By Ikechukwu Amaechi
Recent disclosure by President Muhammadu Buhari that he could have used the army and police to overrun some North East governors of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) didn’t come as a surprise, unless for those in denial.
It simply betrayed a mindset in eternal romance with dictatorship.
I concede that some Nigerians still believe he is truly a democracy convert.
Because of his penchant to repudiate promises made to Nigerians prior to the 2015 elections, I have developed, in recent months, the habit of fact checking all his pronouncements.
Shortly after taking oath of office on May 29, 2015, Buhari disowned two of his key campaign documents, “My Covenant With Nigerians” and “One Hundred Things Buhari Will Do in 100 Days.”
Afraid that Nigerians would ask for his scorecard after September 5, 2015 – 100 days in office – based on what he promised, his Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, kicked off the campaign of disinformation on August 28, 2015.
“In the course of electioneering, the presidential campaign had so many centres of public communication which, for whatever reason, were on the loose.
“There is a certain document tagged ‘One Hundred Things Buhari Will Do in 100 Days’ and the other, ‘My Covenant With Nigerians.’ Both pamphlets bore the authorised party logo but … I can bet my last kobo that candidate Buhari did not see or authorise those publications,” Shehu wrote in a widely circulated opinion article.
A couple of days later, the then All Progressives Congress (APC) National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, doubled down on the false claim by doing what he knows how best to do – spewing alternative facts.
“Buhari never promised to do anything in 100 days, that’s the honest truth,” he said.
Both men lied but the Buhari government got away with it, nevertheless, because Nigerians refuse to hold him to account.
That seems to have emboldened the government in elevating mendacity to a statecraft.
But while Buhari could easily deny knowledge of those documents, he couldn’t wriggle out of his Chatham House, London speech on February 26, 2015, an outing many saw as a diplomatic coup d’état against the Goodluck Jonathan administration, spurring a hitherto hesitant international community to queue behind his presidential aspiration.
The lecture titled, “Prospects for Democratic Consolidation in Africa: Nigeria’s Transition,” was well received by the well-heeled audience under the chairmanship of Richard Gozney, former British High Commissioner to Nigeria.
Let me quote Buhari a little more elaborately:
“On insecurity, there is a genuine cause for worry, both within and outside Nigeria. Apart from the civil war era, at no other time in our history has Nigeria been this insecure. What has been consistently lacking is the required leadership in our battle against insurgency.”
Then he made profound promises.
“Let me assure you that if I am elected president, the world will have no cause to worry about Nigeria as it has had to recently … I, Muhammadu Buhari, will always lead from the front and return Nigeria to its leadership role in regional and international efforts to combat terrorism.”
Has Buhari led from the front on the anti-terrorism war? Your guess is as good as mine.
Is the world less worried about Nigeria today than it was in 2015? The answer is no.
He over promises and under delivers.
Buhari claimed that the pre-2015 economy was neither translating to human development nor shared prosperity.
“A development economist once said three questions should be asked about a country’s development: One, what is happening to poverty? Two, what is happening to unemployment? And three, what is happening to inequality?” he said.
“The answers to these questions in Nigeria show that the current administration has created two economies in one country, a sorry tale of two nations: one economy for a few who have so much in their tiny island of prosperity; and the other economy for the many who have so little in their vast ocean of misery.
“Even by official figures, 33.1 per cent of Nigerians live in extreme poverty. That’s almost 60 million, almost the population of the United Kingdom.
“There is also the unemployment crisis simmering beneath the surface, ready to explode at the slightest stress, with officially 23.9 per cent of our adult population and almost 60 per cent of our youth unemployed. We also have one of the highest rates of inequalities in the world.
“With all these, it is not surprising that our performance on most governance and development indicators (like Mo Ibrahim Index on African Governance and UNDP’s Human Development Index) are unflattering.”
Then Buhari spoke on democracy and dictatorship.
“I have heard and read references to me as a former dictator in many respected British newspapers including the well regarded Economist …. I cannot change the past. But I can change the present and the future. So, before you is a former military ruler and a converted democrat who is ready to operate under democratic norms.”
The international community applauded. Nigerians ululated. The axiomatic Daniel may well be on his way to the leadership throne in Nigeria.
Back home, Buhari reaffirmed his fabled democracy credentials on March 17, 2015 at an interactive session with the Nigerian Press Organisation (NPO) in Abuja, where he said, “I want to give you my full assurances that in this democratic dispensation, I will ensure that the Nigerian Constitution is upheld.
“This includes respect for the media, respect for the right to free expression and freedom of speech …. I give you my full assurances that the Nigerian media will be free under our APC government.”
Most, if not all, these promises have been kept in the breach. Like Olusegun Obasanjo before him, Buhari has proved that old habits die hard.
No matter how hard he pretends to try, he cannot be a democrat. As the Igbo say, it is difficult, if not impossible, for anyone to learn how to be left-handed in old age.
Buhari is a dyed-in-the-wool dictator who thinks he is doing Nigerians a favour by playing by the rules of the game.
He stressed this on August 10 when he told North East governors that the APC could have used the army and police to overrun the opposition in the 2019 elections but for the interest of the nation.
“It is true that we (APC) lost some states as a ruling party in a developing country, which is normal. I am proud of that because we are impartial, that is why as ruling party we lost some states ….
“We know we are a developing country but we respect our country, otherwise, with the use of army, the police and the rest of them, we could have overrun you. We just wanted to show that we are humane.”
Really? Is that what democracy is all about – benevolence of maximum rulers?
So, the opposition parties won election not because the wishes of the electorate prevailed but because a benevolent president had pity on them? Was Buhari implying that he did Nigerians a favour by adhering to the rule of law? What about his Chatham House vows?
He is an autocrat, a pretender to the dining table of democracy.
That explains why he would describe the bloody November 16, 2019 governorship election that secured Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, a second term as “a race well run and a victory well won.”
But no one should be surprised. Buhari is not a democrat. It takes more than contesting elections to be a democrat.