Within the one year of President Bola Tinubu’s administration, he has taken bold and audacious decisions to put Nigeria on the path of economic growth, which others would be afraid to take. One of his tough decisions is the prompt removal of fuel subsidy, a desirable decision which past leaders have timidly evaded for the sake of political correctness.

It risks being shrugged off as anti-people for removing subsidy on petroleum products when Nigerians expected differently. But beyond the veneer of hardship, occasioned by the subsidy removal, the administration has made courageous efforts never since bettered by any other government in building strong institutions that will shore up the country’s economy.

He has also never failed to reverse some decisions, where it is absolutely necessary. In other words, the President listens and listens attentively.   Nigeria was almost at its lowest point when the Tinubu government came into power a year ago. This, many of his critics will not readily admit. Possibly the only thing they will accept is that the President should solve all the problems besieging the country in one fell swoop since it was his turn to govern. Anything short, and whatever effort being made to pull the country out of economic decline, appears not cut an ice with these people.      

Perhaps that is the irony of the Nigerian state where courageous leadership is only tolerated and not celebrated. However, anybody dispassionate enough to assess the Tinubu administration will agree that while insecurity, recession, infrastructural deficit, unemployment, sectarian violence among others tugged at the string that bind the country together, bad leadership tautly stretched it. No effort was made to stem the drift or reverse bad policies of government even when unpopular. In fact, the parlous state of the economy was made evident by the inattentiveness of the leadership at the time. But the Tinubu administration is significantly different.

It may not have offered Nigerians the expected dividends of democracy, but it has taken some courageous steps in confronting the bugbear, and reversing itself when headed south. The hallmark of leadership is in plucking up the courage to admit to unpopular decisions and reappraising them. The Tinubu administration has had to halt, even reverse decisions taken in the course of trying to navigate the ship of the state to safety.

Whether these decisions were on policy issues or appointment to positions, the reversals were done in good time to stave off crisis and augur for peace and overall development of the country. For example on May 14, 2024, the Tinubu administration suspended 0.5 per cent cyber-security levy introduced by the Central Bank of Nigeria, mandating all Banks, Mobile Money Operators and Payment Service Providers to pay. The 0.5 per cent levy was to be deducted on all electronic transaction’s value and remitted to the National Cyber-security Fund under the administration of the National Security Adviser.  It had earlier, on assumption of office, lifted the ban on crypto-currency put in place by his predecessor and reversed the decision to phase out the old Naira note. The difficulty faced by Nigerians within the period as a result of the policy somersault was better imagined.

Not long ago, the administration suspended the names of nominees submitted by the Federal Ministry of Education as Chairmen, Pro-Chancellors and Members of the Boards and Councils of Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education. While some states got just one nomination others got many.

The public reactions against the disproportionate nominations which reflected neither the federal character principles nor national spread made the President to stop the process and redirected a total and comprehensive review. The inauguration and retreat for the nominees slated for May 31st has also been shelved.

Certain appointments were equally cancelled either because they ran against the dictates of public interest or were thought to be undeserving. This may raise the question of lack of diligence or search process or suitability of nomination, but it does not detract from the courage of the administration in admitting to an error once made.

Appointment of Ibrahim Kashim Imam to chair the board of the Federal Road Maintenance Agency (FERMA) was a typical example. His appointment was withdrawn immediately it was found out that he lacked adequate and prerequisite experience to manage the Agency. Appointment to the reconstituted board of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NNDC) had to be reviewed when it was found out to be against the grain of reason.

The appointment of Victor Akinjo from Ondo State and Asi Oku Okang from Cross RiverState was withdrawn when it tried to threaten the peace of the two states. Both appointees were found not to be popular among their people and would impede the smooth running of the Commission if not withdrawn.

They were immediately replaced by Otito Atikase and Otuk Duke from Ondo and Cross River states respectively. An administration that pays no heed to public opinion will not only ignore the opposing views, but may apply force to compel acquiescence where acceptance is not possible

But the Tinubu administration appreciates the need for participatory democracy and collective action. It has done a lot to keep the country together and deescalate violence and strife in the land.  

There is no gainsaying the fact that the administration respects public opinion and is most willing to redirect its compass of development when engaged constructively. In its effort to better the lots of Nigerians and allow for proper separation of power among the major arms of government, the Tinubu administration insists that local governments should be financially independent.

It has followed this up by asking the Supreme Court to stop the thirty six states Governors from spending or tampering with the fund allocation from the Federation Account to Local Government Areas. It is a mark of commitment to the principles of the separation of powers by the Tinubu government that the federal government took up the matter.

It is a sad reality that state governments have completely usurped the powers of the local governments and almost appropriated them as an extension of the states. In taking the states to court, the Tinubu administration has demonstrated resolve to ensure there is separation of power.

Once this is achieved which is most likely, the aberration of appointing caretaker chairmen rather than conducting elections will become a thing of the past. The Tinubu administration may not have achieved to the satisfaction of all in one year, but it has demonstrated enough courage in the face of daunting challenges.  
Abiyesuku wrote from Port Harcourt.