Beyond the protests…, By Reuben Abati

The #EndBadGovernance protests in Nigeria were scheduled to take place between 1-10 August, tagged “10 Days of Rage”, a seemingly apocalyptic projection of the immediate future of Nigeria constructed in the fashion of The People vs. The State, but as it has turned out, it may be correct on 6 August, today, to say that we are now, more or less, at the end of the protests. For now, that is what it looks like. And what has made the difference is the fact that on Day Four of the protests, the President of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, decided to address the nation and speak to the people directly. Since the beginning of the imbroglio, concerned Nigerians had been calling on the President to talk to them. Instead, he sent spokespersons, and condescending Ministers to talk to the people.

Nigerians voted for Tinubu, not the variously privileged persons who now have access to the microphone because of him. Section 5 of the 1999 Constitution grants the President the right to delegate authority, but funnily enough, the same Constitution is studiously silent about what the same all-powerful President can do about his other room affairs! His job is strictly to rule Nigeria under the Constitution and the oath of office he took. Whatever happens, he is the man who will be held responsible. From 1 August, Nigerians took to the streets, as they had promised that they would, against bad governance. Within two days, over seventeen persons had been killed across the country, although the police admits that there have been only seven casualties. They also insist that their men did not kill anyone. So, who did the killings? Should anyone die at all? In Kano, Niger, Nasarawa, Borno and Yobe, there was so much violence that the state governments had to declare a curfew. Properties were destroyed. Nobody could go to work. Foreign missions in Nigeria have advised their citizens to get ready for evacuation in case the Nigerian situation got out of hand.

The entire country has been at a standstill. It took the President a whole three days for him to be persuaded to speak to Nigerians and tell them that he had finally heard them. Tinubu had to speak for 21 minutes in 38 paragraphs, a pre-recorded, teleprompter-assisted speech, before Nigerians felt that their President had finally heard them. My take is that the President could and should have spoken earlier. He offered the Nigerian people too little too late. Presidential communication should be driven by empathy, which should come at the right time. Take the United Kingdom, where there is, at the moment, race-based riots, and religion-based protests in about 19 cities, triggered by misinformation and disinformation over the knife-killing of three innocent persons – Bebe King, 6; Elsie Stancombe, 7; and Alice Aguilar, 9 – in Southport, Merseyside, North West England. It was initially claimed via social media that the killer was a Muslim immigrant. This triggered far-right, nationalistic sentiments: “Britain for the British” and a prompt attack on immigrants. The British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, did not wait for matters to get out of hand before speaking. Two days ago, as the riots spread from Southport to Liverpool and Rotterdam, the British PM quickly addressed the nation, threatening to deal with “far-right thugs”. Yesterday, he summoned an emergency meeting of the Cobra Committee. He was seen to be taking charge.

President Tinubu also reportedly met with traditional rulers and other important people of Nigeria, and through surrogates appealed to the youths of Nigeria to be calm, but he was technically talking to the wrong people. The youths refused to listen. On August 1, they went on to the streets to protest. What we must note here is that the Nigerian President is too much of a monarch. He holds court -one of the things we have to correct in the 1999 Constitution. When the people who elected him in a constitutional democracy demand accountability, he sends emissaries to address the people. If he must meet anybody, he holds court with traditional rulers and religious leaders who end up collecting sitting allowances and flight tickets that could have been better used to serve the people. The ordinary people, the main focus of the democratic process are the last group to be noticed. And this is precisely the pattern that has played out this time around. On Sunday, at 7 am, the monarch of Nigeria’s Presidential Villa, finally deemed it necessary to address the people directly. It turned out to be a big favour! On Sunday morning, the protesters at Ojota Freedom Park in Lagos, who had been toing and froing around the Ikeja axis since August 1, had a tete-a-tete with the police and they resolved that since the President had spoken, they would suspend their protest till October. They agreed to hold a meeting yesterday at 11 am, to deliberate on the President’s speech. Thus, in Lagos, the President’s speech had taken the sting, perhaps temporarily, out of the protests. In Kano and a few other places, protesters continued their agitation on Sunday, but the momentum had become generally subdued. On Monday, banks and business places that had remained shut the previous Thursday and Friday, sputtered to life. Nigeria gradually regained normalcy. To that extent, the President’s national broadcast made a difference. The very symbolism of it, doused tension in the country. Should the President have spoken about two days earlier? Yes. Did he leave his personal intervention a bit late? Yes.

What exactly did he say? Not much, and yet it made small difference. The big lesson is that the Nigerian President and his handlers must never assume that it is beneath him to talk to the same people who elected him into office. He is not a Supreme Leader. He represents the people. Power belongs to the people, not the President. Tinubu is just so, so lucky to have escaped the humiliation that President William Ruto has suffered in Kenya, and the fate that has just befallen Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, following weeks of deadly protests in that South Asian country. Ms. Hasina has fled Dhaka. The people ignored a national curfew and stormed her palace from where she ruled for about two decades. She is now practically on the run. President Tinubu must indeed learn from the luck that he enjoys. Across the world, there is currently a wave of people’s anger, be it in Venezuela, Kenya, or Bangladesh, with the people taking ownership of the democratic process, and seeking every possible means to punish their leaders. With all their angst, Nigerians are still very manageable people, and we must do everything to keep their resentment of authority figures in check.

I may have submitted that the President’s speech has had the effect of dousing tensions, but I do not think that the speech was fit for purpose. The protesters just wanted the President to say something. He said something. It didn’t matter what he said, and many were satisfied. But when you look at the speech itself, what did the President say? One, he regretted the killings that took place, expressed his condolences to the families of the deceased, and invited the protesters for dialogue while insisting on peace. Two, he made it clear that promoters of violence and ethnic bigotry igniting the crisis, will not be spared for violating the laws of the land. Three, he outlined his administration’s programmes in the last one year as proof-positive of his commitment to Nigerian youths: the Skill Up Artisans Programme (SUPA); the Nigerian Youth Academy (NIYA), Youth Talent Export Programme (NATEP), students’ loans and support for Medium and Small-Scale Enterprises (MSMEs). Four, the President talked about his government’s economic reforms, and insisted that there would be no going back on the removal of fuel subsidy and the abolition of multiple foreign exchange rates, the gains of which he said have resulted in increased government revenues, debt service reduction, CNG initiatives to reduce transportation costs, support for the manufacturing sector and other benefits for the Nigerian people. Five, the President stressed his commitment to public order and the rule of law, stating that he will not tolerate actions that threaten national unity and stability.

As is to be expected, there have been reactions for and against the President’s nationwide address. He has received knocks and kudos. Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Festus Keyamo hails the speech as great, inspiring, compassionate, firm, and conciliatory. Please, what else should Keyamo say? Other commentators have a different opinion. Professor Wole Soyinka in a piece titled “The Hunger March as Universal Mandate” faulted the President for failing to condemn “the state’s seizure of protest management, and the use of live bullets as state response to civil protest”. The people asked for bread, the state gave them bullets in return! Mr. Femi Falana, SAN; activist Deji Adeyanju, Omoyele Sowore, leader of the Take It Back Movement Nigeria have also condemned the President’s speech. Sowore, who was a Presidential candidate in the 2023 general elections describes the speech as “Beautiful Nonsense”. There seems nonetheless to be a general consensus that the speech fell short of the people’s expectations. My view is that the speech-writers spent too much time on the achievements of the administration. Nobody wants to listen to propaganda at this time. It is standard practice in the corridors of government in Nigeria to think that any time the President speaks, he should remind the people of his accomplishments. But there must be a time and place to that tradition. The speech this time around should have been shorter and better focused. If I were the person to sign off on the copy, I would have advised against all the navel-gazing, chest beating details in the speech. Certainly not the right time to do that. The protesters had 15 demands and more, not even one of their demands was referred to by the President. There is only one name for that: contempt. It is not enough for the President to say that he is listening, and that he has heard the people loud and clear. What exactly did he hear? What specific information is he processing? Did he for example hear that the people say they are hungry? Did he hear or was he told, that the people say they want the cost of governance to be reduced? They don’t want leaders living in $21m mansions, jolloffing inside expensive yachts, junketing like a yoyo inside imported SUVs while the people are wallowing in penury? Did he hear that the people want electoral reforms and a new Constitution? Or that the general menace of insecurity in the land should be addressed? It was not evident that the President was aware of what the people are saying except the acknowledgement, in parenthesis, in paragraph 31 of his speech.

Mr Atedo Peterside, founder of Stanbic IBTC, Dr Muda Yusuf of the Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprises (CPPE) and Ebun Olu-Adegboruwa, SAN have all appealed to the protesters: that their point has been made, and as Bob Marley advised, they should sheathe their swords to fight another day. A prolonged shut down of Nigeria can only damage the economy and hurt all parties concerned whereas there is no guarantee on the desired outcomes. The way forward clearly is for government to listen truly to the people, not audio promises or any of those cliches: Renewed Hope, Renewed Housing Estate, Renewed Agriculture which the people have heard so often in the last one year, every repeat of the same phrases annoys the majority. The very least that the President could have done would have been the announcement of a committee to look into the people’s demands. We all know that a government committee does not always solve any problems in Nigeria. But the gesture would have taken the pressure off the President. It would give the people the impression that something is being done and that they have been heard. If nothing happens positively for them thereafter, by October, they will hold the committee members responsible. Every President must always appoint fall guys in tough situations who will take the bullets when things go wrong. President Tinubu should learn to dodge the bullets because more will come. There are enough willing fall guys out there, looking for what to eat!

All things said, I think the President was spot on when he deplored ethnic bigotry. In the course of the protests, one imbecile with an X-twitter handle was said to have tweeted, under the handle @Lagospedia on Twitter/X that Igbos must leave Lagos within the next month effective August 20 – 30, and relocate their businesses out of Lagos and other South West states. The animal that sent out this tweet must be identified and made to face the full wrath of the law. Igbos do not pose any problem to the people of Lagos or Yorubas in general. The beauty of this country lies in the strength it draws from its diversity. We live in an interdependent country where we all rely on each other to survive, drawing strength from one another. It is strange how today’s people forget that once upon a time Mbonu Ojike, an Igbo man, from Arondizuogu in today’s Imo State was the Deputy Mayor of Lagos (1951). In 1959, the Federal Minister of Lands and Lagos Affairs, was Muhammadu Ribadu, a Fulani man. If Igbos were to leave Lagos and the South West today, the region may suffer temporary economic setback. Who will sell vehicle spare parts? Who will sell electronics? Landlords will suffer. The banking system in the South West will crash. Many husbands will become emergency bachelors – but that may be a joke- the madness that Nigerians exhibit for ethnic reasons stops at the door of the bedroom. Igbos like Yoruba women. Yoruba men can’t take their eyes off Igbo women, and all the beautiful girls from the East and South East. Those who are beating the drums of ethnic hate should remember the civil war. “Though tongue and tribe may differ, in brotherhood we stand.” Those who violate this principle must be sanctioned. They should be told to remember Rwanda and how ethnic hate and rivalry tore apart a country. They should be reminded of the story of Hitler, whose name lives in infamy forever.

Similarly, as part of matters arising from the protests, another set of imbeciles were said to have been going about carrying Russian flags and calling also for military intervention. That is high treason. Nigerians like to imitate even things they do not understand. Whoever is calling for military rule, or promoting Russia on this soil must be identified and guillotined, after due process. It is good that the Russian Embassy in Nigeria has disowned the protesters and that the Department of State Services has arrested the unpatriotic tailor in Kano, along with 31 others, who were mass producing Russian flags and promoting this dangerous signal. The sad story, really, is that this country is in the grips of mass psychosis at all levels. President Tinubu’s primary job, since he says it is his turn, and he is now where he wants to be is to walk the talk, and rescue Nigeria if he can.

Reuben Abati, a former presidential spokesperson, writes from Lagos.