Opinion
Rotational Presidency: Answer To Nigeria’s Leadership Question?
Agitations for rotational presidency are being speculated in some quarters as not a solution in any way to resolve Nigeria’s poor, and ineffective governance. More than ever before, many Nigerians are arguing the necessity or otherwise of rotating the position of President from one part of Nigeria to the other. These agitations have created divisions between our Northern Governors and their Southern counterparts. Whereas, Southern Governors are insisting that the next President in 2031 must come from the South-South in the overall interest of justice, fairness and equity, their Northern colleagues are kicking against it, saying that such a demand is not only unconstitutional but undemocratic. While I agree that there are some genuine reasons for the agitations, I do not believe that mere rotation of the Presidency can guarantee quality governance in the country. Without doubt, one of the major reasons for the calls for rotational presidency is the concentration of powers in the hands of the president. The President is like an emperor or monarch, who is in control of virtually everything. He is in-charge of allocation of resources and does not only have a hand in the appointment of those in executive positions, but also the heads of the judiciary. He even influences the election of heads of the legislature.
It is the belief of many agitators that in exercising these powers, the President practises nepotism. He appoints people to “principal, sensitive or juicy” offices without obeying the Principle of Federal Character as contained in Chapter II of the 1999 Constitution under Fundamental Objectives and Directives Policy. Section 14 (3) of the directive says, “The composition of the government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the Federal Character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no pre-dominance of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic groups in that government or in any of its agencies”. Have our presidents been complying with this provision? Unfortunately, there is not much the citizens can do to make the President do the right thing, largely because the constitution did not make it enforceable. Section 6 (6c) of the same constitution makes a provision to ensure that violation of this principle by the president cannot be questioned in court.
The section says, “The judicial powers vested in accordance with the foregoing provision of this section shall not, except as otherwise provided by this constitution, extend to any issue or question as to whether any act or omission by any authority or person or as to whether any law or any judicial is in confronting with the fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy set out in Chapter II of the Constitution”. Perhaps, the most important reason for the calls for rotational presidency is the poverty of our political class. Most of our political leaders are generally selfish. They ignore the fact that the primary purpose of their presence in governance is to ensure the security and welfare of the people they govern, as clearly stated in Chapter II, Section 14 (2b) of the 1999 Constitution. They behave as if they are in politics not for the people but for themselves. This has resulted in a situation where those in power engage in privatisation of the state leading to primitive accumulation of wealth for themselves and their families, while the rest of the people wallow in material poverty. It is also the belief in some quarters that the president will locate projects in his own part of the country while ignoring other parts.
It is argued that most of our political leaders tend to favour their areas of origin in deciding where to locate major projects. In their attempts to satisfy their regional and ethnic divisiveness, they jettison economic considerations in determining the right place for project location. This has been evident in many cases. There are cries of marginalisation by people from parts of the country, whose indigenes have not been privileged to be at the helms of affairs under civil rule. From the perspective of this columnist, rotational presidency without considering the leaders cannot cure these ills and guarantee good leadership. The question that rightly comes to mind is: does rotational presidency really mean the solution to bad leadership in Nigeria? Rotational presidency has the tendency to stir up ethnic, religious and regional sentiments, thus promoting disunity and regional or sectional loyalty. Rotational presidency may not promote patriotism among citizens. It is likely to empower only the political class while the larger population remain marginalised. This can be seen from the trend of leadership we have had since our political independence 64 years ago.
Despite the fact that the North has produced most of the nation’s leaders since then, majority of its citizens remain the poorest and most marginalised in the country – one of the outcomes of this state of affairs is the high level of insecurity in this part of Nigeria today. Although, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo governed Nigeria for about 10 years (both as a military head of state and civilian president), the South-West, where he comes from, did not enjoy any special benefits from his long stay in the corridors of power. Infact, he fought against the then Lagos State governor and now President of Nigeria, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, by stopping local government allocation accruing from the federation account to the state since, according to him, Tinubu violated the constitution by creating Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs) in the state. Goodluck Jonathan ruled for about six years, but he did not develop his region of origin, the South-South. This columnist believes that what Nigerians require is quality leadership, a leader who cares and loves to work for the people and not rotation of presidency as solution to the country’s bad governance as concluded by some scholars and bookmakers. It does not matter where the leader comes from. For many members of our generation, the best national leader the nation ever had was the late General Murtala Mohammed, who ruled for only 200 days. We were all proud to be called Nigerians during the short period of his administration.
Bethel Toby
Opinion
Ken Saro-Wiwa’s Unfinished Struggle (I)
On November 10, 1995, the Nigerian military government of General Sani Abacha executed Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni leaders after a deeply controversial trial. Their deaths marked one of the darkest chapters in Nigeria’s history. At a time when fear silenced citizens and sycophancy flourished around military power, Saro-Wiwa chose to confront tyranny. Many Nigerians retreated into silence, while others praised the regime to secure favour. He knew the risks, yet refused to abandon a people whose land had been devastated by oil exploration and whose lives remained trapped in poverty. His courage arose from the conviction that public responsibility sometimes demands resistance to authority. Saro-Wiwa understood that speaking against a military government could lead to imprisonment or death.
Nonetheless, he believed the suffering of the Ogoni people demanded a courageous response. While oil was extracted from their land, they were left with polluted rivers, damaged farmland, declining livelihoods and an environment hostile to human survival. Fishing grounds and sources of livelihood were threatened, while the people struggled to secure basic amenities. The wealth beneath their soil brought neither adequate development nor a fair share of national resources. For him, silence in the face of injustice would have amounted to complicity. Through the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), he organised a peaceful campaign that took the Ogoni question to the international community. MOSOP gave ordinary people an organised platform through which to express their grievances and insist on recognition.
The Ogoni Bill of Rights, presented to the Federal Government in 1990, demanded political autonomy, economic justice, environmental protection and control over the people’s resources. The campaign exposed the human and ecological costs of oil operations, particularly those associated with Shell, and challenged the apparent alliance between corporate interests and an unresponsive State. The Ogoni struggle became a defining expression of minority rights and environmental justice in Nigeria and Africa. Saro-Wiwa’s writings and mobilisation drew attention to communities treated as expendable because of their limited population and political influence. He argued that numerical strength should never determine a people’s value or rights.
A minority community does not become less deserving of justice because it cannot command electoral numbers or political power. In Nigeria, every ethnic group deserves dignity, protection and a fair opportunity to benefit from the commonwealth. Rather than respond to peaceful agitation with dialogue, the Abacha regime resorted to repression. Ogoni leaders were harassed, detained and killed; others fled into exile. The crisis intensified after four Ogoni chiefs were killed in May 1994. Saro-Wiwa and other MOSOP leaders were arrested, tried by a special tribunal and executed despite international appeals for clemency and serious concerns about the trial’s fairness. The executions drew worldwide condemnation and intensified scrutiny of Nigeria’s human-rights record and oil companies in the Niger Delta.
They demonstrated the danger of using State institutions to suppress peaceful demands. The proceedings remain a reminder of the need for judicial independence and due process. Saro-Wiwa’s courage rested on the conviction that justice must be pursued despite the cost. His method combined non-violent resistance, public education and grassroots organisation. His struggle recalled the civil-rights campaign of Martin Luther King Jr. and the power of peaceful mobilisation against injustice. Saro-Wiwa linked environmental degradation to political exclusion, economic exploitation and the denial of democratic rights. Oil-producing communities, he insisted, should not remain zones from which wealth is removed to develop other parts of the country.
Their people must benefit through roads, schools, healthcare, jobs and clean water. Resource extraction carries a duty to protect host communities. His argument extended to the structure of the Nigerian federation. He challenged a revenue-allocation system that made oil-producing communities bear the environmental and social costs of extraction without commensurate benefits. Like advocates of fiscal federalism, he believed resources should be managed and shared equitably. He envisaged a society in which no community would be disadvantaged by its size, ethnicity, political affiliation, culture or religion. His vision was a country bound together by justice and equal citizenship. Saro-Wiwa was also a gifted writer, dramatist and public intellectual.
Through books, essays, plays and television, he documented Nigerian society’s contradictions and challenged abuses of power. His popular television series, Basi and Company, demonstrated his creative range, while his leadership of the Association of Nigerian Authors encouraged writers to engage national questions. He believed literature should not be detached from society’s struggles. His pen exposed environmental injustice, political repression and the dangers of silencing courageous voices. He used storytelling, satire and drama to shape public consciousness and expose social contradictions. His literary achievements gave his activism wider reach and made the Ogoni experience part of national conversation. His commitment to the Ogoni people extended beyond the oil question.
During the Civil War, he worked to protect his vulnerable community. He urged younger generations to reject subservience and complacency and pursue change through lawful, peaceful means. Citizens, he believed, must not surrender their responsibility to challenge wrong doing. An injury to one community threatens the rights and security of all. The return to democratic government in 1999 and the establishment of the Niger Delta Development Commission, the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs and the Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project (HYPREP) are among developments that have kept the region’s demands in public view. Saro-Wiwa did not create these institutions, but his movement helped expose the urgency of intervention and sustain pressure for redress.
His death made it harder to ignore the Niger Delta’s environmental and political grievances. Yet, interventionist institutions do not prove that the original demands have been met. Their effectiveness depends on competent leadership, transparent spending, measurable outcomes and community participation. Yet, thirty-one years after his execution, the central concerns of the Ogoni struggle remain unresolved. The HYPREP-led clean-up has offered hope, but many residents await meaningful improvements. Questions persist about the programme’s pace, quality and transparency, and whether its benefits reach ordinary people. A clean-up should be judged not by ceremonies or contracts, but by restored land and waterways, safe drinking water, improved livelihoods and better public health.
It must include long-term monitoring to ensure treated sites remain safe. Residents deserve information about contamination, remediation methods and completion timelines. Reports that water projects in Gwara and Ebubu Communities, in Khana and Eleme Local Government Areas respectively, failed weeks after commissioning have raised further concerns. If confirmed, the failures would indicate weaknesses in supervision, procurement and quality control.
To be continued in our next edition.
Taneh Beemene
Opinion
Reforming NYSC For Practical National Service
The National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) was established in 1973, after the Nigerian Civil War, to promote national unity, reconciliation and integration. By deploying graduates beyond their States of origin, its founders hoped to encourage understanding among Nigeria’s diverse peoples and help rebuild a divided country. However, the difficulties confronting corps members and their families now demand a comprehensive review. For many graduates, national service has become a period of uncertainty, financial pressure and exposure to risks. Parents who have spent years financing their children’s education must still find money for transportation, camp necessities, accommodation, feeding and other expenses. The monthly allowance may provide some relief, but often cannot meet the cost of living, especially where the place of primary assignment offers no accommodation or support.
Security is another serious concern. Corps members may be posted to communities affected by kidnapping, communal violence, insurgency or other threats. Government cannot eliminate every danger, but it must assess locations, provide reliable security information and avoid deployments where safety cannot reasonably be assured. National service should promote patriotism, not expose graduates to preventable harm. There is also the problem of securing meaningful places of primary assignment. A graduate trained in engineering may perform duties unrelated to engineering; a journalist may spend the year in an office with no opportunity to practise journalism. Graduates in agriculture, health, education and other specialised fields may likewise be assigned routine tasks that contribute little or nothing to their professional growth. Some depend on personal contacts or incur expenses to obtain suitable placements.
A year is significant for a young graduate entering a competitive labour market. National service should not be merely a compulsory waiting period before the search for employment begins. It should help bridge the gap between academic learning and practical work. The time has therefore come to review the structure of NYSC, not necessarily abolish it. I propose that the one-year programme should become vocational and professionally oriented. Graduates should, as far as practicable, be posted to institutions where they can gain supervised experience in their fields of study. Teachers should serve in schools; health graduates in suitable health facilities; engineers in technical organisations and public works departments; agricultural graduates in farms and extension services; and communication graduates in media and public information establishments.
NYSC should partner with ministries, state and local governments, private companies, professional bodies, universities, hospitals, schools and credible organisations to identify genuine training opportunities. Each member should have defined duties, a supervisor and clear learning objectives. At the end of the year, each should receive a record of duties performed and competencies acquired. The reform must also address remuneration and welfare. Corps members should receive fair pay that reflects the demands of their placements, while host organisations should provide reasonable support where possible. Government must establish transparent funding arrangements so that the new system does not become another burden imposed on employers or parents. Transport or accommodation assistance should be considered for difficult postings.
Graduates seeking jobs after service would have more than a discharge certificate: they would possess practical experience, workplace discipline and demonstrable skills. Employers would gain access to young people who have received supervised preparation. However, professional relevance should not erase the scheme’s founding objective of national integration. Inter-State deployment can remain, provided it is balanced with security, suitable placements and the availability of basic facilities. Where a safe and meaningful placement cannot be guaranteed outside a graduate’s State, an alternative should be considered. Orientation and community development activities can continue to promote cultural exchange, citizenship and service.
The Federal Government and NYSC management should convene consultations involving corps members, parents, universities, employers, security agencies and State Governments. Decisions should be based on evidence and the experiences of serving and former corps members. NYSC was created to help rebuild a nation divided by war. Its ideals remain important, but institutions must adapt to changing realities. Success should not be measured only by the number of graduates mobilised or certificates issued. It should also be measured by the skills acquired, the contribution made and whether young Nigerians complete their service safely and with dignity. It can better preserve the scheme’s founding ideals while meeting today’s economic and professional needs. A vocationally driven; adequately remunerated NYSC would turn national service from a costly obligation into a bridge between education, employment and national development. The purpose should not simply be to occupy graduates for twelve months, but to prepare them to work, serve and contribute meaningfully to Nigeria’s future.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Opinion
Protecting Nigeria’s Democratic Space
Quote: “Democracy is not
As the 2027 general elections
Organisers said they had
Police intervention
In Kaduna, the ADC accused
These claims require prompt
These rights apply equally to
No ambition, party or
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
Politics4 days agoLG CITY BOY COORDINATOR HAILS WIKE’S SUPPORT FOR ONYESOH, TINUBU
-
Politics4 days ago
DIRI INAUGURATES APC CAMPAIGN COUNCIL, SETS MILLION VOTES TARGET FOR TINUBU
-
Politics4 days agoNDC Candidate Urges Oborevwori To Probe Asaba Political Violence
-
News5 days agoArmy Recovers X Account After Hack Attempt
-
Business12 hours ago
‘NUJ, NPA’s Partnership Would Boost Port Producrivity, Economic Growth’
-
News9 hours ago
RSG Reaffirms Commitment To STEM Education, Technological Advancement
-
News9 hours agoIGP Warns Police Officers Against Partisanship …Directs Regular Engagement With Journalists
-
Politics4 days ago
2027: Oborevwori Tasks Media On Fair, Accurate Reporting
