administration

President Muhammadu Buhari was Military Head of State from 1984-85. His claimed principles including a zero-tolerance for corruption and fierce patriotism in that era partly propelled his return as a two-term elected – not necessarily democratically elected – President.

He encapsulates Karl Marx’s assertion  that: “History repeats itself; first as a tragedy, then, as  farce.” He was known as a tough and determined general who as the    General Officer Commanding the Third Division in Jos, without permission, led troops to clear Chadian troops who had occupied some Nigerian islands in the Lake Chad area.

Tragically, as President and Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces, he has in the past five years Nigeria, presided over a country under continuous Islamist terrorist attacks and occupation in the North East. Also,  murderous herdsmen attack all political zones in the country, while his government is yielding large parts of the country in states like      Katsina,  Zamfara, Sokoto and Niger, to organised bandits with whom serving governors negotiate.

As a military leader, Buhari felt a duty to run the country in the interest of the populace with little or no discrimination. But as President, he is not even contrite in announcing that he is a sectional leader who is primarily responsible not to the entire populace, but to those he claimed, voted for him.

In abandoning the Pan-Nigeria philosophy of his first coming, he told international donor agencies, to concentrate their resources and anti-poverty programmes on his part of the country rather than the entire federation.

In deepening the parochial agenda of his administration and in complete violation of the constitution, he appointed almost all the heads of military and paramilitary agencies from the North West and North East.

As Military Head of State, Buhari suspended the Constitution and disobeyed court orders. As elected President, the Constitution is left in place but the disobedience or even contempt for the courts remain. However, in all its intolerance and contempt for the judiciary,  his military regime was not known to invade the courts or homes of judges; these are dubious achievements the Buhari administration has chalked up. Also, to complete the humiliation of that arm of government, a serving Chief Justice of the Federation was not only humiliated but also unconstitutionally plucked off. The cowed judiciary dutifully nominated a new head who can be seen carrying out the motions of the office, but can hardly be heard; a new Chief Justice that neither sparkles nor inspires.

The legislative arm is not faring better; but in the days of military dictatorship when it was not in existence, the country saved the huge resources that are now expended maintaining “Distinguished Senators and Honourables” that seem incapable of asserting any independence.

There are also issues of integrity, truthfulness and honour. You could run with anything the Buhari regime said; even if you disagreed with it,    it was likely to be the truth. But today, I will need to first verify whatever the Buhari administration tells me before I can invest even one Naira in it. The trust deficit between the Buhari administration and Nigerians is as clear as a sunny day.

Perhaps no other issue contrasts the two Buhari eras than the March 18, 2020 subjugation of the country to the ghoulish International Monetary Fund, IMF. Nigeria had first applied for an IMF loan in April 1983; that is eight months before Buhari overthrew the Shagari administration. He inherited the negotiations, but Buhari as a patriot, would not sell the country to the IMF. He rejected its Conditionalities which were ruinous to the country, Rather, he decided to engage other countries and evolve more viable options like counter trade. Even his fellow coup plotters who overthrew him, to some extent, respected Nigerians by floating a national debate on the IMF Loan.

When Buhari was elected in 2015, he made it known that he remained his old patriotic self; that the country will not be sold to the IMF. So, he went into negotiations with other countries and took development loans, especially from China. He even entered into currency swap agreements with that country making the Chinese Yuan a reserve currency.

On this issue, his biographer, John N. Paden in his 2016 book, Muhammadu Buhari: The Challenges of Leadership in Nigeria, wrote: “Buhari made (it) clear that he would not borrow from the International Monetary Fund, because of its strict Conditionalities.”

Tragically, while the attention of Nigerians was diverted by the murderous  COVID-19 pandemic, President Buhari without any consultation with Nigerians,      or public hearings in the National Assembly, made a flip accepting a $3.4 billion IMF loan and its slavish Conditionalities.

In submitting Nigerian sovereignty to the IMF, the Buhari administration pledged to make our Central Bank books available to it and to make no restrictions on payments concerning international transactions. So, with the fall in oil prices, while cutting the 2020 capital budget by 20 per cent and recurrent by 25 per cent, the government left intact, the N5 trillion debt serving package of the budget. That debt servicing sum was 23 per cent of the original N10.59 trillion 2020 Budget.

The Buhari government also pledged in writing that Nigeria will not engage in any multiple currency agreements without the approval of the IMF. It means that the Yuan reserve currency agreement might be scrapped.

But most worrying are the government’s acceptance of other stifling IMF Conditionalities like post-COVID-19      increases in the prices of petrol and electricity,      the immediate stoppage of employment, scrapping or merger of agencies (Using the Oronsanye Report) and massive devaluation of the Naira. When Buhari came in 2015, the Naira fell to N220 to the dollar; over the years, it stabilised at an average N356; but last Friday, it was N440.

Perhaps if the manifesto and programmes presented to the electorate by the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, had been even partially implemented, the Buhari administration might have scored some undisputed successes. But the party rather than play its expected role behaves as a mere political platform for elections. It has spent the last half-decade insulting and blaming past administrations in the country.

The APC behaves like the Nigerian football supporter who because he watches the European League on television, believes he is a better coach than Pep Guardiola, Jurgen Klopp,  or  Zinedine Zidane.

In concluding my comparative analysis of the two Buhari eras, I submit that in all indices of governance, policy formulation and implementation, the latter Buhari demystified himself. Even in parts of the country where he had cult-like followership, he should in his quiet moments admit to himself, that this has evaporated. If I were to write a book on Buhari’s engagement in partisan politics, I will title it The Demythologisation of Muhammadu Buhari.