Connect with us

Opinion

Late President Muhammadu Buhari: where the buck stops?-Inuwa Waya

Published

on

 

 

By

Inuwa Waya

Let me commence by extending my condolences to the families of the late President Muhammadu Buhari (both nuclear and extended). Let me also commend President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for conducting an elaborate state burial in honour of his late Predecessor.

Throughout his military career including his role as the Military Governor of North East and Federal Commissioner of Petroleum Resources, the late President Buhari was little known to ordinary Nigerians.

He came to limelight on 31st December 1983, when he and his colleagues in the military overthrew the democratically elected government of late President Shehu Shagari of blessed memory.

He assumed the position of the head of state and began to rule by Decree.

The Constitution Suspension and Modication Decree number one was enacted under which the 1979 constitution was suspended.

The State Security (detention of persons) Decree number two was promulgated. The Decree authorised the detention of anyone who was alleged to have contributed to the economic adversity of the nation or who participated in acts prejudicial to the state security. The military government can arrest and detain any individual for three month or more without trial under the Decree. Prominent politicians of the second Republic, political office holders and business men were arrested and detained for security reasons and economic sabotage, under the Decree. Many were tried and convicted by special military Tribunals created for those purposes. (For obvious reasons, the names of those affected by the said decree 2 would not be mentioned here). The military administration also enacted Decree number 4 tittled Public Officer Protection Against False Accusation Decree. Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor of the Guardian Newspapers were convicted under the Decree.

The junta also introduced the WAR AGAINST INDISCIPLINE (WAI) in order to tackle corruption and other vices which was believed to be prevalent under the deposed civilian administration. People were encouraged and in certain cases forced to be orderly in markets, Banks, shops and offices. Drug barons and armed robbers were executed. In an attempt to drive prices of commodities down, warehouses were broken in various parts of the Country and the items hoarded were sold to the public at control prices. Civil servants were directed to report early for work. Campaigns of patriotism informing Nigerians that they have no other Country but Nigeria were aired in the radios and television on a daily basis. Andrew was advised to stay at home and salvage the Country in one of the adverts. The down trodden welcomed those policies because they believed they are harbingers for prosperity and economic development. As the Head of State and Commander in chief of the Armed forces, the mass of the people believed General Buhari was the driving force behind these policies. That was the beginning of the love, confidence and admiration the ordinary people especially from the north, had for General Buhari.

On the 27th August 1985, General Buhari was overthrown in a bloodless palace military coup. Erstwhile Chief of Army Staff, General Ibrahim Babangida took over as the Head of State and Commander in Chief of the Armed forces. The reasons for the coup were stated by General Babangida in his autobiography ” A journey in service”. According to him, Buhari’s policies and leadership style were detrimental to the nation’s progress. Draconian Degrees were promulgated which trampled on the fundamental human rights of the citizens. The Babangida military administration was welcomed by the Country’s elites who saw it as a relief against tyranny and egregious abuse of power by the Buhari administration. They also believed that the new administration will be receptive to new ideas to address the economic problems of the Country. The ordinary Nigerians on the other hand gave them a cautious welcome. In their view, the process of turning the Country into a land of milk and honey was truncated by the new junta. They therefore accepted the reasons for the change of button with equanimity. In a populist move, the Babangida administration released political and economic detainees, opened up the Nigerian Security Organisation (NSO) detention centres for the press to conduct tour of what they referred to as Buhari’s torture chambers. General Babangida replaced the Supreme Military Council with a wider Armed Forces Ruling Council. He introduced different economic reforms including the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP). He began a democratization process for return to civil rule by strengthening the Centre for Democratic Studies (CDC) and the registration of the National Republican Convention (NRC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) as the only political parties in the Country. The process continue upto the June 12 Presidential election and its subsequent annulment which led to the Babangida administration parting ways with the Nigerian political elites especially those from the South West of Nigeria. The political instability caused by the annulment of the June 12 election led President Babangida to step aside and Chief Earnest Shonekan stepped in as the Head of the Interim Government. The collapse of the Interim Government and its aftermath is a subject of another day.

Advert

When General Buhari was released from detention, he resigned to his fate and led a quite life until he was appointed the head of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) by General Sani Abacha. For obvious reasons, the Babangida coup was not a fall from grace for General Buhari. Toppling his government attracted sympathy for him and reinforced his popularity. The bond between him and the downtrodden became rock solid. Indeed, it was for that reason the political elites considered him a good material as a Presidential candidate and convinced him to join partisan political activities in the third Republic. President Buhari contested three times and in all the three election circles, he lost the Presidential contest. During the campaigns, the opposition portrayed him as a dictator, a tribal irredentist and a religious bigot. They averred that he was not fit to rule a pluralistic Country under a democratic settings. He was forced to depend himself as a tolerant person who worked with people from different tribes and religions in the course of his career. Delivering a lecture at the Chatham House in London, Buhari identified himself as a former dictator and a converted democrat. In spite of all these, Buhari’s votes in each of the three elections were largely limited to the Northern part of the Country where has was seen as the most upright leader. Preparatory to the 2015 general elections, the opposition parties formed a merger in order to wrestle power from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who had been ruling the Country for sixteen years. The merger led to the emergence of the All Progressive Congress (APC) and Muhammadu Buhari was nominated as the party’s flag bearer in the 2015 Presidential elections. The elections were conducted and Buhari defeated President Goodluck Jonathan who the incumbent President.

President Buhari was sworn in as the Nigeria’s President when there was general discontent on the performance of the economy under the PDP led administration. Pundits and novice alike expected him to hit the ground running immediately after his swearing in as President. However to everyone’s consternation, President Buhari spent nearly seven months without forming his cabinet. Rumours had it that the President was carefully selecting his team to make sure that he did not make a mistake in his choice. By the time the cabinet was formed, the economy had further sank into deeper trouble and it was difficult for the newly constituted Federal Executive Council to turn the tide with ease. That was how the administration started on a weak foundation. The difference between General Muhammadu Buhari and President Muhammadu Buhari began to manifest. Furthermore, as a civilian President, he had to work with the Constitution and not Decree. The 1999 Constitution as amended had clearly provided for separation of powers between the three arms of government, namely the legislature, the executive and the Judiciary. To be fair to him and true to his conviction as converted democrat, President Buhari tried as much as possible to respect the doctrine of separation of powers. In his capacity as the Head of the executive arm of government, he also gave government institutions some measure of independence which is a sine qua non for democracy. At the time Buhari took over as President, government institutions were subjected to different kind of manipulation. Therefore giving them such autonomy without training, control and supervision as he did, became counter productive. It enabled abuse and exercise of discretionary powers by those at the helm of affairs of these institutions. Major institutions of government such as the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCItd), the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeran Customs and Excise, were feeding the nation and the President with false and adulterated information. There was no one to audit government institutions because the President did not have an economic team and did not appoint any of his Ministers to coordinate the economy. There were reported cases of abuse of power and excesses against top government officials including the presidency and nothing was done to stop them. There were allegations of public sector corruption including secret employment of those that are connected in government. There was deep concern of nepotism in government appointments. A new form of insecurity came into existence with the emergence of IPOB, ESN and the bandits terrorising the North West. With the economy going down, the government resorted to borrowing in order to among others, pay salaries and wages. President Buhari became overwhelmed and the situation deteriorated when he fell sick and spent almost four months receiving treatment in London for an undisclosed illness. There was a time he was incoherent in answering questions about government policies, which indicated that he was either too sick to know what was going on or he doesn’t receive proper briefings from those concerned. Buhari himself acknowledged that much when he said Nigeria missed the opportunity when he was young and ruthless. During the 2019 elections, Nigerians gave President Buhari the benefit of doubt by voting for him for another four year term of office. Everyone expected the him to rejig the administration by making major changes and injecting fresh blood to help him exercise his mandate. Much to the bewilderment of many, the President avoided making any significant changes and business continue as usual. Those who knew how President Buhari ruled the Country as a military Head of State were disappointed with the way he led the Country as a civilian President. Although, the two systems are different, one can not entirely dismiss their expectations. Whether as military or civilian Head of government, the buch stops on his desk. President Harry S. Truman, the 33rd American President adopted a no nonsense approach to decision-making. The sign “THE BUCH STOPS HERE” on his desk served as a constant reminder to him and to the officials coming to the Oval Office that he was ultimately responsible for the actions of everyone in his administration. President Buhari, should have taken copious notes from the legacy of President Truman. While receiving visitors at his Daura residence after leaving, President Buhari reflected on his years in government and asked people to forgive him for all his shortcoming. Currently there is an ongoing debate especially in the north, with some holding the view that his request came too little too late. On my part, I have forgiven him.

Opinion

Dr Bello Matwallle: Why Dialogue Still Matters in the Fight Against Insecurity

Published

on

 

By Musa Iliyasu Kwankwaso

In the history of leadership, force may be loud, but wisdom delivers results. This is why security experts agree that while military action can suppress violence temporarily, dialogue is what permanently closes the door to conflict. It is a lesson the world has learned through blood, loss, and painful experience.

When Dr. Bello Matawalle, as Governor of Zamfara State, chose dialogue and reconciliation, it was not a sign of weakness. It was a different kind of courage one that placed the lives of ordinary citizens above political applause. A wise leader measures success not by bullets fired, but by lives saved.

Across conflict zones, history has consistently shown that force alone does not end insecurity. Guns may damage bodies, but they do not eliminate the roots of violence. This understanding forms the basis of what experts call the non-kinetic approach conflict resolution through dialogue, reconciliation, justice, and social reform.

When Matawalle assumed office, Zamfara was deeply troubled. Roads were closed, markets shut down, farmers and herders operated in fear, and citizens lived under constant threat. Faced with this reality, only two options existed: rely solely on military force or combine security operations with dialogue. Matawalle chose the path widely accepted across the world security reinforced by dialogue not out of sympathy for criminals, but to protect innocent lives.

Advert

This approach was not unique to Zamfara. In Katsina State, Governor Aminu Bello Masari led peace engagements with armed groups. In Maiduguri granted amnesty to repentant offenders of Boko Haram, In Sokoto, dialogue was also pursued to reduce bloodshed. These precedents raise a simple question: if dialogue is acceptable elsewhere, why is Matawalle singled out?

At the federal level, the same logic applies. Through Operation Safe Corridor, the Federal Government received Boko Haram members who surrendered, offered rehabilitation and reintegration, and continued military action against those who refused to lay down arms. This balance
rehabilitation for those who repent and force against those who persist is the core of the non-kinetic approach.

Security experts globally affirm that military force contributes only 20 to 30 percent of sustainable solutions to insurgency. The remaining 70 to 80 percent lies in dialogue, justice, economic reform, and addressing poverty and unemployment. Even the United Nations states clearly: “You cannot kill your way out of an insurgency.”

During Matawalle’s tenure, several roads reopened, cattle markets revived, and daily life began to normalize. If insecurity later resurfaced, the question is not whether dialogue was wrong, but whether broader coordination failed.

Today, critics attempt to recast past security strategies as crimes. Yet history is not blind, and truth does not disappear. Matawalle’s actions were rooted in expert advice, national precedent, and global best practice.

The position of Sheikh Ahmad Gumi, who publicly affirmed that Matawalle’s approach was appropriate and that military force accounts for only about 25 percent of counterinsurgency success, further reinforces this reality. Such views cannot be purchased or manufactured; they reflect established security thinking.

In the end, dialogue is not a betrayal of justice it is often its foundation. And no amount of political noise can overturn decisions grounded in evidence, experience, and the priority of human life.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Matawalle: The Northern Anchor of Loyalty in Tinubu’s Administration

Published

on

 

By Adebayor Adetunji, PhD

In the broad and competitive terrain of Nigerian politics, loyalty is often spoken of, yet rarely sustained with consistency, courage and visible action. But within the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, one Northern appointee has demonstrated this quality not as a slogan, but as a lifestyle, as a political principle and as a national duty — Hon. (Dr.) Bello Muhammad Matawalle, Minister of State for Defence.

Since his appointment, Matawalle has stood out as one of the most loyal, outspoken and dependable pillars of support for the Tinubu administration in the North. He has never hesitated, not for a moment, to stand firmly behind the President. At every turn of controversy, in moments of public misunderstanding, and at times when political alliances waver, Matawalle has continued to speak boldly in defence of the government he serves. For him, loyalty is not an occasional gesture — it is a commitment evidenced through voice, alignment, and sacrifice.

Observers within and outside the ruling party recall numerous occasions where the former Zamfara State Governor took the front line in defending the government’s policies, actions and direction, even when others chose neutrality or silence. His interventions, always direct and clear, reflect not just loyalty to a leader, but faith in the future the President is building, a future anchored on economic reform, security revival, institutional strengthening and renewed national unity.

Advert

But Matawalle’s value to the administration does not stop at loyalty. In performance, visibility and active delivery of duty, he stands among the most engaged ministers currently serving in the federal cabinet. His portfolio, centred on defence and security, one of the most sensitive sectors in the country, demands expertise, availability and unbroken presence. Matawalle has not only embraced this responsibility, he has carried it with remarkable energy.

From high-level security meetings within Nigeria to strategic engagements across foreign capitals, Matawalle has represented the nation with clarity and confidence. His participation in defence summits, international cooperation talks, and regional security collaborations has positioned Nigeria as a voice of influence in global security discourse once again. At home, his involvement in military policy evaluation, counter-terrorism discussions and national defence restructuring reflects a minister who understands the urgency of Nigeria’s security needs, and shows up to work daily to address them.

Away from partisan battles, Matawalle has proven to be a bridge — between North and South, civilian leadership and military institutions, Nigeria and the wider world. His presence in government offers a mix of loyalty, performance and deep grounding in national interest, the type of partnership every President needs in turbulent times.

This is why calls, campaigns and whisperings aimed at undermining or isolating him must be resisted. Nigeria cannot afford to discourage its best-performing public servants, nor tighten the atmosphere for those who stand firmly for unity and national progress. The nation must learn to applaud where there is performance, support where there is loyalty, and encourage where there is commitment.

Hon. Bello Matawalle deserves commendation, not suspicion. Support — not sabotage. Encouragement, not exclusion from political strategy or power alignment due to narrow interests.

History does not forget those who stood when it mattered. Matawalle stands today for President Tinubu, for security, for loyalty, for national service. And in that place, he has earned a space not only in the present political equation, but in the future judgment of posterity.

Nigeria needs more leaders like him. And Nigeria must say so openly.

Adebayor Adetunji, PhD
A communication strategist and public commentator
Write from Akure, Ondo State, Nigeria

Continue Reading

Opinion

Drug Abuse Among People With Disabilities: The Hidden Crisis Nigeria Is Yet to Address

Published

on

 

By Abdulaziz Ibrahim

Statistically Invisible, Persons with Disabilities feel shut out of Nigeria’s drug abuse war as a report from Adamawa reveals lacks data and tailored support needed, forcing a vulnerable group to battle addiction alone.

In Adamawa State, the fight against drug abuse is gaining attention, but for many people living with disabilities (PWDs), their struggles remain largely unseen. A new report has uncovered deep gaps in support, treatment, and data tracking for PWDs battling addiction despite official claims of equal access.

For nearly three decades, Mallam Aliyu Hammawa, a visually impaired resident of Yola, navigated a world increasingly shrouded by drug dependency. He first encountered psychoactive substances through friends, and what began as casual use quickly escalated into long-term addiction.

“I used cannabis, tramadol, tablets, shooters everything I could get my hands on,” he recalled. “These drugs affected my behaviour and my relationship with the people close to me.”

Family members say his addiction changed him entirely. His friend, Hussaini Usman, described feeling “sad and worried” when he realized Aliyu had fallen into drug use.

Aliyu eventually made the decision to quit. It was marriage and the fear of hurting his wife that finally forced him to seek a new path. “Whenever I took the drugs, I felt normal. But my wife was confused about my behaviour,” he said. “I decided I had to stop before she discovered the full truth of what I was taking.”

A National Problem With Missing Data

Advert

Nigeria has one of the highest drug-use rates in West Africa, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). Over 14 million Nigerians between the ages of 15 and 64 use psychoactive substances. Yet, within that massive user base, PWDs are statistically invisible.

There is almost no national data on drug abuse among persons with disabilitiesa critical gap that experts warn makes it impossible to design effective, inclusive rehabilitation programmes.

Ibrahim Idris Kochifa, the Secretary of the Adamawa State Association of Persons with Physical Disability, told this reporter that PWDs face unique, systemic pressures that intensify their vulnerability to drug abuse, specifically citing poverty, unemployment, isolation, and social discrimination.

“Whenever a person with disability is caught with drugs, the common decision is to seize the drugs and let him go,” Kochifa said, speaking on behalf of the disabled community leadership. “But if they consult us, we have advice to offer on how they can be treated and rehabilitated. Without involving us, no programme will fully benefit people with disabilities.”

NDLEA Responds

At the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) Command in Adamawa, officials insist their services are open to everyone without discrimination.

Mrs. Ibraham Nachafia, the Head of Media and Advocacy for the NDLEA Adamawa State Command, said during an interview, “Our rehabilitation centre is open to all. There is no discrimination. Anyone including persons with disabilities can access treatment.”

While the official position suggests inclusiveness, disability advocates call it “tokenistic.” They argue that equal access on paper does not translate to tailored support in practice. True rehabilitation for PWDs requires specialized counselling that understands their unique traumas, physically accessible facilities, and significantly stronger community engagement to prevent relapse.

A Call for More Inclusive Action

Advocates are now urging the Nigerian government and drug-control agencies to build a response framework that recognizes PWDs as a vulnerable group in need of targeted support.

The advocate Goodness Fedrick warns that until rehabilitation and prevention programmes reflect the realities faced by people with disabilities, Nigeria’s battle against drug abuse will remain incomplete.

For people like Aliyu Hammawa, who managed to recover without structured support, the message is clear: many others may not be as fortunate.

This story highlights the urgent need for inclusive, data-driven, and community-supported approaches in Nigeria’s fight against drug addiction. Until the nation sees and serves this ‘hidden crisis,’ its overall battle against addiction will continue to be fought with one hand tied behind its back.

Continue Reading

Trending