By Anthony Akinwale

Nigeria ought to be a land flowing in milk and honey. But she is, at this point in time, a land afflicted with deprivation and flowing in blood. Blessed with the capacity to flourish, with crude oil and fertile soil, with the sun and with exquisite and precious solid minerals difficult to count, with a mosaic of cultures, each bearing a blueprint for development, sons and daughters of the land around the Niger ought to be living in wealth. But when it comes to quality of life, her constitutional arrangement has only favoured her political class.

With an assortment of security agencies, Nigeria should enjoy peace and tranquility. But the opposite is the case. Hardly any week passes without news of terrorist attacks. Neither safe at home, nor on the streets, nor on their farms, nor in the marketplace, Nigerians live in quasi perpetual fear. They are compelled to pay ransom for loved ones held in captivity. Security agencies represent the government. Where they fail to protect the citizen, and there is no doubt that they are failing, government itself has failed.

As we enter another campaign season, what each candidate for public office ought to be saying to Nigerians is how he or she would tackle insecurity and poverty in the land. In fact, these two, poverty and insecurity, must be key campaign issues. Instead of the sterile conflict over identity politics, over which region should produce the next President, or which senatorial district will produce the next governor, Nigerians must very seriously interrogate all the candidates, and the candidates must make themselves available for interrogation. They must not be seen to be dodging any televised debate, as they have been known to have done in the past. By presenting yourself for public office, you are telling your would-be employees, the people of Nigeria, that you are ready and willing to subject yourself for public scrutiny. That is why we must insist on a television debate broadcast nationwide. It is like an applicant who must present himself for an interview before he can be hired. To refuse to present yourself for public scrutiny is to take your employers for granted. It is to dodge the interview, and, for so doing, you don’t deserve the job.

This campaign season is an opportunity to discuss the state of affairs of our country, and where we ought to be at this point in the history of Nigeria. But there are serious concerns that we will once again miss this opportunity by trading insults instead of ideas. Politicians and their supporters are busy using social media to demean each other’s ethnic community instead of strategising on how Nigeria can become a stable and prosperous country. A generation that was not born during the Civil War has had transmitted to it propaganda of both sides during the war. It is said that truth is the first casualty in every war. And so, during the Nigeria-Biafra war, lies were told by both sides. After the war, historical revisionism has taken the centre stage. Every election season, Nigerians are reminded that their enemies are the men and women of the other ethnic group. And, in our gullibility, we tend to believe whatever our politicians and pastors and their image makers say to us.

In case we forget, our land is confronted with formidable challenges. A very harsh economic climate is getting harsher, rising insecurity lingers, ethnic tension is encountered on social media, there is an air of hopelessness about the future while the younger population is becoming increasingly disillusioned. These are issues we must address if Nigeria is to be a land where no one is deprived of the opportunity to flourish, issues which we must confront if Nigeria is to be taken seriously by the international community.

Rather than strategise on what ought to be done to ensure the ship of state sails smoothly, some Nigerians are dissipating their emotions by arguing over ethno-religious and regional affiliations. North, south, east and west, in patent ethnic bigotry, many Nigerians would prefer a president or governor from their clan to a president or governor who possesses requisite competence to lead. Or, if at all they care about competence, their definition of leadership competence is totally determined by ethnic or regional or religious affiliation of candidates.

This will no doubt sound unrealistic to many. But it must be said, nonetheless, that the question before us this campaign season is not the region of origin of contestants for the presidency or any office in the land. Neither is it the ethnic or religious affiliation of contestants. These are antiquated questions. The whole idea of zoning offices, supposedly agreed upon through a pact of the political elite, is predicated not on competence but on emotions. In every election, the question Nigerians have a moral obligation to raise and respond to in candour is: who is the most suitable for the job?

Answering that question depends on a criterion of suitability that transcends emotions rooted in ethno-religious and regional identity. The criterion of suitability for public office in Nigeria is whether a contestant is in possession of requisite intellectual, administrative and ethical competence to occupy public office in a country as rich, vast and diverse as Nigeria. A more concrete version of this criterion is: whether this candidate for public office is stable, able and willing to put an end to disunity, insecurity and poverty in the land?

Nigeria is governed with a constitution in urgent need of replacement or at least far-reaching reforms. Cosmetic constitutional amendments aggravate our situation. They come down to be wrong therapy for a grave and life-threatening ailment. The big government this constitution has created is lethargic and prone to corruption, and corruption is largely responsible for the sorry state of Nigeria. For this reason, each of those campaigning for public office in Nigeria must answer two very critical questions: first, what do you think about the 1999 Constitution? Secondly, what do you intend to do about it? A candidate’s answer to each of these questions will be a pointer to whether or not he fulfills the criterion of suitability for public office in contemporary Nigeria.

It is worthy of note that, so far, none of those campaigning to be President of Nigeria come May 29, 2027 has volunteered any response to those two critical questions despite the crippling contents and consequences of this Constitution. Everyone is going on as if those questions were not pertinent, entering and exiting a room and maintaining a deafening silence whereas there is a big elephant in the room. The big elephant in the room is the 1999 Constitution. With its numerous deadly provisions, one would have expected it to be a campaign issue. But no political party, no aspirant is willing to make any comment on it.

Nigerians need to have their hope in Nigeria rekindled. But if we are to rekindle hope in the land and in the hearts of Nigerians, the issue of the constitution must be given the attention it deserves by all who present themselves for electoral scrutiny this season.

Father Akinwale is a Professor at the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Augustine University, Ilara, Lagos State.