Nigeria, a country with over 250 ethnic groupings who speak over 500 different languages and have different cultures, may be complex like some other nations. That indeed should not make it difficult to govern with the right leadership in place at every point.
Former president Olusegun Obasanjo recently asserted that Nigeria should not be seen as difficult to govern despite the manifest complexities often accentuated by ethnicity and religion. To a large extent, Obasanjo’s allusion has reignited the puzzle as to whether the challenge of governance is largely attributable to a lack of good leadership or the complex nature of the country.
Having served as military head of state and two-term elected president, Obasanjo should be in the position to appraise leadership and governance in Nigeria, more so that he’s acknowledged as an eminent global leader. We cannot but agree with him that leadership with sincerity and genuine commitment to public good could change the negative narrative of governance in Nigeria. Notwithstanding, the merit in Obasanjo’s comment may be difficult to decipher unless there is an inclination to separate the message from the messenger. The preponderance of opinions, no doubt, would most likely attribute the myriads of challenges in the country to leadership deficit rather than the diversities that ought to be harnessed as assets. We are persuaded to agree that Nigeria is not only governable but also that good governance is indeed feasible with the right leadership in place.
Unfortunately, Nigeria has, for most of her over 60 years of independence, paraded leaders who lack a genuine commitment to translating the diversities that often manifest as complexities into resources for building a united and prosperous country. Indeed, in the last couple of years, the corporate existence of Nigeria has, more than hitherto, been threatened as a consequence of parochial leadership. A careful appraisal of governance under the present democratic dispensation would reveal the extent to which the quality of leadership has degenerated across the country with the emergence of political actors who appear more interested in power than selfless service to the people.
Interestingly, Nigeria has also paraded individuals who have had the unique opportunities to make a difference in leadership. Obasanjo served as two-term president two decades after he first presided over the country as military head of state. Apart from Obasanjo, the immediate past President Muhammadu Buhari is another individual with the rare privilege to have led Nigeria as military head of state and civilian president. Despite the complexities, it is common knowledge that Nigerians readily submit to their leaders with the usual resolve to persevere whenever a new leader comes on board. Regrettably, some of these leaders have exploited the acquiescence of the citizenry by failing to live up to expectations.
Under the current democratic dispensation, the hope invested in leadership has been abused by privileged individuals who, upon emerging as elected representatives, not only alienated themselves from their immediate constituencies but became overlords and masters to the people they ought to serve with a sense of purpose and unfeigned humility. The challenge of leadership in the country, therefore, presents a dilemma considering that a good number of Nigerians entrusted with strategic leadership positions at the global stages are performing exceptionally.
While Nigerians are earning recognition as transformational leaders on the global stage, it should be worrisome that failure of leadership at the home front remains a huge disincentive for the emergence of Nigeria as the world’s most populous black nation. If the argument is that governance in Nigeria presents unusual challenges due to its complex nature, it still does not explain the gory tragedy of leadership whereby the appetite for public office does not compel obligation to make a difference as leaders.
There should be no pretence about the structural imbalances which partly accentuate the negative trends of Nigeria’s complexities, the failure of leadership is a different matter altogether. Failure of successive leaders to demonstrate unflagging commitment towards addressing the imbalances in the federal system only serves to entrench transactional politics that have lowered the bar of leadership recruitment and undermined good governance. Precisely, because the leadership recruitment process has become patently transactional, the country has, in recent years, witnessed the emergence of leaders that have ended up as dismal failures with unpleasant records of corruption and abuse of power.
It is lamentable that poor governance which is a consequence of leadership deficit appeared to have worsened rather than abate in the last 25 years of civil rule. Leaders who lack the requisite comportment and sense of commitment to nation-building would most likely exploit complexities for personal aggrandizement rather than see opportunities presented by diversities. It is, therefore, imperative for emerging leaders to recognise the obligation of committing themselves to the attributes of good governance which, amongst other imperatives, demand accountability, transparency and a sense of personal responsibility.
