President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s recent cabinet reshuffle, where he fired five ministers, redeployed 10 to other ministries and appointed seven new ministers has raised many eyebrows especially in the wake of the call for reinvigoration of his administration.
The reshuffle has sparked controversy, with many Nigerians questioning its motivations. While majority expect it to be an attempt at revitalising his administrations poor performance occasioned by diminishing hope in the face of harsh economic policies meting untold hardship on millions of Nigerians in the country, the President rather successfully doused an opportunity for a renewed hope breather as many argue that his moves prioritises political interests over performance.
But I will argue differently. Many thought the President would be sacking non performing ministers in his cabinet but he ended up changing the portfolio’s of some ministers that should have been given the boot over perpetual poor performance.
I personally think if President Tinubu’s priority were politically inclined, he would have have had it both ways by retaining people like Abdullahi Tijjani Gwarzo of the Housing and urban development, who is an astute grassroots politician and diehard loyalist of the President.
Mr Tinubu has severally been criticised for key decisions that diverged from public expectations but one will not expect that the President will gamble loyalty, plus Politics, plus performance over just politics.
Touted as a Kingmaker himself, President Tinubu should be wary of historical Precedents where poor appointments undermined leaders authority and ultimately led to their downfall.
Pharaoh Akhenaten, a pivotal political figure in ancient Egyptian history, known for his radical reforms and mysterious reign and whose enigma has continued to captivate historians and scholars till date, appointed advisors who mismanaged the economy and alienated nobles.
Akhenaten the tenth ruler for the eighteenth dynasty who reigned from in 1353 – 1336 BCE, surrounded himself with inexperienced and loyal advisors, rather than seasoned officials. This led to poor decision-making and mismanagement of the kingdom.
His advisors isolated him from traditional power centers, such as the priestly class and nobles, creating opposition and resentment.
The advisors’ incompetence resulted in economic decline, weakened foreign influence and internal unrest, ultimately contributing to Akhenaten’s downfall and the collapse of his reforms.
While the official performance evaluations used to sack or retain ministers are yet to be made public, it is visible to the blind that certain “power centers” and “nobles” are deliberately being alienated, creating a potential “Akhenaten” scenario for President Tinubu’s reign.
At the time analysts are of the opinion that the President should have considered scrapping the office of state Ministers to reduce the cost of governance and to avoid duplication of duties, it is curious that among the sacked Ministers, only Abdullahi Tijjani Gwarzo was a state minister.
If the official performance evaluations were of any standard and transparent matrics, I dare say, Gwarzo shouldn’t have been sacked. Together with his senior Minister Dangiwa, they have performed wonders bringing a series of reforms, and developing a roadmap to revitalise the Housing and Urban Development sector.
On the basis of the so called scorecard, Hadiza Bala Usman has woefully failed in accessing Abdullahi Gwarzo’s performance even with his position as a Junior Minister.
Sacking a junior minister while retaining the senior minister raises questions about fairness and collective responsibility. Since they work together, achievements are often credited to both ministers. This move sparks concerns about selective accountability, lack of transparency and unresolved issues. Why punish only the junior minister when both are responsible for the outcomes, what criteria justified the junior minister’s removal, and will removing the junior minister truly address the underlying problems if any at all?
Abdullahi Gwarzo, a devoted loyalist of President Tinubu, has a notable political background. He was the Action Congress of Nigeria’s gubernatorial candidate in 2011 and previously served as Deputy Governor of Kano state from 2007 to 2011. During his tenure, he oversaw the state’s water resources ministry, earning him the nickname “Ruwa Baba” (meaning “Water Father” in Hausa). President Tinubu would affectionately chant “Ruwa Baba” whenever they met at functions, showcasing their close relationship and mutual regard.
This is a man who from time immemorial is always at the forefront of defending the interest of the president even to the detriment of his own interest and ambition. It is on record that the National leader of the Kwankwasiya movement in Kano, Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso ferociously fought his senatorial ambition because he did the bidding of Tinubu during the APC primaries that produced Muhammadu Buhari in 2015.
Abdullahi Gwarzo’s contribution to Tinubu’s emergence cannot be overemphasised, he delivered not only his polling unit but his local government to the President unlike his replacement, Yusuf Ata who lacks an iota of political clout or competence.
If the President aims to balance appointments for political correctness and give Kano Central a fair chance, he should recognize that key positions are already held by individuals from Kano Central.
The Director General of National Productivity Centre Baffa Babba Danagundi who is also a grassroots mobilizer is from Kano Central, the Special Adviser to the President Sen. Bashir Garba Mohammed Lado is also from the Kano Central and the Chairman of the Governing Council of Bayero University Kano who was also the governorship flagbearer of the APC in 2023 Nasiru Yusuf Gawuna is also from Kano Central.
Given Kano’s significance as Nigeria’s largest populated state, contributing substantially to the country’s economy and employment, and its historical importance as a major political and trade hub, the President should know that Kano deserves more than Ogun from him.
By political calculation, Kano Central is the weak zone of the APC, even if the entire APC members converge at Kano Central, it will be hard for them to checkmate or defeat Kwankwaso. That’s the NNPP stronghold in Kano and Kwankwaso’s strength since 2011.
It is not to late for the President to reconsider this decision as there is no tangible reason to convince Nigerians and the people of Kano on why Abdullahi Gwarzo was removed as a Minister of the Federal Republic.
What happened to an ACN loyalist and disciple of the Tinubu School of Thought will only discourage other loyalists from standing firmly with sincerity on the mandate of President Tinubu.
The President has a crucial opportunity to debunk the notion that the Yoruba people are untrustworthy by rewarding the unwavering loyalty of a devoted follower. This move would not only demonstrate his commitment to honoring loyalty but also challenge prevailing stereotypes about the Yoruba community’s trustworthiness. By doing so, the President can foster greater unity, understanding and inclusivity within the nation.
Or better still, even if for selfish interest, the President should be wary that by alienating people like Gwarzo in his administration, a potential “Akhenaten” scenario looms.
Kayode Abdulrazag writes from Sabo Yaba, Lagos.
