Opinion
IGBO PRESIDENCY: The mystery of a ‘forbidden’ aspiration
The constitution of Nigeria stipulates the criteria for becoming the president of the country. It never forbids any region or tribe of the country from mounting the seat of power.
Going down memory lane, since the advent of the 4th Republic, different individuals from different ethnic climes have been elected presidents. Late Umar Yar’adua, Mohammadu Buhari of the Northwest region, Olusegun Obasanjo of the Southwest, and Goodluck Jonathan of the South-south have all been democratically elected to become Nigerian presidents.
The Ibos are aggrieved, claiming to be marginalised for having not produced a president to lead the country. Why the grievances? Has any aspirant ever been disqualified from contesting for the presidency for being Igbo? Have the Ibos themselves spoken with one voice? Have they ever been serious with such aspiration? How have the Southeasterners fared with other tribes or regions? Is such grievance genuine?
The constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is in tandem with the Federal Character as a way of promoting equity, justice, and fair play, and giving every constituent of the Nigerian society a sense of belonging.
The 1979 Constitution states “the composition of the government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from few states or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or any of its agencies” (Section 14 (3) of the 1999 Constitution). Under this, the appointment of Ministers shall reflect the Federal Character of Nigeria…the President shall appoint at least one Minister from each state who shall be an indigene of such state. (section 147 (3) 1999 Constitution). Appointment to the offices of the Secretary to the Government, Head of Service, Ambassadors, and Permanent Secretaries shall have regard to the federal character (section 171 (5) 1999 Constitution). However, no section of the constitution disenfranchises anyone seeking elective positions to incorporate federal character, so the grievance may be watery.
Choosing the flag bearers for the 1999 presidential election, the scheming never favoured the aspiring Ibos, because the Yorubas were seemingly being appeased over the June 12, 1993 injustice – Obasanjo emerged as PDP’s candidate, having enjoyed the support of the northerners the more, while Olu-Falae was to fly the joint ticket of AD/APP. Towards the presidential election, the Yoruba socio-cultural group, Afenifere had shown much commitment, backing the Alliance for Democracy which won all the 6 states of the zone. Such was never the case in the east! In 2003 when the ballot was thrown open to all and sundry, Biafran warlord, Chukwuemeka Ojukwu threw his hat into the ring but even the Ibos did not reckon with him. The ballot had 6 different other Ibos apart from Ojukwu, splitting the fortunes of the zone:
Ojukwu (APGA) 1,297,455
Jim Nwodo (UNPP) 169,609
Arthur Nwakwo (PMP) 57,720
Emmanuel Okereke (ALP) 26921
Kalu Idika Kalu (NNPP) 23830
Iheanyichukwu G. Nnaji (BNPP) 5,987
Harmonisation of efforts then could have proven a point but it was like the people of the region did not know what they wanted. Rather, all the 5 states of the region voted for the candidate of the ‘Fulani-owned party’, the PDP.
How have the Ibos fared with other regions?
The Ibos have appeared so inimical to the rest. The tribe remains the only one that has gone into civil war with the federation in a failed secession bid. To an average Ibo man, who is oblivious, ignorant of, or mischievous about the generational fold of events in the country, the Yorubas are forbidden traitors, the Fulanis, useless cows, and the Hausas, intruding parasites,…
At the inception of the country’s self-rule, in 1959 precisely, Nnamdi Azikwe orchestrated the grip of power by the Fulanis over other tribes – the 12th December 1959 parliamentary election was with no clear majority to form a government: Zik’s National Council of Nigeria and Cameroon (NCNC) polled 2,594,577 with 81 seats; Awolowo’s Action Group (AG) had 1,992,364 with 73 seats; Ahmadu Bello’s Northern People’s Congress (NPC) came third, polling 1,922,179 votes with 134 seats. An alliance had to be formed to form a government. Approaching NCNC, Awolowo humbled himself, accepting the slot of Deputy Prime Minister or Finance Minister, ceding the position of Prime Minister to Zik’s NCNC, for having secured more seats and votes. Zik called for coalition talks between the 2 parties in Asaba, the diameter of the Southwest and the Southeast. While awaiting the NCNC delegates in Asaba, the AG heard in the news that Zik had gone ahead to form an alliance with the Northern People’s Congress. Zik ceded the position of Prime Minister to Tafawa Balewa, accepting the figurehead position of Governor-General. He had cunningly outsmarted Awolowo by distracting him from going into alliance with other minority parties ahead of him. Zik justified his action in his autobiography, where he referred to an issue he once had with some Yorubas, including Olufimilayo Ransom-Kuti, Prince Adeleke Adedoyin, and Dr. Olohunnimbe, in the NCNC. Then, he had the resolve that the Yorubas would never rule the country. He had thought he could easily manipulate the Hausas/Fulanis, which could not easily do with the sophisticated Yorubas.
In what could be described as being vindictive, Zik, historically, manipulated Tafawa Balewa to arrest Awolowo in 1962 and get him jailed in 1963. He also influenced Balewa to remove from the Western Region, Edo, Itsekiri, Western Ijaw, and Urhobo which account for 70% of the oil wealth of the country, and create for them, the Mid-West Region. Zik’s hatred for the Yorubas, no doubt, gave the Fulanis, the impetus to lord over other tribes.
When it was discovered that the Fulanis were even smarter than they thought they could be, and they no longer could be tamed, the Ibos resorted to the 1966 coup, the first-ever in the country, tagged ‘Igbo Coup’, in which numerous Northern and Southwest leaders were brutally killed while many Igbo leaders were spared. This was the remote cause of the civil war which was also initiated by the Ibos.
The Ibos’ hatred has always been so deep that, believing the direction of the Yorubas, they have remained conservative. In 1993 when in the then two-party system – MKO Abiola and Bashir Tofa were the flag bearers of the Social Democratic Party and National Republican Convention respectively, the Ibos, as usual, went their Fulani way, giving block votes to Tofa, jettisoning a co-southerner. Even as MKO won convincingly in some Northern states, including Tofa’s Kano State, the Ibos never spared a state for Abiola, as the whole 5 states went to Tofa massively. In the 2019 election when two Fulanis, were the major contenders for the presidency, the Ibos massively threw their weight behind the one that had less backing from the Yorubas. It was believed that Bola Tinubu, a leader in the Yoruba Race had much stake in the APC so Atiku Abubakar of the PDP got 100 % victory in the entire 5 states of the east.
The Yorubas might be waiting, one day, for a pound of flesh, paying the easterners back in their coin. Though a sociocultural group, Afenifere, of the Yorubas has frequently drummed support for an Igbo presidency the question to ask is ‘How relevant are such clamour and the group clamouring?’ Tinubu’s political empire has recently thrown the group into oblivion. The group is understandably having personal beef with Tinubu, and as such, it has always been antagonistic to his aspirations.
The post-Zik/Ojukwu era generation Igbo, in most cases, has seen the Hausa/Fulani or/and the Yorubas as their predicament. They see the Northerners as being domineering, clinching on to power. They see the Yorubas as those who have been harbouring the northerners, aiding them to win elections. In this era of social media, the ‘battle’ is widely discussed. A good example, as observed in an empirical work are archived tantrums of Nnamdi Kanu and Simon Ekpe, agitating for Biafra:
“These criminals cannot be stealing money belonging to everybody. These same men cannot be responsible for the length and breadth of the depth….”
Facebook: (Nnamdi Kanu, 2014.)
“They have no sea but they are in charge of all seaports in the south.
They have no single drop of oil but they own all oil wells in the south and are in charge of NNPC.
“They score lowest in every exam, yet they are Chief Justices, AGF, Supreme Court Judges, and Army Generals.”
Facebook (Nnamdi Kanu, via Inside Biafra, May 25, 2021.)
“The more you keep supporting evil in the zoo
The more your land will be taken from you;
The more your daughters will be raped and abducted;
The more your sons will be slaughtered in cold blood.”
Facebook (Nnamdi Kanu, addressing the Yorubas, via World Around Us, June 2, 2021).
“Oduduwa must now understand that the war is real. 6.6.2021.
NSA orders dismantling illegal security outfits nationwide to enable Fulanis to overrun Nigeria.
Okonjo Iweala is now a target as Fulani accused her of IPOB.”
Facebook (Simon Ekpa, June 6, 2021).
“Since the killings by Fulani terrorists, sponsored by the presidency has now spread across Southern Nigeria with the latest massacre of Oduduwa People in Oyo State, the acting president, Garba Sheu is hereby banned indefinitely from entering Southern Nigeria.”
Facebook (Simon Ekpa, June 7, 2021).
Also in another work, it has been documented that 62 % of those who post share like; or pass consenting remarks on such inflammatory ideological outbursts are from the Eastern region. All these have, of course negatively affected the trusts reposed in the easterners by other regions, seeing them as secessionists who could not be trusted with power.
Is the marginalisation grievance of the region, Southeast genuine?
A peruse of the archive may shed some light:
The North-West Region has produced the late General Muritala Mohammed, who was the military Head of State from 29th July 1975 – 13th February 1976 (6 months, 15 days); Alhaji Sheu Shagari, 1st October 1979 – 31st December 1984 (4 years, 61 days); Late General Sanni Abacha, 17th November 1993 – 8th June 1998 ( 4 years, 203 days ); Umar Yar’adua, 29th May 2007 – 5th May 2010 ( 2 years, 341 days); Muhammodu Buhari, 31st December – 27th August 1985, 29th May 2015 – 29th, 2023 ( 9 years, 239 days).
From the North-Central, there have been General Yakubu Gowon, 1st August 1966 – 29th July 1975 (8 years, 362 days); General Ibrahim Babangida, 27th August 1985 – 26th August 1993 (7 years, 364 days); and General Abdulsalam Abubakar, 8th June 1998 – 29th May 1999 (355 days).
Down the south, the South-West has General Olusegun Obasanjo, 13th February 1976 – 1st October 1979 & 29th May 1999 – 29th May 2007 (11 years, 8 months and 12 days); Late Ernest Shonekan, 26th August 1993 – 17th November 1993 (83 days).
The South-South has Goodluck Jonathan, 5th May 2010 – 29th May 2015 (5 years, 25 days).
The South-East has Late Nnamdi Azikwe, 16th November 1960 – 1st October 1963, & 1st October 1963 – 16th January 1966 ( cumulatively, 5 years, 61 days); General JTU Aguyi-Ironsi, 16th January 1966 – 29th July (194 days).
Lastly, the North-East has nobody, and as such, has ruled for 0 day!
Going by this, the only region that should be aggrieved is the northeast, which is the only region that is yet to produce a head of government either as a civilian or as a coup plotter. The South-East had Nnamdi Azikwe who willingly settled as a titular head and Aguyi-Ironsi, the first coup plotter in the country, who though never lasted being in power.
Will the Ibos ever right the wrongs?
The destiny of the Igbo Nation is lying right before them! They should be bold enough and mould their future. If is still secession that they desire, they should get so serious about it, realising that the process is not as easy as bread and butter. They should also realise that violence may not be productive as proven by the outcome of the 6th July 1967 – 15th January 1970, which they activated. They should also be mindful of the fact that social media is not the avenue for a referendum. Making unnecessary enemies is not the best option.
The leadership of the zone should put mercenaries in place to curb the incessant violence, killings, and civil unrest currently being witnessed in the zone; the menace has only been counterproductive so far. In a recent video’ that went viral, the IPOB miscreants went as far as killing Ibo men at the INEC registration center for having flouted the Monday-sit-at-home-order.
The Ibos should for once, prove that they are sincerely consequential by speaking with one voice. They should at this point forget about party politics, harmonise efforts, produce a widely acceptable candidate, and unanimously present them, seeking the blessings of the other zones rather than seeing any as enemies. At present, several Igbo political gladiators have shown interest in running in the 2023 presidency race, and history has it that they have always been divisive.
More importantly, the region should bury the hatchet of hatred lingering since the days of Late Zik as such has always boomeranged, inflicting on them and their aspirations.
This panacea is all that could solve the puzzle of that presidency debacle.
Kola Adebiyi writes from Ibadan, Oyo State
Opinion
Nigeria: Dancing On The Edge Of Destiny
Nigeria stands as a paradox, endowed with immense natural wealth yet grappling with staggering poverty levels among its populace. The country is blessed with an abundance of resources, including diverse agricultural products, vast oil reserves, and a burgeoning tourism and entertainment industry, all of which hold immense potential for national prosperity. Despite this richness, many Nigerians endure dire economic conditions, raising questions about the effective management and equitable distribution of wealth generated from these resources.
The agricultural sector in Nigeria is a significant contributor to both the economy and food security. With favourable climatic conditions and arable land, Nigeria has the potential to become an important player in global agriculture. However, inefficiencies in farming techniques, lack of access to modern equipment, inadequate infrastructure, and insecurity impede growth, leaving many farmers in subsistence conditions. By addressing these challenges, Nigeria could harness its agricultural wealth to reduce poverty and strengthen its economy.
Similarly, oil and gas remain at the forefront of Nigeria’s natural resources, providing a substantial share of government revenue. Unfortunately, the oil riches have also been a source of conflict and corruption, leading to environmental degradation and social unrest in oil-producing regions. Although the sector can foster economic growth, the mismanagement of resources has prevented the country from fully benefiting from its wealth. Furthermore, the fluctuating oil prices on the global market create vulnerability, emphasizing the need for economic diversification.
The entertainment industry, particularly Nollywood, represents another facet of Nigeria’s wealth. This sector showcases rich cultural heritage, offers employment opportunities, and generates income. Despite its success, it has not yet been leveraged to bring about far-reaching economic change across the country. Without addressing existing systemic challenges, Nigeria’s abundant resources might continue to dance precariously on the edge of opportunity, further complicating the narrative of its natural wealth.
Leadership Challenges and Political Corruption
Significant leadership issues and pervasive political corruption have plagued Nigeria’s history. Since gaining independence in 1960, the nation has witnessed a succession of leaders, many of whom have failed to prioritize the welfare of their citizens. Ineffective governance has not only hampered Nigeria’s growth but has also led to a persistent cycle of political instability. This crisis of leadership has contributed significantly to the erosion of public trust in governmental institutions, weakening the social fabric of the country.
The impact of political corruption is deeply entrenched in Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape. Corruption permeates various layers of governance, leading to the misallocation of resources intended for public welfare. Essential services such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure development suffer as funds are diverted for personal gain. The consequences of such malfeasance are evident in the rise of poverty rates, inadequate healthcare systems, and a significant lack of access to quality education. Consequently, these socio-economic challenges create a vicious cycle that further exacerbates the leadership crisis.
Historically, Nigeria has experienced a range of leadership styles, from military rule to civilian governments, yet the recurring theme remains the same: a failure to eradicate corrupt practices. Each new leadership regime often promises reform and better governance, but these assurances rarely translate into meaningful change. The lessons from past experiences underscore the importance of accountability and transparency in rebuilding trust between the government and the populace. As the nation grapples with its leadership crisis, the intersection of governance and corruption demands critical attention to chart a new course towards sustainable development and empowerment.
The Hardships Under the Current Administration
The current administration of Nigeria, under President Bola Tinubu, has ushered in an array of policies that have sparked significant public discourse due to their profound impact on the lives of ordinary Nigerians. Notably, the removal of fuel subsidies has been a pivotal move that has reverberated through the economy, leading to steep increases in fuel prices. This sudden change has not only made transportation costs soar but has also led to a ripple effect, dramatically affecting the prices of basic goods and services. Citizens are now grappling with the daily realities of inflated living costs, often on already strained budgets.
Furthermore, the naira floating, aimed at addressing exchange rate discrepancies, has instead resulted in further devaluation. The naira’s instability has posed challenges for local businesses and individual consumers, making it increasingly difficult to afford essential products. This monetary policy highlights the delicate balancing act required in governance, reflecting the complexity of addressing economic issues while ensuring the welfare of the populace. Many Nigerians report feelings of uncertainty and anxiety regarding their financial futures, emphasizing a general sentiment of disillusionment with the direction of government policy under the Tinubu administration.
A Path Forward: Hope or Despair?
Nigeria’s current circumstances present a dichotomy of hope and despair. Despite the numerous challenges confronting the country, including political instability, economic hardships, and social unrest, there is a glimmer of hope that reform is possible through concerted efforts by the populace and leadership. As the country reaches a crossroads, systemic reforms have the potential to catalyze change. These reforms must prioritize institutional strengthening, increase transparency, and promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth.
Public participation is critical in this endeavour. Citizens must reclaim their agency by actively participating in democratic processes, advocating for accountability from their leaders, and demanding that their voices be heard. Civic education should be promoted to ensure that the electorate is informed and empowered to make decisions that affect their future. Furthermore, civil society organizations can play a pivotal role in mobilizing resources and providing platforms for dialogue, where citizens can articulate their needs and aspirations.
Accountability from leadership is another cornerstone for progress in Nigeria. As the people seek a path forward, leaders must prioritize the needs of their constituents over personal interests. Regular assessments of governmental performance, transparency in budgeting and spending, and anti-corruption measures can help to restore public trust. Leaders who demonstrate commitment to these principles may inspire hope and foster collective action aimed at the common good.
Ultimately, the question remains: Who holds the key to Nigeria’s promised future? The answer lies within the collaboration between the government and its citizens, whereby both parties work towards common objectives. The road to prosperity for Nigeria is not easy, but through systemic reforms, public engagement, and accountability, there exists an opportunity to transform hope into reality, steering the nation towards a brighter tomorrow.
Mimiola, an Award-Winning journalist, sent in this piece.
Opinion
NNPCL vs. Dangote: Why Tinubu Can’t Play Pontius Pilate
The Presidency addressed several issues last Wednesday as the Special Adviser to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Information and Strategy, Mr. Bayo Onanuga picked the microphone to give perspectives to certain developments. One of the issues he addressed was the lingering feud between the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) and Dangote Refineries Limited.
Onanuga said that President Tinubu would not intervene in the feud because the two entities “operate independently in a deregulated market.”
According to Onanuga, the Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) field has been deregulated, just as Dangote is a private company. The NNPCL is a limited liability company, he said. In the loaded statement, the presidential adviser was hinting Nigerians why the President cannot dabble into the huge but confusing feud between Dangote Refineries and NNPCL, over the pricing of petroleum products in the country.
The presidential adviser and Nigerians are not oblivious to the implications of his statement. First, a lot of hope had been invested in the Dangote Refineries by Nigerians, who had concluded that its coming on stream would yield them cheaper fuel and help end the perennial fuel scarcity that kept the pumps at the filling stations dry for most of the months. But as the refinery was about to fag off its full operations, officials of the refinery, the NNPC and its subsidiaries started singing some music with disparaging tunes. Accusations upon accusations were rampaging in the air, while some name calling and tagging were being spread openly and under the table. It became obvious that elements in the administration of President Tinubu were opposed to the operation of the local refinery. Such insinuations must have prompted the President of Dangote Group, Alhaji Aliko Dangote to speak out in some tones not easily attributable to him hitherto. He alleged that officials of the NNPC were running a blending plant in Malta, where fuel is imported into Nigeria. He equally offered to hand off the Lagos-based refinery if the government would buy him out.
As tension rose, between Dangote and NNPCL, the corporation was having the last laugh, as it chose the same time to unleash some violent strokes of koboko whips on the back of the Nigerian citizen. It galloped fuel prices at will and at the same time locked the products away from their reach. Queues got unwinding at filling stations and the agony was unending. The hunger and thirst for Dangote fuel grew, but the NNPC chose to remain the stumbling block. I guess that the cries of Nigerian citizens at one point got across the Aso Rock Villa, in Abuja and the presidency had to order a temporary ceasefire. NNPCL was directed to create avenues for the supply of crude oil to Dangote in Naira while the refinery too was to agree to a pricing model to be fashioned by the Federal Executive Council. Even at that, the two combatants have continued to throw jabs at each other, especially over what should constitute the exact price of Dangote petrol. While Dangote had claimed that fuel from its refineries would be far cheaper than imported ones, the NNPC had given a conflicting indication. The NNPC/Dangote tango has been a ding-dong and a topsy-turvy affair.
That was the situation as the October 1 date fixed for the start of crude supply to Dangote draws close. And Mr. Onanuga was speaking against that backdrop. If that stands, it would amount to classifying Tinubu in the mould of the biblical Pontius Pilate, as seen in the book of John 18:37-49 and 19:1-19. In that biblical encounter, leading to the final crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Jews had brought Jesus to Pilate’s court for an indictment that would enable them to crucify him. Pilate asked questions of Jesus and even though Jesus answered in the spirit, the judge was still able to conclude that he found no fault in Jesus. And that was despite the mounting pressure from the multitude of Jews, seeking to crucify Jesus.
As we read in John 19:6; “When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, Crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.”
I believe that President Tinubu should not throw Nigerians at the NNPC, like sheep to wolves. If the declaration of his office is allowed to stand, he would be doing otherwise. To play the Pilate in this needless NNPCL and Dangote feud, he would have endorsed all the punishment his compatriots are suffering at the hands of the NNPCL. He would have said, even though I found no merit in the push to whip the population, I leave you to crucify them’ That would tell us that the President is not only shirking his responsibility as the Minister of Petroleum but also his overriding power as the President and Commander-in-chief.
Much as the officials of the NNPCL and other subsidiaries owned by the Nigerian people want to play the master by believing that they are independent limited liability companies, we will be hiding behind one finger if we believe any inch of that claim. And besides, which limited liability company would not be accountable to its shareholders or the chairman of its board?
If we don’t want to use agidi to light a gas cylinder, we have to agree that the matter of fuel supply in Nigeria is a basic unmistakable assignment President Tinubu must handle for his employers-the Nigerian people. He must be in a position to find answers to the puzzles. Why is fuel supply such a pain in the neck under his administration so far? Why is the locally imported fuel threatening to get more expensive under the watch of the NNPC he supervises? And why is the same NNPC seeking to suffer headaches for another person? When will NNPC’s refineries come alive after the several deadlines?
President Tinubu needs to intervene decisively too, by helping his employers find solutions to the endless hike in fuel prices, and why citizens of other oil-producing countries derive benefits from oil while the Nigerian situation is perpetually in the negative. The Daily Trust on September 23, published a report by Global Petrol Prices, a platform that tracks petrol prices across various countries, which claimed that four countries in Africa sell fuel cheaper than Nigeria. They include Libya which sells at $0.032 (approximately N52/litre), Egypt ($0.279), Algeria($0.342) and Angola, another oil-producing country, at $0.351 per litre.
Besides the above, Tribune columnist and renowned writer, Professor Farook Kperogi quoted data by some oil industry experts who claimed that the landing cost of imported petrol in Nigeria should stand at N1,107 per litre and that several cost components are not inclusive of locally imported fuel.
According to him, when such cost components are removed, Dangote’s fuel should not sell higher than N518.35 per litre. Indeed, investigations have revealed that Dangote fuel costs far cheaper than the amount quoted by him and the NNPC. You could see the fire in the eyes of the spokesperson of Dangote when he refuted the claim that NNPC got fuel at N890 per litre from the refinery.
President Tinubu should not play the ostrich, he cannot afford to play the Pontius Pilate in this case, if he wants a reversal of the oil curse in his tenure.
Opinion
Who Says Nigerian Youths Should Not Japa?
The trend of Nigerian youths relocating abroad, commonly called “Japa,” has reached alarming levels, driven by many pressing factors. Chief among these is the dire economic situation in the country, characterized by high unemployment rates, inflation, and widespread poverty.
Many young Nigerians find themselves grappling with the harsh realities of a stagnant job market where opportunities are limited, leading to a pervasive sense of hopelessness about their futures. In a society where ambition is often met with barriers, the desire for a better life has become a powerful motivator for japa (migration).
In addition to the economic challenges, high levels of insecurity further exacerbate this trend. The persistent threat of violence, crime, and social unrest makes everyday life precarious for many. Young people often feel vulnerable and unsafe, prompting them to consider relocation as a viable solution to secure their well-being. This atmosphere of fear and instability not only impacts their psyche but also diminishes their prospects for career growth and personal development.
Moreover, the desperation felt by many of these youths leads to significant personal sacrifices. It is not uncommon for individuals to sell their properties, deplete their savings, and even acquire loans in the hopes of financing their migration plans. These choices reflect a profound commitment to change their circumstances despite the inherent risks of leaving their homeland. Pursuing better educational prospects, career opportunities, and improved living conditions fuels the great exodus, as many believe that the benefits of migrating outweigh the costs of remaining in a challenging environment.
Ultimately, the convergence of economic instability, insecurity, and a lack of hope in the current environment drives this trend of migration among Nigerian youths. Each individual’s journey represents a search for a brighter future, underscoring the critical challenges facing young Nigerians today.
The Call for Action: Political Responses and Policies
The migration of Nigerian professionals, particularly within the healthcare sector, has elicited varied political responses. As the phenomenon of ‘Japa’—the colloquial term for seeking greener pastures abroad—grows increasingly prevalent, the Nigerian government has been compelled to confront the ramifications of this brain drain. Efforts have been made to formulate policies designed to retain healthcare workers, reflecting a recognition of these professionals’ pivotal role in national development. Initiatives such as improved salaries, better working conditions, and enhanced career advancement opportunities have been introduced to stem the tide of emigration.
A Lagos lawmaker representing Oshodi Isolo II Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives, Hon. Ganiyu Johnson, in 2023, sponsored “A bill for an Act to Amend the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act, Cap. M379, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, to mandate any Nigeria-trained medical or dental practitioner to practice in Nigeria for a minimum of five before being granted a full license by the council to make quality health services available to Nigeria.”
He argued that “the government has invested so much money in training these medical doctors, on average. Recently, the United Kingdom opened healthcare visas to people; who were all going to the UK, USA, and Canada. So should we fold our hands?”
President Bola Tinubu recently approved a National Policy on Health Workforce Migration to manage the exodus abroad of skilled Nigerian healthcare professionals. According to Muhammad Pate, the Coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare, the 56-page document outlines the national strategy for addressing the dynamics of health workers’ migration while ensuring that it does not jeopardize the requirements of the nation’s healthcare system.
However, the efficacy of such policies remains a subject of intense debate. Critics often point to the disparity between these governmental measures and the observed behaviour of political elites, who were based abroad before returning home to occupy political posts, frequently seek medical attention for themselves and educational and professional opportunities for their children overseas, and are even quick to return abroad almost immediately they are out of political offices. This disconnect has raised questions about the commitment of leaders to create a conducive environment for graduates and professionals in Nigeria. Many citizens view these actions as a manifestation of hypocrisy, breeding further disillusionment and fueling the desire to ‘Japa’.
The persistent crisis in the healthcare system, characterized by inadequate infrastructure, insufficient funding, and a lack of essential resources, undermines these retention efforts. As the government formulates strategies, a more holistic approach is necessary to tackle the issues underlying healthcare workers’ dissatisfaction. This includes addressing systemic problems such as corruption and the lack of equitable resource distribution. A truly effective solution must encompass policies aimed at retaining talent and a broader commitment to reforming the conditions that compel professionals and youths to look abroad.
Ultimately, the Nigerian government faces a critical juncture in addressing the migration of skilled workers. A renewed focus on policy effectiveness and political accountability is essential to reverse the brain drain trend and retain valuable talent within the country.
The Ethical Dilemma: Is Japa Justified?
The decision of many Nigerian youths to japa, seeking opportunities abroad, stirs a profound ethical discourse regarding migration. At the heart of this phenomenon lies the debate over human rights to freedom of movement and the ethical implications of seeking better prospects in foreign lands. From one point of view, migration is a valid option for people who want to advance socioeconomically, supported by the fundamental human right to seek out a better life. This viewpoint emphasizes that individuals should have the autonomy to explore opportunities that enhance their quality of life, especially when local conditions are less than conducive to personal and professional development.
Conversely, critics often label this exodus as brain drain, equating it to a collective abandonment of responsibilities towards a nation grappling with myriad challenges. This characterization raises questions regarding the role and responsibility of political leaders in nurturing an environment that fosters growth, stability, and opportunities within the country. Are they not, partly, accountable for the growing desire among youths to leave? When governments fail to create adequate conditions for human capital development, they inadvertently precipitate a flight of talent, which may severely hinder national progress.
The ethical implications become even more complex when we consider the motivations behind migration. If the pursuit of knowledge and global exposure drives these individuals to relocate, does that not warrant a more nuanced conversation about the potential benefits of such a movement? Rather than framing this trend exclusively as a detrimental outflow of talent, exploring how these experiences, when leveraged effectively, could eventually contribute to national development upon their return may be more productive. Thus, understanding these ethical dilemmas necessitates a balanced perspective, recognizing the individual’s rights and the collective responsibilities inherent within the societal framework.
From Brain Drain to Brain Gain: The Way Forward
The current trend of brain drain among Nigerian youths poses a significant challenge to the nation’s development. However, this brain drain can be transformed into a brain gain by implementing strategic initiatives. It begins with fostering a conducive environment that encourages talented individuals to return home after acquiring international experience. The government and private sector must collaborate to create job opportunities that match the skills of returning emigrants and offer competitive salaries and benefits. Establishing policies that support entrepreneurship can also incentivize returnees to contribute to the economy, fostering innovation and local development.
In addition to encouraging returnees, it is essential to educate Nigerian youths on the motivations behind their relocation. Instead of following trends or peer pressure, young individuals must be empowered to make informed decisions about their futures. This can be achieved through comprehensive career counselling programmes in schools and universities, which will help students understand their options and the potential impacts of their choices. Encouraging critical thinking and strategic planning can lead to more purposeful migrations—individuals seeking international exposure while still retaining a commitment to their homeland.
Furthermore, cultivating a culture of engagement within Nigeria will encourage both citizens and expatriates to invest in the country’s future. This can be accomplished through initiatives promoting community building, networking, and professional collaboration. By emphasizing the skills and experiences that returning Nigerians bring, the nation can foster an environment where intellectual capital is valued. Hosting forums and symposiums where returnees share their experiences can inspire others and create a cohesive community centred around progress.
In conclusion, Nigeria can combat the brain drain phenomenon by actively promoting brain gain strategies and educating youths on purposeful migrations. This approach not only mitigates the loss of talent but also cultivates a dedicated populace invested in the nation’s development, ultimately benefiting both the individuals and the broader society.
Mimiola, an award-winning journalist sent in this piece.
-
Politics1 week ago
Oyo Rep, Oseni Pays APC Secretariat Staff Salaries, Donates N10m to Boost Party Operations
-
Health4 days ago
Oyo: Oseni to Launch Mobile Clinic Initiative to Revitalize Rural Healthcare
-
Crime & Court2 days ago
EFCC Chair Raises Alarm on Rampant Fraud in Nigeria’s Electricity Sector
-
News2 days ago
Half of Shortlisted Directors Fail Federal Permanent Secretary Exam