform. No arrests were made following the Easter attacks in April (56 killed) or May’s Gwer West massacre (42 killed). During his visit, Tinubu questioned publicly why no suspects had been detained four days after Yelewata, highlighting entrenched accountability failures.
The roots of the conflict are complex, with climate change pushing northern herders south and 77 per cent of Benue’s population reliant on agriculture. A Tiv community leader described the violence as “calculated land-grabbing” rather than mere clashes, with over 500 deaths recorded since 2019.
Government interventions have largely fallen short. The 2018 federal task force and 2025 Forest Guards initiative failed to curb violence. Tinubu’s newly announced committee of ex-governors and traditional rulers has been met with scepticism given the litany of past unkept promises.
The economic fallout is severe. Benue’s status as Nigeria’s “food basket” is crumbling as farms are destroyed and farmers displaced. This worsens the nation’s food crisis, with hunger surges in 2023-2024 directly linked to farming disruptions caused by insecurity.
Citizens demanding justice have been met with force; protesters faced police tear gas, and the State Assembly conceded total failure in safeguarding lives, admitting that the governor, deputy, and 32 lawmakers had all neglected their constitutional responsibilities.
The massacre has drawn international condemnation. Pope Leo XIV decried the “terrible massacre,” while the UN called for an investigation. The hashtag “200 Nigerians” trended worldwide on X, with many contrasting Nigeria’s slow response to India’s swift action following a plane crash with similar fatalities.
Nigeria’s centralised security system is clearly overwhelmed. A single police force is tasked with covering 36 states and 774 local government areas for a population exceeding 200 million. Between 2021 and 2023 alone, 29,828 killings and 15,404 kidnappings were recorded nationally. Proposals for state police, floated since January 2025, remain stalled.
Other populous nations offer alternative models. Canada’s provincial police, India’s state forces, and Indonesia’s municipal units demonstrate the effectiveness of decentralised policing. Nigeria’s centralised structure creates intelligence and response gaps, worsened by the distance—both physical and bureaucratic—from Abuja to affected communities.
The immediate aftermath is dire: 21 IDP camps in Benue are overwhelmed, and a humanitarian crisis is deepening. The State Assembly declared three days of mourning (18-20 June), but survivors lack sufficient medical aid. Tragically, many of those killed were already displaced by earlier violence.
A lasting solution requires a multi-pronged approach, including targeted security deployment, regulated grazing land, and full enforcement of Benue’s 2017 Anti-Open Grazing Law. The National Economic Council’s failure to prioritise state police in May 2025 represents a missed chance for reform.
Without decisive intervention, trends suggest conditions will worsen. More than 20,000 Nigerians have been killed and 13,000 kidnapped nationwide in 2025 alone. As Governor Hyacinth Alia stressed during Tinubu’s visit, state police may be the only viable path forward. All 36 states have submitted proposals supporting decentralisation—a crucial step towards breaking Nigeria’s vicious cycle of violence.
Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999 marked a watershed moment in the nation’s political history. After enduring nearly 16 years of successive military dictatorships, Nigerians embraced a new era of civil governance with the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo on May 29, 1999. Since then, the country has sustained a democratic system for 26 years. But, this democratic journey has been a complex mix of progress and persistent challenges.
The formal recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari acknowledged a long-standing injustice. The annulment of the 1993 presidential election, Nigeria’s freest, betrayed the democratic aspirations of millions. That it took decades to honour this date reflects the nation’s complex relationship with its democratic memory.
One of the most momentous successes of Nigeria’s democracy has been the uninterrupted civilian rule over the last two and a half decades. The country has witnessed seven general elections, with power transferring peacefully among different political parties. This is particularly notable considering that prior to 1999, no civilian government had completed a full term without military intervention. The peaceful transitions in 2007, 2015, and 2023 are testaments to Nigeria’s evolving democratic maturity.
Electoral participation, while uneven, has also reflected a level of democratic engagement. In 2003, voter turnout stood at about 69 per cent, but this figure dropped to approximately 34.75 per cent in 2023, according to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Although the declining turnout raises concerns, it also highlights the increasing expectations of the electorate, who demand credible and transparent elections.
Another area of progress is the growth of a vibrant and free press. Nigerian media has played a crucial role in holding governments accountable and fostering public discourse. Investigative journalism and civil society activism have exposed corruption and human rights abuses. The rise of social media has further expanded the democratic space, enabling young Nigerians to mobilise and advocate for change, as evidenced by the 2020 #EndSARS protests.
Judicial independence has seen mixed results. On one hand, the judiciary has occasionally demonstrated resilience, such as in landmark rulings that overturned fraudulent elections or curtailed executive excesses. On the other hand, allegations of political interference and corruption within the judiciary persist, undermining public confidence in the legal system’s impartiality.
Nigeria’s democracy has also facilitated the decentralisation of power through the federal system. State governments now wield some autonomy, allowing for experimentation in governance and service delivery. While this has led to innovative policies in some states, it has also entrenched patronage networks and uneven development across the federation.
Despite these successes, Nigeria’s democratic journey faces formidable problems. Electoral integrity remains a critical concern. Reports from election observers, including those from the European Union and ECOWAS, frequently highlight issues such as vote-buying, ballot box snatching, and violence. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and electronic transmission of results in 2023 elections showed promise, but technical glitches and alleged manipulations dampened public trust.
Corruption continues to be a pervasive issue. Nigeria ranks 145th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index, with a score of 25/100. Democratic institutions meant to check graft—such as anti-corruption agencies and the legislature—often struggle due to political interference and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Security challenges have also strained Nigeria’s democracy. Insurgency in the North East, banditry in the North West, separatist agitations in the South East, and herder-farmer conflicts across the Middle Belt have collectively resulted in thousands of deaths and displacements. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2024, Nigeria ranks as the eighth most impacted country by terrorism. The government’s difficulty in ensuring safety erodes public confidence in the state’s capacity and legitimacy.
The economy poses another critical remonstrance. Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita stands at approximately $2,400 as of 2024, with over 40 per cent of the population living below the national poverty line. High unemployment and inflation have fueled discontent and disillusionment with democratic governance, especially among youth. Without addressing economic grievances, the democratic dividend will remain elusive for many Nigerians.
Ethnic and religious divisions further complicate Nigeria’s democratic consolidation. Politicians often exploit identity politics for electoral gains, exacerbating social tensions. Although federal character principles aim to promote inclusiveness, they have also sometimes fostered a quota mentality rather than merit-based appointments.
Gender representation remains inadequate in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Women occupy less than 10 per cent of seats in the National Assembly, one of the lowest rates globally. Efforts to pass gender parity bills have faced stiff resistance, highlighting deep-seated cultural and institutional barriers to female political participation.
Civil liberties, while constitutionally guaranteed, are under threat. Crackdowns on protesters, restrictions on press freedom, and surveillance of activists reveal an authoritarian streak within the democratic framework. The controversial Twitter ban in 2021 exemplified the country’s willingness to curb digital freedoms, prompting domestic and international criticism.
The political crisis in Rivers State embodies broader democratic struggles. Attempts to control the state through undemocratic means expose weaknesses in federal institutions and the rule of law. Immediate restoration of democratic governance in Rivers State is vital to preserving Nigeria’s democratic integrity and institutional credibility.
Local governments remain under the control of state governors, depriving citizens of grassroots democracy. Last year’s Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy is promising, but state-level resistance threatens its implementation. Genuine autonomy would bring governance closer to the people and foster democratic innovation.
As we mark Democracy Day, we must honour the sacrifices of Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Femi Falana, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Pa Alfred Rewane, President Bola Tinubu, and countless others, who fought for Nigeria’s freedom. As democracy in Nigeria continues to evolve after 26 years, this day should inspire action toward its renewal. With despotism and state failure as real threats, both citizens and leaders must take responsibility—citizens by demanding more, and leaders by delivering. Excuses are no longer acceptable.