Sure, this is the first time Atiku’s policy thrust appears to resonate strongly with the people. His persistence, faith in his convictions, and audacity have strengthened the contest around our experimental presidential system of government. Whether he is playing to the gallery and seeking cheap popularity or not remains to be seen… What is certain, however, is that the destiny of 240 million Nigerians should not be tied to one impoverishing policy.
Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga called Atiku Abubakar a “perennial candidate for the presidency of Nigeria” in his first official attack on the former Vice President’s promise to reintroduce fuel subsidy. Atiku is the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu himself said Atiku is “ignorant of governance” or perhaps of how subsidy works. He may be all of that and more. But how about debating the message: Tinubu’s subsidy removal, its discontents and its gains, if any?
Instructively, since Atiku threw the first salvo, the governing All Progressives Congress (APC) has switched to panic mode, reacting, rebutting, rebuking, scrutinising and attacking almost every statement by Atiku, as well as those of his aides, and even his body language.
| | | |---|
To the extent that critics describe the government’s response as a “knee-jerk reaction”, Atiku’s assertion seems to have resonated with Nigerians whose living conditions have been directly affected since President Tinubu’s ill-advised, ill-timed and insensitive fuel subsidy removal.
But I do agree that Atiku’s ambition is perennial, his policy vows inconsistent and his explanations inadequate. Since 2007, when his first journey towards Aso Rock began, Atiku has never looked back. He has rattled every sitting president. In the process, the judiciary and democracy gained. Every election has been an Atiku moment: 2007, 2011, 2015, 2019, 2023 and now 2027, which, according to him, is in “the service of the country and an attempt to deepen democracy.”
When he was hounded by his principal, former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Atiku took the legal route and fought his way to the Supreme Court. He came out victorious in the court cases, including those relating to corruption allegations. That experience, instead of dampening his spirit, elevated his profile as a fighter. Importantly, the judiciary was strengthened in the process, which was good for the sustainability of our democratic institutions.
Over the years, Atiku’s campaign messages were viewed by many as mere platitudes, though I concede that as Nigeria evolves, priorities and problems change too. In 2007, insecurity was not as pervasive as it is today, and poverty was not as widespread. Today, 133 million Nigerians are estimated to be multidimensionally poor, representing 63 per cent of the population, according to the National Bureau of Statistics.
Although the crafting of Atiku’s political messaging might have been a function of the times and the challenges of each period, every season comes with different themes. In other words, there is no constant or consistent ideological position to hold him to, even though the questions remain: what does he really subscribe to? Populism? Or is he simply a bundle of contradictions?
What is important is that all public policies, no matter how laudable, should be subjected to periodic review, adjustment or change. The president, however, appears adamant on fuel subsidy.
For Atiku, each election season has brought a different campaign message. My AI assistant summarised it this way: Atiku’s 2007 speech presented the election as a choice between maintaining Nigeria’s persistent problems and pursuing meaningful change. He argued that despite the country’s abundant resources, millions remained trapped in poverty, unemployment and underdevelopment because of poor infrastructure, unreliable electricity, weak public services and inadequate governance.
He is still in active opposition, jolting the government in power through a series of policy pronouncements, especially on the reversal of fuel subsidy removal, borders and other issues. His unexpected volte-face on subsidy has energised the campaigns, proving that sitting on the fence is no longer a viable strategy.
His proposed “people first” philosophy placed citizens’ welfare at the centre of economic policy, with emphasis on job creation, private sector growth, security, anti-corruption, education and community-based development in the Niger Delta.
In 2011, Atiku’s theme centred on reducing Nigeria’s dependence on oil and building a more sustainable and diversified economy. He argued that oil revenues are volatile and finite and should therefore be invested in infrastructure, human capital and other productive sectors, rather than used mainly for consumption. He proposed incentives for states to develop non-oil sources of revenue and reduce their dependence on federal oil allocations.
His broader vision was of a prosperous, secure and democratic Nigeria, supported by private investment in the power sector, better use of public funds, and improved implementation of capital projects. Despite his disappointment with the party’s primary, Atiku maintained that he was “not a quitter” and remained committed to pursuing his political vision.
Atiku focused on a “Nigeria for All” vision in his 2015 presidential declaration. He believed Nigeria had the potential to do far better but was being held back by insecurity, poverty, unemployment, weak infrastructure, corruption and deepening ethnic and religious divisions. He presented the election as an opportunity for change, while promising competent and accountable leadership focused on job creation, education, healthcare, security and economic development.
Drawing on his personal background and experience as Vice President, he cited reforms achieved under the Obasanjo administration as evidence that effective leadership and political will could transform the country. He criticised the PDP-led government for what he described as poor governance and declining economic and social conditions. He pledged to build a united, secure and prosperous “Nigeria for All” by investing in people, strengthening institutions, fighting corruption and bringing Nigerians together.
After losing the 2015 election to Muhammadu Buhari, Atiku returned to the trenches in 2019, this time under the banner of his former party, the PDP. He mounted a strong campaign but fell short of unseating President Buhari.
So much dissonance. Whereas Atiku has always been the subject of ridicule and mockery as a serial contender, there is no doubt about his driving force. His resilience has morphed into strong resolve and tenacity, becoming a source of strength for him and inspiration for others. But he was still not trusted.
He is still in active opposition, jolting the government in power through a series of policy pronouncements, especially on the reversal of fuel subsidy removal, borders and other issues. His unexpected volte-face on subsidy has energised the campaigns, proving that sitting on the fence is no longer a viable strategy.
Atiku may not be consistent, but where has our blind trust in Tinubu taken us? Additionally, when is government or governance ever cast in stone? The other day, I overheard a professor of economics trying hard to prove how the CBN had stabilised the macroeconomy because of fuel subsidy removal. The same government, he noted, had not been able to stabilise the microeconomic indices. Who is to blame for the lapses?
Onanuga noted that Atiku was behaving “like a man from an archaic past who least comprehends the present economic dynamics” and suggested that he (Atiku) would restore the much-abused, wasteful and pillaged subsidy.
Oh, really?
Why should honest and innocent citizens be punished for the infractions of oil racketeers? Besides, I wonder if there are Nigerian citizens who do not wish for some aspects of the past. That nostalgic past when late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua reduced fuel costs, and when former President Goodluck Jonathan stopped his planned fuel price hike after protests by organised labour and the opposition, led by the current President.
The reactions on X, formerly Twitter, to Atiku’s subsidy comment are not comforting for the government. Of course, social media is not enough to determine the government’s popularity; it does not win elections, as the APC would say. Meanwhile, the same government is on its heels, running from pillar to post to improve its CNG transport infrastructure, which remains at an abysmal 12 per cent after more than three years.
Atiku may not be consistent, but where has our blind trust in Tinubu taken us? Additionally, when is government or governance ever cast in stone? The other day, I overheard a professor of economics trying hard to prove how the CBN had stabilised the macroeconomy because of fuel subsidy removal. The same government, he noted, had not been able to stabilise the microeconomic indices. Who is to blame for the lapses?
The economic expert conceded that any policy, (including subsidy removal), that does not improve the welfare of citizens needs to be reviewed. So, what if Atiku once supported subsidy and has now seen its follies? What if Tinubu recants and admits his mistake over fuel subsidy? Onanuga was spot on about Atiku’s contradictory statements. But for what reason? The jury is still out. Desperation? Time will tell.
Sure, this is the first time Atiku’s policy thrust appears to resonate strongly with the people. His persistence, faith in his convictions, and audacity have strengthened the contest around our experimental presidential system of government. Whether he is playing to the gallery and seeking cheap popularity or not remains to be seen.
What is certain, however, is that the destiny of 240 million Nigerians should not be tied to one impoverishing policy.
Zainab Suleiman Okino (FNGE) is the Blueprint Editorial Board chair. She is a syndicated columnist and can be reached via: [email protected]
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
