democratic leadership. This explains why Nigeria owes a debt of gratitude
to patriots, most notably, Ogbonnaya Onu, Bola Tinubu, and Muhammadu
Buhari for sustaining the opposition movement, which culminated in the
birth of All Progressives Congress (APC). Similar kudos ought to go to
President Goodluck Jonathan for creating the enabling environment that
engendered the emergence of the APC, the elusive viable alternative to the
then-ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The irony, however, is that
Buhari, as president, has adopted a patronage model, which is on pace to
decimate the opposition and potentially plunge the nation into a “next
level” of crisis.
The Buhari patronage model is a totalitarian discriminatory scheme
predicated purely on political inclinations. Adapted from the stone-age
imperial philosophy, and brought into the 21st Century Nigeria since 2015,
the model views opposition with perilous contempt. For example, Buhari’s
second term is set to once again overly reward Northern Nigeria at the
expense of the South, merely because the former accounted for 77%
of his votes in the 2019 presidential election. Specifically, government
patronage is likely to mirror the share of his total votes, which are as
follows: North-West:40%; North-East:21%; North-Central:16%;
South-West:13%; South-South:7%; and South-East:3%.
The totalitarian model explains why Buhari, upon assuming office,
discarded an equitable order embraced since 1999, whereby positions of the
President, Vice-President, Senate President, Speaker, Chairman of the
ruling party, and the Secretary to Federal Government were spread across
the six geographical zones—regardless of political inclinations. The
totalitarian
scheme is the sole rationale behind the current plan by the ruling party
to zone the Senate Presidency to the North-East, thereby producing a
curious state of affair where all the three arms of government are headed
by the North. Today, virtually all critical state organs are controlled by
people of the Northern extraction, particularly from the North-West and
the North-East zones—thanks to the Buhari model.
This blind pursuit for total domination is antagonistic to the Nigerian
diversity and negates the Constitution. The optics is taxation without
representation, which historically leads to revolt. Moreover, injustice
ingrained with impunity is a recipe for crisis which, of course,
does not always differentiate between the North and South. But what must
not escape the minds of Buhari apologists is the fact that Nigeria remains
a diverse country of bellicose ethnic groups, with national income accrued
from the states naturally endowed with remunerative resources. Thus, while
it can be convenient to gloat over the reality that over 70% of Buhari’s
votes came from the North, it is bluntly instructive that over 70% of the
government revenue is generated from the South, the apparent victim of the
president’s totalitarian regime.
As elaborated in my 2015 essay, “How PDP and APC Created New Biafran
Agitations”; while the abject lack of development in the East during the
PDP years handed the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) the convenient
backdrop to curry its initial groundswell of sympathy, Buhari’s brazen
threat of vendetta against the region definitely exacerbated the
secessionist movement. The immediate effect, remember, was the emergence
of a sister organization, the Niger Delta Avengers (NDA), that shutdown
oil facilities in 2016, causing production to its lowest level in the
Fourth Republic, which contributed in no small measure to the economic
recession that followed. A repeat of Buhari’s first term blunder is bound
to provoke a next level of crisis. Only a loon will ignore the message
inherent in this passage.
Yet Buhari’s yes-men will argue otherwise, nudging the
president to stay the status quo. After all, the man just won re-election.
But that is a toadying travesty. An objective history will not archive his
victory in 2019 as any reflection of broad or mass support. The verdict
was merely a byproduct of a binary election in which the opposing party,
disgraced out of power, nominated a fundamentally flawed candidate with
perplexing prospects for victory. Nevertheless, the flaws of the
opposition party or its candidate do not bequeath President Buhari the
rabid audacity to oppress 44% of the electorate, or the zones, that voted
against him. Opposition is neither a crime nor failure. Thus, the
prevailing
attempt by overzealous ruling party propagandists to stoke guilty
conscience on some people or zones based on their voting preferences is
maddening nescience.
The fact is that Buhari’s discriminatory patronage model is a serious
threat to the fabric of the vitally essential Nigerian diversity, as well
as the opposition. This portends a troubling future. Other fears apart,
the president ought to realize that the primary victims of a weak
opposition state are the poor masses, the very class he claims to
symbolize. Buhari
must also recognize that the new generation of Nigerians—both north and
south—want an equitable and progressive country. It is not surprising,
therefore, that true patriots within the ruling party, particularly from
the North, are rising against the unjust patronage model.
SKC Ogbonnia, a former 2019 APC presidential aspirant, is the author of
the Effective Leadership Formula*