Opinion

The Oracle: Is Democracy Really the Best Form of Government? (Pt 1)

Published

5 years ago

July 9, 2021

Eric

By Chief Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

In the midst of suffering, gnashing of teeth, hunger, squalor, despondency, corruption, insecurity, mass poverty and even hopelessness, many Nigerians have been asking me (both by SMS, phone calls, Watsapp messages, and emails), whether democracy is actually the best form of Government. They are wondering if successive civilian governments in Nigeria, especially the Muhammadu Buhari government, has demonstrated that democracy actually possesses the assumed talismanic abracadabra magical wand of being the best form of government. They are wondering why democracy which has been in Nigeria (aside the era of military interregnum), has never yielded the desired profits, let alone dividends. They are convinced that the only difference they have seen between the military adventurers in power and their ally elitist and political buccaneers is in the military’s starched uniform and looting gun, as against the politician’s agbada and babaringa, with a looting pen.

It has therefore become pertinent to explore some forms of government, starting with this universally acclaimed type called democracy.

HOW THE SEEDS OF DEMOCRACY WERE SOWN

In the afternoon of Thursday, November 19, 1863, American president, Abraham Lincoln, delivered a famous speech at the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, 4 and half months after the Union Armies which he led, had defeated the Confederacy Armies at the “Battle of Gettysburg”. The speech was to honour the soldiers who had sacrificed their precious lives for the country.

In just 271 words, Lincoln delivered one of the greatest speeches ever made in history. He told his transfixed audience in a speech that has since become famously known as “The Gettysburg Declaration”, thus:

“That these dead shall not have died in vain – that this nation under God, shall have a new birth of freedom – and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth”.

The same Abraham Lincoln was also quoted to have said on August 1, 1858, as follows (the circumstances in which he did so are not quite clear):
“As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy”.

QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS AND QUESTIONS

The questions that beg for answers are: Is democracy really the best form of government? If so, why and how? How many forms, types, systems, forms or structures of government do we actually have? My research on these questions shocked me to no end, when I discovered that there are well over 65 forms and structures of government. But, why has democracy stood out with such luminousness, prevalence and endearing love by most advanced countries of the world? What is it really that makes democracy so tick? Why is it so unique, adored, embraced and adulated by all? Why has it become the yardstick or international best practice barometer with which a ruler or government is weighed and measured?

Today, I am taking my avid readers along with me on a new series concerning the different systems, types, forms and structures of government. The revelations in my writes-up will shock many readers. From thousands of continuous feedback by reading members of the public, I have come to discover that the readership of this newspaper is quite vast and is no longer restricted to only Nigerians. It has since expanded to a global readership of all persons who thirst for democracy, knowledge, information, history, literature, scriptures, good governance, national affairs, international matters, human rights, Rule of law and constitutionalism. A litany of daily telephone calls, letters, whatsapp, facebook, SMS, linkedin, twitter and other online social media handles and platforms interactions with me readily testify to this wide readership. I am greatly encouraged by these divinely driven positive reactions to this my self-imposed sacrificial, but tasking, mission, of educating members of the public, sharing my little God-given knowledge and research capabilities, to illuminate the dark crevices of our ignorance, sheer hypnotism, brainwashing, and enhance national discourse.

Today, we shall commence this lengthy discourse which will take quite some time. Let us start, arguably, with the mother of all forms and structures of government – democracy. I shall break up from time to time, from this stream of national conversation, to attend to more urgent emergent national issues. When I so do, please, permit and pardon me. So, let us now start with the most cherished concept of government- DEMOCRACY.

DEMOCRACY AND ITS ORIGIN

The word “democracy” has its original roots in the ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city state of Athens. It means ‘demokratia,’ meaning ‘rule by the people’ (“demos” means ‘people’ and “kratos” means ‘rule’.) It is a political system in which people not monarchs (King or Queens) or Aristocracies (like Lords) rule.

Democracy also has roots in the Magna Carta, England’s “Great Charter” of 1215 that was the first document to challenge the authority of the king, subjecting him to the rule of the law and protecting his people from feudal abuse.

Democracy as we know it today was not truly defined until the Age of Enlightenment in the 17th and 18th centuries, during which time the U.S. Declaration of Independence was penned, followed by the U.S. Constitution (which borrowed heavily from the Magna Carta). The term evolved to mean a government structured with a separation of powers, provided basic civil rights, religious freedom and separation of church and state.

Theodore Parker defines it as “government of all the people, by all the people and for all the people”. Seymour Lipset (1960) gives a working definition of democracy as “a political system supplying regular constitutional opportunities for changing the government by allowing the population to choose between alternative sets of policy makers”.

While delivering a speech on the importance of democracy to the people of Annapolis in 1809, Thomas Jefferson said, “Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends; the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property is his who can take them”.

According to Larry Diamond, a Political Scientist, democracy consists of four key elements:

A political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections.

The active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. Protection of the human rights of all citizens.

A rule of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all citizens.

Democracy is a type of social system in which everyone has an equal share of power. In large complex societies, however, it is impossible for every citizen to be involved in the political process. Thus, when we refer to ‘democratic’ power structure, we mean those structures in which people are allowed to vote for elected representatives.

MY OWN DEFINITION OF DEMOCRACY

To me, my understanding is that democracy is a system of government borne of the hopes and aspirations of a people and in the shaping of which the people have a real say and commitment to a political structure to which people, in consequence, have intellectual, ideological, and emotional attachments. This means a system of government that is considered by the people as their own and which they are prepared to protect and defend to the hilt. This is a government of the people, one that has its roots in the people, in their goals, values, ideals, experiences, and aspirations. It is not a type of governmental system, the nuances of which can be imposed on the people from outside, though some aspects of those nuances can be influenced or even borrowed externally. But, it is a system of rule that is nurtured, refined, and modified by the people to reflect their wishes, desires, and experiences. The lack of all these desiderata makes a people’s appreciation of, and attitude toward, a particular form of democratic practice merely tentative and tinkering.

HOW DEMOCRACY HAS EVOLVED

Most societies that describe themselves as political democracies are actually representative democracies in which citizens elect politicians who actually hold and exercise political authority. Pure democracy is quite rare. This is because the definition of ‘everyone’ always excludes some portion of population.

The origins of democracy as an idea and a practice go back to the city-states of Greece in the 5th century BCE. But, contemporary democracies are very different from the above ancient Greek model. It is a paradox that though modem democracy first emerged in the Greece, yet the Greeks were always suspicious of democracy.

They felt that people often made bad decisions that went against their interests. People could be manipulated by demagogues and vested interests. The pattern that emerged in England in the 17th century and slowly became the model for the entire world was one of “representative democracy” or “parliamentary democracy”.

Here, citizens elected their leaders by ballot, who promised to represent the interests of those citizens in debates and decisions, which typically took place in some central national forum such as parliament or Congress. Thus, ideally, the parliament becomes a miniature demos.

In India, this type of democratic political system developed after independence. It is said that in ancient India, the people led a democratic way of living (Ram Rajya), but the political democracy of the modem form did not exist.

In practice, politicians in a democracy usually belong to parties which propose general policies or programmes, rather than responding to citizens on issue-by-issue basis. Parties thus became independent centres of power.

The experience of the 20th century seems to show that citizens’ interests are best represented by either two, or at the most, three parties—as in Britain or the United States; although there are many one-party systems in the world which claim to be democratic on the basis that they represent the collective will of the people. Political processes (elections, political socialization) are the lifeblood of all types of democracies. Political organization, political competitiveness, and the big political gesture-all these are integral to democracy. Without these, democracy is hollow.

INGREDIENTS OF DEMOCRACY

It is widely now accepted that for real democracy, the following necessary conditions must be present: free and fair elections; a genuine choice between candidates and policies; real parliamentary power; the separation of powers between the executive, legislature, judiciary and the politicians; civil rights for all citizens; rule of law and equality before law; inter-party competition; real representation of different interests, free, strong and responsible media; personal freedom; freedom of speech and the press, freedom of religion and public worship and freedom of association and of assembly; freedom from arbitrary arrest; and political choice, etc.

Although democracy is based on majority rule, the protection of minority rights has always been regarded as an essential aspect of the democratic system. Thus, although the majority may always have its way, the minority must always be allowed to have its say. Democracy does not however tolerate tyranny of a vociferous and oppressive tiny minority. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy”. (Woodrow Wilson).

Opinion

Beyond the Present Impasse: Five-Pillar Strategy for Restoring Credibility of ECOWAS

Published

3 days ago

April 25, 2026

Eric

By Tolulope A. Adegoke PhD

PREAMBLE: THE STRATEGIC MOMENT AND ITS IMPERATIVES

The Economic Community of West African States confronts a moment of institutional reckoning without precedent in its fifty-year history. The confluence of democratic recession, the fracturing of regional solidarity, the commodification of the Community’s security space by external actors, and the erosion of popular faith in the tangible benefits of integration has converged to pose a systemic threat to the organization’s foundational relevance. The established toolkit of declaratory diplomacy, automatic suspension, and sanctions escalation has demonstrably exhausted its capacity to compel compliance or to stabilize the regional order.

The way forward, therefore, cannot be a mere intensification of existing methods. It must be a strategic recalibration of ECOWAS’s institutional posture, operational doctrines, and normative architecture. The objective is not the preservation of institutional prestige for its own sake, but the patient, principled, and incentivized reconstruction of a regional political community in which sovereign member states and their citizens perceive membership as a demonstrable enhancement of their national security, economic prosperity, and democratic legitimacy. The following roadmap articulates a sequenced, non-biased, and operationally concrete way forward, structured across five interdependent strategic lines of effort.

STRATEGIC LINE OF EFFORT I: RECALIBRATE THE NORMATIVE FOUNDATION OF THE COMMUNITY

The prevailing perception that the ECOWAS normative framework on democratic governance is applied with selectivity—penalizing military seizures of power while remaining diplomatically passive in the face of civilian constitutional manipulation—has inflicted severe damage on the institution’s moral authority. Rectifying this asymmetry is an indispensable precondition for the restoration of credible institutional leadership.

Action 1.1: Convene an Extraordinary Authority Summit Dedicated Exclusively to Normative Self-Correction

The Chair of the Authority must convene, within a non-extendable 90-day period, an Extraordinary Summit with a single, undiluted agenda item: the critical review and amendment of the 2001 Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance. This Summit must not be subsumed within a broader agenda of security or economic matters. Its singular focus signals institutional seriousness and prevents diplomatic evasion.

Action 1.2: Codify and Adopt a Binding Symmetrical Sanctions Regime

The Summit must adopt a formal Supplementary Protocol that introduces, with legally binding precision, a definition of the “Constitutional Coup” or “Incumbent Entrenchment.” This shall be defined as any action by a sitting elected executive, whether through legislative manipulation, compliant judicial ruling, or tailored constitutional referendum, that modifies the fundamental law of the state for the primary purpose of abrogating or eliminating established presidential term limits in order to extend the incumbent’s tenure. The sanctions prescribed for this defined violation must be identical in their automaticity of trigger, procedural robustness, and severity of consequence to those prescribed for classical military coups d’état. This single act of symmetrical legal self-correction eliminates the charge of institutional bias and re-establishes the Community as a principled, impartial guarantor of democratic integrity.

Action 1.3: Mandate the ECOWAS Council of Ministers to Develop a Compliance Monitoring and Early Warning Matrix

The Council of Ministers must be mandated to develop, within 120 days, a transparent, indicator-based Compliance Monitoring and Early Warning Matrix. This matrix must track, on a continuous and publicly accessible basis, the compliance status of every member state against the full spectrum of democratic governance norms, including term limit provisions, electoral calendar integrity, and civil liberties protections. The matrix serves as an objective, depoliticized early warning mechanism that triggers preventive diplomatic engagement before a crisis crystallizes, removing the element of discretionary political judgment that fuels perceptions of bias.

STRATEGIC LINE OF EFFORT II: REPOSITION THE SECURITY ARCHITECTURE FROM PUNITIVE POSTURE TO ENABLING PARTNERSHIP

The region’s security space has become an unregulated, competitive marketplace for external military projection. ECOWAS must fundamentally reconceive its security offer to member states, pivoting from a posture associated with kinetic interventionism to one of technical enabling partnership that sovereign states perceive as enhancing, rather than constraining, their national security.

Action 2.1: Adopt and Promulgate a Binding External Security Partner Code of Conduct

The Mediation and Security Council must convene a high-level Strategic De-confliction and Transparency Dialogue with all external state actors conducting unilateral security operations on the territory of ECOWAS member states. The binding, legally codified outcome shall be an ECOWAS External Security Partner Code of Conduct. Its central provision mandates that all bilateral Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs), defense cooperation memoranda, and security-related basing or access pacts between any external state and any individual ECOWAS member state be formally and confidentially deposited with a centralized registry at the ECOWAS Commission within a non-extendable 90-day period. The objective is a non-prejudicial technical audit ensuring that the cumulative effect of multiple, independently negotiated bilateral arrangements does not inadvertently undermine collective regional security.

Action 2.2: Formally Reconceptualize the ECOWAS Standby Force into a Modular Technical Enabling Capability

The Department of Political Affairs, Peace and Security must be directed to present, within 180 days, a comprehensive doctrinal and operational blueprint for the reconceptualization of the ECOWAS Standby Force (ESF) into a new instrument, provisionally designated the “ECOWAS Crisis Response and Resilience Capability” (ECRRC). This new capability must execute a decisive doctrinal pivot away from large-scale conventional combat power projection—a mission type assessed as operationally unviable and politically irrecoverable in the current environment—and towards the provision of high-demand, low-substitutability technical enabling functions. These core modules shall include a multi-source intelligence fusion and strategic warning cell, a specialized digital border security and management task force, and a dedicated regional counter-financing of terrorism unit operating in institutional coordination with GIABA. This recalibrated offer creates a non-coercive incentive for disengaged states to voluntarily resume security cooperation.

Action 2.3: Establish a Specialized Civilian Harm Monitoring and Accountability Mechanism

The Commission must establish, with immediate effect, an operationally independent Civilian Harm Monitoring and Accountability Mechanism (CHMAM). Its personnel shall be sourced from member states with no direct security-material interest in the Sahelian theatre. Its mandate is the impartial, transparent, and universally applied monitoring, verification, and public reporting of civilian harm perpetrated by all armed actors, including state forces and their external partners. This mechanism depoliticizes the protection agenda and positions ECOWAS as a non-partisan guarantor of humanitarian accountability.

STRATEGIC LINE OF EFFORT III: ENGINEER A CALIBRATED, INCENTIVE-ANCHORED POLITICAL ENGAGEMENT FRAMEWORK

The sterile binary between “immediate unconditional constitutional restoration” and “indefinite unverifiable transition” has produced a protracted diplomatic gridlock. A new engagement framework, grounded in verified deliverables and sequenced incentives, is required.

Action 3.1: Constitute a Permanent, Empowered Panel of Eminent Persons for Silent Mediation
The Chair of the Authority must formally constitute, through a Decision of the Authority, a permanent Panel of Former Heads of State and Eminent Persons. Membership must be curated exclusively from a small cohort of former leaders whose nations possess an unassailable living legacy of peaceful, constitutional, and fully contested democratic alternation of executive power. The Panel’s mandate is to conduct a silent, continuous, indefinitely sustained shuttle diplomacy mission, operating strictly on the methodology of interest-based negotiation. No public statements, no deadlines, and no press releases are to be issued by the Panel. This permanently discontinues the counterproductive practice of “mégaphone diplomacy.”

Action 3.2: Table a Formal, Three-Tiered Transition Compact with Verified Deliverables and Sequenced Incentives

The Commission, under the political guidance of the Mediation and Security Council, must prepare and formally table a comprehensive Three-Tiered Transition Compact as the baseline framework for engagement with member states currently under transitional military administration. The tiers are sequenced as follows:

· Tier 1 (Immediate Confidence Building): Full, unimpeded humanitarian access to all conflict-affected zones, verified by operational humanitarian agencies; and the release of all political detainees not credibly charged with violent criminal offenses, verified by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Upon successful independent verification, ECOWAS commits to a formal suspension of targeted economic sanctions against the state apparatus.

· Tier 2 (Sequenced Political Roadmap): A binding 24-month, bottom-up electoral sequence—local elections first, constitutional referendum second, presidential and parliamentary elections third—with a guaranteed statutory role for ECOWAS in the technical vetting of the electoral management body. Upon verification of each phase, incremental incentives are released.

· Tier 3 (Structural Guarantee Against Self-Dealing): The constitutional entrenchment, prior to terminal elections, of a non-amendable clause prohibiting any serving member of the transitional government from contesting those elections. Upon verification and peaceful transfer of power, all remaining sanctions are lifted, and ECOWAS proactively sponsors the state’s full reintegration and development financing package.

Action 3.3: Formally Delink Humanitarian Access from Political Negotiation
The Commission must issue a binding institutional directive establishing that humanitarian access and the protection of civilian populations are non-negotiable obligations under international humanitarian law and the ECOWAS Treaty. These shall not be treated as bargaining chips within political negotiations. This directive establishes an impartial humanitarian baseline that protects the vulnerable and starves extremist narratives of their recruitment material.

STRATEGIC LINE OF EFFORT IV: CONSTRUCT AND DELIVER A TANGIBLE, VISIBLE ECONOMIC COUNTER-OFFER

Economic sanctions, while a legally mandated instrument, have inflicted disproportionate harm on vulnerable populations and have been successfully weaponized by transitional authorities as evidence of ECOWAS hostility. A serious, fully-funded, and rapidly disbursing economic offer that demonstrates the irreplaceable material value of ECOWAS membership is a strategic necessity.

Action 4.1: Capitalize and Launch the ECOWAS Community Livelihood and Border Zone Resilience Facility

The Commission, in partnership with the ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID) and the African Development Bank, must convene a dedicated donor pledging conference within 120 days to capitalize a substantially expanded, fast-disbursing stabilization instrument. The facility’s exclusive investment focus shall be the cross-border communities whose economic fabric has been destroyed by insecurity and political rupture. Priority projects shall include the rehabilitation of transhumance corridors with negotiated local governance structures, the construction of solar-powered border market infrastructure, and the launch of a massive Community-Based Youth Employment and Apprenticeship Program targeted at displaced youth in frontier zones. All projects must be collaboratively and transparently branded as direct dividends of ECOWAS solidarity.

Action 4.2: Adopt a Unified Institutional Position Linking Debt Relief to Verified Governance Progress

The Authority must adopt a formal Common Position directing its collective diplomatic weight towards aggressive advocacy for a comprehensive, non-punitive, and development-sensitive sovereign debt restructuring framework for all severely affected member states. This advocacy shall be executed at the G20 Common Framework, the IMF Executive Board, and the Paris Club. Critically, the ECOWAS Common Position must explicitly and publicly link a pathway to structural debt relief to the affected state’s independently verified, irreversible progress against the Tier 2 and Tier 3 benchmarks of the Transition Compact. This leverages the international financial architecture as a structurally aligned positive incentive for good-faith engagement, offering a sophisticated alternative to blunt unilateral sanctions.

Action 4.3: Reaffirm and Technically Safeguard the Free Movement Protocol as a Non-Negotiable Community Asset

The Commission must urgently establish a dedicated, technically staffed “Free Movement Safeguard and Facilitation Unit.” This unit’s mandate is to work bilaterally and discretely with all member states, including those in withdrawal processes, to identify and implement the minimal, security-justified, and technically proportionate border management procedures that can preserve the residual functional operation of the Free Movement Protocol for ordinary citizens, even during periods of political estrangement. Preserving this tangible, daily-lived benefit of ECOWAS citizenship protects the human constituency for regional integration and prevents the political fracture from metastasizing into permanent inter-community estrangement.

STRATEGIC LINE OF EFFORT V: INSTITUTIONALIZE A TRANSFORMED STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION AND DIPLOMATIC PROTOCOL

All substantive policy interventions will fail if transmitted through the existing, demonstrably counterproductive communication protocols. A binding institutional transformation of ECOWAS’s mode of public engagement is a standalone strategic priority.

Action 5.1: Institute a Mandatory Linguistic and Register Recalibration Across All Official Communications
The Commission must issue a binding editorial protocol mandating a permanent and institution-wide recalibration of the language employed in all communiqués, declarations, and public statements. The default opening frame of “condemnation, suspension, and ultimatum” must be replaced by a primary, consistent language frame that centers the “non-negotiable, legally binding obligation of ECOWAS to the sustained physical security, human dignity, and economic opportunity of the individual West African citizen.” The primary subjects of all public interventions shall be the identifiable human beings whose lives are affected: the farmer, the trader, the displaced child. This reframes the diplomatic confrontation from a contest between elites into a shared responsibility for protection.

Action 5.2: Permanently Discontinue Mégaphone Diplomacy and Institutionalize a Protocol of Public Humility

The ECOWAS Authority must formally resolve to permanently discontinue the practice of issuing public ultimatum deadlines as an instrument of political mediation. The only regular public updates permitted on the political process shall be confined to measured, independently verified progress on humanitarian deliverables. The substantive, consequential work of political resolution is to be conducted exclusively through the confidential, professional channels of the Permanent Panel of Eminent Persons. This protocol deliberately starves the political crisis of the sensationalist, polarizing public media cycle upon which spoilers and external actors depend, relocating the work of resolution to an environment where trust can be painstakingly reconstructed.

Action 5.3: Launch a Sustained, Decentralized Community-Level Public Diplomacy Campaign

The Commission must design and resource a sustained, decentralized public diplomacy campaign that operates below the level of national media and engages directly with local communities, traditional authorities, women’s associations, and youth networks in border regions. The campaign’s message must be non-polemical and focused exclusively on the tangible, practical benefits of ECOWAS citizenship—the right to travel, to trade, to access education and healthcare across borders—documented through the authentic testimonies of real citizens whose lives have been positively impacted. This ground-level, person-to-person diplomacy rebuilds the popular constituency for regional integration from the bottom up, countering the top-down, state-controlled narratives that currently dominate the information space.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke, AMBP-UN is a globally recognized scholar-practitioner and thought leader at the nexus of security, governance, and strategic leadership. His mission is dedicated to advancing ethical governance, strategic human capital development, resilient nation building, and global peace. He can be reached via: tolulopeadegoke01@gmail.com, globalstageimpacts@gmail.com

Opinion

Kano Deputy Governorship: Why Murtala Sule Garo is Most Deserving

Published

6 days ago

April 21, 2026

Eric

By Abdullahi Sa’idu Baba (Hafizi)

One of the defining slogans of the Governor of Kano State is “Kano First,” a principle that emphasizes prioritizing the collective interest, development, and unity of Kano State above all else. In line with this vision, Hon. Murtala Sule Garo stands out as the most suitable candidate for the position of Deputy Governor. His track record reflects a history of diligent and selfless service to Kano State, marked by consistent dedication to grassroots development and people-oriented governance. Over the years, he has demonstrated an unwavering commitment to advancing the welfare of the people, making him a natural fit for a leadership role that demands loyalty, competence, and a deep understanding of Kano’s needs.

Throughout his time in office, Garo distinguished himself through people-oriented policies and impactful empowerment initiatives. He became widely known for implementing large-scale programs that directly improved the livelihoods of youth and women across Kano State. Thousands benefited from his initiatives, which included financial support, business tools, and opportunities for economic independence. These efforts not only reduced poverty at the grassroots level but also demonstrated his belief in inclusive governance ensuring that the dividends of democracy reach even the most remote communities. His approach earned him recognition as a leader who “takes government to the people,” a rare quality that continues to endear him to the masses.

Beyond empowerment, Garo’s leadership style is defined by accessibility, generosity, and responsiveness. He has consistently been described as a “man of the people,” someone who listens, engages, and responds without bias. His political strength lies in his deep-rooted connection with communities across Kano, where he has built trust over the years through direct engagement and consistent support. This grassroots network has become one of his greatest political assets, positioning him as a unifying figure capable of mobilizing support across different demographics and political divides.

In the evolving political landscape of Kano State, Murtala Sule Garo has emerged as a leading and widely endorsed candidate for the position of Deputy Governor. Recent political development shows that he enjoys overwhelming support not only from key stakeholders within the APC, but also from the generality of the grassroots Kano electorate, reflecting not only his political relevance but also the confidence party leaders and stakeholders have in his experience, loyalty, and leadership capacity.

Garo’s suitability for the role of Deputy Governor is further strengthened by his extensive experience in governance and party administration. Having served in multiple strategic positions, including organising roles, advisory capacities, and two consecutive terms as commissioner, he possesses both institutional knowledge and practical governance skills. His ability to navigate complex political structures while maintaining strong grassroots support makes him uniquely positioned to complement executive leadership and ensure stability in governance.

Looking ahead to future elections, Murtala Sule Garo’s political capacity remains one of his strongest advantages. He is widely regarded as a mobilizer who can energize the electorate, increase voter participation, and strengthen party unity. His influence at the ward and local government levels provides a strategic advantage for any administration he is part of, as he can effectively translate political goodwill into electoral success. Observers believe that his inclusion in leadership would not only consolidate party structures but also enhance governance outcomes through effective implementation of policies at the grassroots level.

Moreover, Garo represents a bridge between experience and youthful dynamism. His understanding of both traditional political structures and modern governance demands positions him as a forward-thinking leader capable of contributing meaningfully to Kano’s development agenda. His inclusive approach, engaging traditional rulers, youth groups, and stakeholders, suggests that he can foster a sense of collective ownership in governance, which is essential for sustainable development.

In conclusion, Hon. Murtala Sule Garo embodies the qualities of a competent administrator, a grassroots mobilizer, and a unifying political figure. His track record of service, empowerment, and community engagement presents a compelling case for his emergence as the next Deputy Governor of Kano State. With his proven ability to deliver results and connect with the people, he stands not only as a suitable candidate but as a strategic asset capable of driving progress, stability, and inclusive governance in Kano State’s future.

Abdullahi Sa’idu Baba (Hafizi) writes from Kano, and can be reached via Hafeeezsb@gmail.com

Opinion

2027: Why Nigeria Can’t Afford to Lose Atiku’s Experience and Expertise

Published

1 week ago

April 18, 2026

Eric

By Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba

To be candid and straightforward, this article is written to sensitize Nigerians to the growing smear campaign against Atiku Abubakar, a campaign of calumny that appears less about national interest and more about political anxiety. The persistence and intensity of these attacks suggest one thing: there are powerful interests who see him not merely as a contender, but as a genuine threat. Yet, Nigerians are no longer easily distracted. The electorate is becoming more discerning, more interested in good governance.

Closely tied to this is the urgency of the 2027 presidential election. This is not just another electoral cycle, it may well represent a turning point in Nigeria’s history. Although Atiku Abubakar has confirmed 2027 to be his last presidential outing. That reality alone elevates the stakes. It presents Nigeria with a stark choice: to either harness a reservoir of experience at a critical moment or risk drifting further into uncertainty. In clear terms, 2027 is not just about political succession, it is about whether Nigeria recalibrates its direction or continues along a path of deepening national challenges.

The fundamental truth is that, experience and effective leadership are positively correlated, independent of age. Leadership in a complex state like Nigeria requires far more than youthful enthusiasm. It demands institutional memory, policy depth, negotiation skills, and the ability to manage crises with precision. It is therefore misguided to reduce leadership capability to age alone. Age neither guarantees competence nor invalidates it. Across the world, both young and elderly leaders have failed when they lacked the depth of experience required for governance. In Nigeria itself, recent experience with president Tinubu shows that leadership failure cannot be attributed to age alone. This underscores a critical point: the true dividing line between success and failure in leadership is not age, it is experience, particularly practical and relevant experience, which is too often overlooked.

Global political trends reinforce this reality. In the United States, voters returned Donald Trump to power over Kamala Harris, reflecting a preference for perceived experience over age. Figures such as Bernie Sanders remain influential well into their later years, shaping national discourse. Similarly, in Brazil, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was elected again at an advanced age because voters trusted his tested capacity to lead during difficult times. A similar pattern recently played out in West Africa. In Liberia, the younger incumbent George Weah was defeated by the significantly older Joseph Boakai. That outcome was widely interpreted as a preference by Liberians for experience and not youthful appeal. These examples are not coincidences. They illustrate a consistent global pattern that when nations face uncertainty, they turn to experience. Nigeria must not waste the experience of Atiku Abubakar like it happened with remarkable figures like Obafemi Awolowo, Chief MKO Abiola and Malam Aminu Kano in the past.

Beyond the question of age lies another critical issue: political strategy. The debate over who should carry the opposition banner in 2027 must be guided by political reality. Nigeria’s recent history makes this abundantly clear. When Goodluck Jonathan sought re-election, the opposition were less influenced by sentiment. Instead, they made a strategic calculation, searching for a candidate with national reach and electoral strength, an idea that birthed Muhammadu Buhari as the opposition candidate, despite his previous electoral defeats.

It is therefore difficult to sustain the argument that Atiku Abubakar should be excluded on the basis that he has contested before. By that same reasoning, Buhari would never have emerged as a viable candidate. Political persistence is not a weakness; it is often a reflection of conviction, resilience, and determination. Elections are not won by novelty alone, they are won by structure, experience, and the ability to connect with a broad electorate.

Equally unconvincing is the argument that 2027 should be determined by zoning or that it is “still the turn of the South.” If the opposition is serious about unseating president Tinubu, it must prioritize a candidate with the experience, national appeal, and political structure required to achieve that goal. Atiku Abubakar is therefore the “asset” of the today. His eight years as Vice President under Olusegun Obasanjo provided him with deep exposure to governance, economic reform, and institutional development. Beyond public office, he is widely recognized as a seasoned politician and an established businessman with independent wealth, an important factor in a political environment often clouded by concerns about misuse of public resources.

Interestingly, it’s increasingly clear that Nigerians are moving beyond superficial narratives. The electorate is more focused on outcomes, on who can stabilize the economy, strengthen institutions, and restore confidence in governance. The conversation is shifting from age to ability, from rhetoric to results.

As 2027 approaches, the choice before Nigeria is becoming clearer. This is not a contest of personalities or a debate about generational symbolism. It is a question of capacity, preparedness, and national survival. History, both global and local, points in one direction: when experience is sidelined, nations pay the price.

Nigeria cannot afford that mistake again…

Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba writes from Kano, and can be reached via drssbaba@yahoo.com