Politics
China is Reaping the Harvest of Democracy
China is Reaping the Harvest of Democracy
By: Olalekan A. Babatunde
This opinion is coming on the heels of the United States’ preparation to host more than 100 participants in the initial “Summit for Democracy” from 9-10 December 2021. World leaders, along with civil society and private-sector representatives will meet virtually in “renewing democracy in the United States and around the world”. According to James M. Goldgeier and Bruce W. Jentleson in the Politico (5 December), “the summit was never a good idea…” While making reference to the January 6 insurrection, attacks on election officials and ongoing systematic efforts by Republicans in a number of states to curtail voting rights, the authors feared that “the U.S. had questionable credibility to position itself as a leading democracy. “
Determining who is suitably democratic to make the list has already created criticisms and tension. Critics are of the opinion that the list seems to divide the world into “good guys and bad guys.” The entire concept of a democracy summit relies on an overly ideological approach to managing the global agenda. For instance, while Hungary and Turkey are not invited, backsliding democracies such as Poland, the Philippines, Brazil, India and Pakistan on the list raised concerns. Their undemocratic practices have grown worse over the past year. Hungary, the only E.U. a member left out, has already said it is excluded and penalized for its closeness to former President Donald Trump.
Just like other genuine observers of the development, China has legitimately argued “the U.S. has no right to monopolize democratic standards to impose its own political system on others and to instigate division and confrontation under the guise of democracy. “ According to its Foreign Ministry spokesman, Zhao Lijian, “democracy is the common value of all mankind and the right of all peoples.” Of course, he is right. For a country with a feudal history, China has provided leadership in realizing people’s democracy.
Long before many nations evolved popular sovereignty, freedom and political equality, China has been practicing elective democracy. It was the Communist leader Mao Zedong that introduced New Democracy or New Democratic Revolution, a concept of Bloc of Four Social Classes theory in post-revolutionary China underpinning the fact that democracy in China would take a path that was decisively distinct from that in any other country. Today, China’s version of democracy is consultative, with voting permitted at the very local level and public feedback collected before any law is implemented.
In the words of John Ross, former director of economic and business policy for the Mayor of London on China’s framework and delivery on human rights and democracy, said China is “ far superior to the West’s”, as China focuses on real improvement of the real conditions of humanity. While dialogue on democracy is necessary, the idea behind the event raises fundamental questions. What should democracy be all about? What should be the normative end of democracy? Whose system is delivering democratic outcomes? Is China a democracy or not? It is important to provide some explanation.
When the concepts of democracy as a form of government originated in ancient Athens (Greece) circa 508 B.C. none could ever fathom how thousands of years later the Greek system of direct democracy would pave the way for representative democracies across the globe. The point of departure or contention has often been the designations of whether one’s version of democracy is liberal, direct or pure, indirect or representative or electoral. As democracy varies from peoples, regions, religions and cultures, it is important to underscore the fact that every nation has its own system of democracy.
Whatever it is, nations evolved their own system in line with their socio-economic and political conditions-history, culture, tradition and so on. For example, the Swiss cantons and towns evolved people’s assemblies while the Chinese developed theirs. Also if democracy can be exported, Tunisia where the Arab Spring began and Afghanistan would have been perfect examples. But the effectiveness of governance itself is the yardstick of popular government. Today, socialist democracy has built prosperous China in line with the Chinese characteristics. It is not that China had not experimented with the western parliamentary, multiparty and presidential systems after its 1911 Revolution. But they failed.
With the founding of CPC in 1921, an illumination towards democracy was born. China is one of the countries that have advanced their own form of democratic rule. This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and has never stopped pursuing democratic dividends for the people. All along, the Chinese people were at the centre of the struggle. So the end of feudal-autocratic rule gave way for the establishment of a democratic republic. The three decades of political development during the “reform and opening-up” period when socialist democracy and the rule of law were advanced ushered China into a new era.
This is the “Whole-Process People’s Democracy” under the CPC leadership. This sounds all encompassing by integrating process-oriented democracy with results-oriented democracy, procedural democracy with substantive democracy, direct democracy with indirect democracy, and people’s democracy with the will of the state. According to Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng, “China’s whole-process people’s democracy is not the kind that wakes up at the time of voting and goes dormant afterwards.” Also, the State Council Information Office of China says it is a model of socialist democracy that covers all aspects of the democratic process and all sectors of society. Again, it is the people that elect their leaders. There are nine political parties including CPC in China today but a multi-party cooperation system in which CPC exercises state power. These other parties participate fully in the administration of state affairs under the leadership of the CPC.
Also Read: 79 PHCs get N418m as Zulum launches Borno’s Basic…
Yet, the CPC under president Xi has reinforced and reformed party politics and government institutions in accordance with democratic norms and rule of law. There are also active roles being played by think tanks and united fronts at the grassroots level up to national level in the development of democratic governance and the rule of law in China. They engage and educate policymakers, media and the public on policy issues, and thereby help bridge the gap between policymakers and the public. In fact, according to the 2014 Global Go To Think Tanks Index Report, Asia (with China) has 16.71% in the global distribution of think tanks by region while North America has 30.05% and Sub-Saharan Africa 7.06%.
A few of these reforms are the modernisation of China’s governance system and capacity, strengthening CPC’s overall leadership, managing over 1.4 billion population with 56 ethnic groups, advancing democratic elections, robust and widespread consultations, decision-making, management and oversight, and promoting political stability, unity and vitality. Power is derived bottom-up. That is, from the people or grassroots. Participation and liberty is high. There are local people’s congresses at all levels. Townships, provinces and national levels have congresses where over 2 million representatives are elected in agreement with the Chinese founding fathers and leaders’ vision. All administrative, supervisory, judicial and procuratorial organs of the state are created by the people’s congresses, to which they are responsible and by which they are supervised. The National People’s Congress (NPC) is the highest organ of state power and is controlled by the National Committee.
Elections in China are extensive and cover all aspects of the country’s political and social life. They include elections to government institutions, villagers and urban residents committees, and employees congresses in enterprises and public institutions. Elections in China are based on equality, and the people’s right to vote and stand for election is fully guaranteed. Each person can cast one vote, and all votes are of equal value. Elections in China are genuine and not manipulated by financial interests. Voters are free to vote for the candidates they trust. The above summary of key democratic organs and processes are enabling China to efficiently and effectively discharge and oversee its day-to-day socio-economic and industrial activities within the country and far beyond. Decision-making procedures and government’s accountability to the people are made easy.
The resultant democratic outcomes for the people are huge. Some of them are worth mentioning. Besides having successfully tamed the spread of COVID-19 pandemic, China has ended absolute poverty by lifting the last 80 million people. It is a unified multi-ethnic state. The Chinese at the grassroots level, employees at private and public institutions exercise democratic rights. This helps to coordinate the interests of multiple stakeholders, mitigate conflict, and maintain social stability and harmony at the grassroots level. Many successful grassroots experiences and practices have eventually turned into national policies, injecting new vitality into the development of China’s democracy.
A modern prosperous society with the spate of a few decades is beyond many imaginations in the world. A democracy that wheeled the engine of the 4th industrial revolution has propelled China from the 7th economy to 2nd prosperous economy in the world. A visitor to China can easily decipher democratic ideals and freedom across the country. Many other countries’ nationalities cannot claim to enjoy the kind of freedom the Chinese have.
Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore once said, “The ultimate test of a political system is whether it improves the standards of living for the majority of people.” China has profoundly proved that democracy can be a tool for human development. It has brought rapid development within the country and around the world. With its presence in over 2/3 of the world through bilateral and multilateral cooperation and trade, China respects other people’s democracy and freedom. It does not interfere with internal politics of the host country.
Therefore, as the democracy summit is exposing the fissures of the world, it is also revealing the weakness in our ability to reckon with other popular governments that are working elsewhere. It also uncovers the hypocrisy in us. We trade and invest in the countries not on the summit list. China’s own model of democracy is worth paying attention to. Many western scholars, diplomats and media have already paid attention to this type of governance that delivers coherent and long-term outcomes of what a true government should be. True democracy is effective governance that is solving problems but not held by political gridlock, corruption and theatrical distractions.
Participating in the new discussions on democracy is a welcome one but it should afford others to lay out their successes and failures in democracy. This is what a genuine meeting on democracy ought to be. The world is in dire need of pragmatic democratic leadership that will pursue peaceful development, protect people’s rights and promote freedom, and help to mitigate the effects of the pandemic and climate change regardless of race, gender, faith and region. As President Joe Biden has said, “Democracy doesn’t happen by accident, we have to defend it, fight for it, strengthen it, renew it.” That was exactly what China has done. They consciously developed their model of democracy, defended it against subversions, and strengthened it with their characteristics. What the people are enjoying now is the fruits of democracy.
*Dr. Babatunde is a fellow, peacebuilding and evidence practitioner at the Nigeria’s Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution, Abuja.
China is Reaping the Harvest of Democracy
Politics
The Unmatched Humility of Vice President Kashim Shettima: A Testament to Leadership in Nigeria
The Unmatched Humility of Vice President Kashim Shettima: A Testament to Leadership in Nigeria
By: Dr. James Bwala
In the complex landscape of Nigerian politics, leadership often comes with profound challenges, especially in a nation marked by diverse cultures, religions, and regions. In this milieu, humility emerges as a crucial trait for effective leadership. What Vice President Kashim Shettima said at the gathering in Enugu, where he received Governor Peter Mbah and thousands of decampees, reveals his strategic formula for winning oppositions both on political and personal grounds. “I find myself in a unique position, serving as the Vice President of Nigeria, and yet, it is important to acknowledge the exemplary leadership of my governor, Professor Babagana Umara Zulum of Borno State… My experience underlines an irrefutable truth.” Indeed, true leaders inspire through their humility and ethical governance, benefiting both their immediate constituency and the broader nation.

Vice President Kashim Shettima has not only been a significant figure in Nigeria’s political sphere but also a testament to the power of humility in leadership. Historically, Nigerian political dynamics have often revolved around power plays, tribal affiliations, and sycophantic politics, where loyalty is frequently bought rather than earned. In contrast, Shettima’s relationship with his governor offers a refreshing perspective—one rooted firmly in respect and recognition of genuine leadership capabilities. The indispensable nature of humility in governance, as exemplified by the unique relationship between Vice President Shettima and Governor Zulum, goes beyond politics.

First, it is imperative to delineate what we mean by humility in leadership. Humility is often misconstrued as weakness or submissiveness; however, in the realm of effective governance, it denotes a leader’s willingness to prioritize the needs of others above their own ego. Humility fosters collaboration, respect, and trust—qualities essential for any leader striving to implement policies for the good of all citizens. When leaders openly acknowledge their limitations and the contributions of others, they cultivate an environment conducive to innovation and collective success.

READ ALSO: https://newsng.ng/umth-another-cap-for-the-chief-medical-director-prof-ahmed-ahidjos-distinguished-govtech-trailblazer-award/
In the context of Nigeria, where communal ties are deeply entrenched, humility plays a pivotal role in bridging divides. Kashim Shettima’s humility is evident in his approach to governance, where he acknowledges the invaluable contributions of Governor Zulum. When leaders operate within a framework that promotes mutual respect and cooperation, there is a tangible impact on the political climate. Shettima’s acknowledgment of Zulum’s leadership transcends the typical vice presidential role; it illustrates a partnership that inspires unity among citizens who rely on effective governance for their well-being.

Indeed, humility acts as a catalyst for responsiveness in leadership. Engaged leaders often listen actively to the voices of their constituents. Shettima’s support for Zulum’s initiatives, particularly his focus on education, healthcare, and rebuilding efforts in Borno State after years of insurgency, embodies this quality. Instead of competing with his governor, Shettima amplifies his vision and policies, ensuring that the plight of the people is addressed holistically. This symbiotic relationship serves as a model for how humility can drive progress, as the vice president utilizes his platform to elevate the work being done at the state level.

A notable instance illustrating this principle occurred during the Boko Haram crisis, which had devastated Borno State. Governor Zulum, renowned for his hands-on approach to governance, sought to provide relief and rehabilitation for displaced persons. Rather than distancing himself from the governor’s efforts, Shettima stepped forward, providing necessary federal support to facilitate these initiatives. This collaborative effort not only underscored the importance of cooperative governance but also demonstrated how humility can lead to more effective and compassionate responses to crisis situations.

The personal attributes of Vice President Shettima resonate powerfully with the citizens of Nigeria. In a time when politicians are often seen as distant and disconnected from the struggles of the average Nigerian, Shettima’s genuine approach stands in stark contrast. His ability to speak candidly and without pretense has fostered a sense of trust between himself, Governor Zulum, and the population they serve. This transparency is vital in an era where skepticism about political motives runs rampant. By embodying humility, Shettima encourages hope and empowerment, inspiring citizens to engage more actively in the democratic process.

However, it is essential to recognize that humility does not equate to indecisiveness or lack of authority. On the contrary, the most humble leaders often possess the confidence to make difficult decisions, rooted in their commitment to serving the greater good. Shettima illustrates this point clearly; he has navigated complex political terrains while remaining steadfastly supportive of Zulum’s initiatives. This combination of humility and decisiveness creates a strong leadership fabric that reassures citizens of their leaders’ commitment to their welfare.

The reciprocal nature of the Shettima-Zulum relationship invites a broader dialogue on the cultural paradigms of leadership in Nigeria. As we analyze the prevailing political narratives, it becomes evident that a shift toward humility-driven leadership could transform the nation’s governance landscape. The precedents set by Shettima and Zulum should inspire other leaders to adopt similar principles, prioritizing service and community over personal gain and ambition.

Critics may question whether such humility can be sustained in a political arena often characterized by competition and adversarial relationships. However, history has shown us that transformative change arises from consistent action and advocacy for shared values. For Nigeria to thrive, its leaders must cultivate environments where collaboration and respect prevail over discord. The Shettima-Zulum dynamic reinforces the idea that leveraging each other’s strengths leads to authentic, impactful governance.

The legacy of humility in leadership could reshape Nigeria’s political culture, fostering an atmosphere of accountability and ethical governance. When humility becomes a norm rather than an exception, we will witness a reduction in corruption and a rise in leaders genuinely dedicated to public service. The collective consciousness of a nation that embraces this ethos would empower citizens to hold their leaders accountable, thereby enhancing democracy’s effectiveness.

This exceptional humility of Vice President Kashim Shettima towards Governor Babagana Umara Zulum presents an invaluable model for leadership in Nigeria. This relationship illustrates how humility can serve not only as a personal virtue but also as a strategic asset in governance. By embracing humility, leaders can cultivate collaboration, engage authentically with their constituents, and drive meaningful change.

The leadership approach of Shettima and Zulum stands as a beacon of hope for a nation yearning for transformative governance. As we move forward, it is imperative that we encourage our leaders to embody humility, recognizing that true greatness in leadership stems from a commitment to service and a deep respect for the collective journey towards national progress.
* James Bwala, PhD, writes from Abuja.
The Unmatched Humility of Vice President Kashim Shettima: A Testament to Leadership in Nigeria
Politics
The NLC vs. Shettima: A Misplaced Blame Game in Labor Rights
The NLC vs. Shettima: A Misplaced Blame Game in Labor Rights
By: Dr. James Bwala
The National Labour Congress (NLC) has taken a critical stance against Vice President Kashim Shettima, alleging that he is shielding Aliko Dangote, a prominent industrialist, from the enforcement of labor laws. This assertion has sparked a heated debate regarding the role of government officials in upholding worker rights and the actual motivations behind the NLC’s criticisms. At first glance, the accusations may seem valid, but a deeper analysis reveals numerous inconsistencies and suggests that the NLC itself might be misdirecting its frustrations and VP Kashim Shettima is right.
I read the lines from a caption on Vanguard Newspapers with deep thoughts; it is imperative to understand the context in which these accusations have been made. The Nigerian labor landscape has faced significant challenges, particularly in the oil sector, where safety, remuneration, and working conditions have been contentious issues. The PENGASAN (Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria) is at the forefront of advocating for oil workers’ rights, and any perceived negligence by government officials, including top leadership, can understandably provoke outrage among its members. However, the NLC’s allegations appear to be more rooted in political maneuvering than substantive labor advocacy.
The NLC’s response to Shettima’s alleged protection of Dangote suggests a failure to appreciate the complexities of governance and the intersection between industry and labor rights. Shettima, as the Vice President, operates within a framework that requires balancing economic growth with labor rights. Dangote Industries represents a significant pillar of the Nigerian economy, contributing to job creation and fiscal revenue. Therefore, while it is vital for labor laws to be upheld, it is equally important to recognize the economic context in which these laws operate. Shielding an influential businessman like Dangote may not necessarily equate to an abandonment of labor rights; instead, it may reflect a broader strategy aimed at sustaining economic stability.
The notion that the NLC is advocating purely for the rights of oil workers becomes questionable when one considers the alleged “trickling profits of PENGASAN.” If NLC leaders are indeed benefiting from the very system they claim to challenge, it raises serious ethical questions about their motivations. Are they genuinely committed to improving labor conditions, or are they merely leveraging their position for personal gain? This potential conflict of interest dilutes the message of the NLC and raises skepticism regarding its criticisms of high-profile figures like Shettima.
One must also consider the implications of a targeted campaign against Dangote. The business environment in Nigeria is already fraught with challenges, including regulatory hurdles, corruption, and infrastructural deficits. Discrediting essential businesses and their leadership could have far-reaching consequences for the economy, disproportionately affecting the very workers the NLC claims to represent. Instead of pursuing a confrontational approach, dialogues and negotiations with industry leaders may lead to more fruitful outcomes for workers. The NLC should consider strategies that involve cooperative engagement rather than baseless allegations, fostering a climate of collaboration that can yield real improvements in labor conditions.
The existing labor laws in Nigeria need to be reevaluated and perhaps revised to meet the changing dynamics of the workforce. In their current form, many of these legislations do not adequately address modern workplace realities. The NLC must prioritize reforming these laws to ensure they protect workers effectively without stifling economic growth. By focusing efforts on legislative improvement rather than personal attacks, the NLC could present itself as a constructive force in the labor movement, focusing on solutions rather than scapegoats.
READ ALSO:https://newsng.ng/vp-kashim-shettima-in-president-tinubus-words-competent-capable-reliable-and-able/
The NLC’s criticism does not only undermine its integrity but can also alienate potential allies in the quest for labor reform. Kashim Shettima, being part of the government, could be an instrumental ally in driving positive changes in labor laws if approached correctly. The decision to position him as an antagonist may close off avenues for potential collaboration and thwart progress in labor advocacy. The NLC risks marginalizing itself and losing the support of the very workers it strives to help by adopting this combative strategy.
Critics of Shettima argue that the vice president should unequivocally stand against influential businessmen who disregard labor laws. However, this perspective overlooks the intricacies of leadership and the need for strategic alliances in governance. While Shettima has a duty to uphold labor rights, he also has to consider the broader economic implications of his actions. A nuanced approach to labor relations, taking into account the economic realities facing Nigeria, will ultimately benefit workers more than knee-jerk reactions and targeted blame assessments.
For many Nigerians, it is crucial to acknowledge that the responsibility of upholding labor rights does not lie solely on government officials. Businesses, including Dangote’s, must also take accountability for ensuring fair labor practices within their operations. There is a shared responsibility among all stakeholders—government, labor unions, and businesses—to create a sustainable framework for labor rights. Thus, instead of vilifying individuals, conversations should be directed toward fostering a culture of compliance and ethical practice across all sectors.
While the concerns raised by the NLC regarding labor rights are undoubtedly valid, blaming Vice President Kashim Shettima for allegedly shielding Dangote oversimplifies a multifaceted issue. The NLC must critically evaluate its position, recognizing that effective labor advocacy involves collaboration, dialogue, and a commitment to reforming existing laws for the benefit of all. Rather than waging a dispute based on political posturing, stakeholders should unite in the pursuit of a healthier labor environment that respects both workers’ rights and the economic imperatives of the nation. By doing so, they can transform the narrative from one of contention to a shared vision for progress, ensuring that the interests of Nigerian workers are met with both compassion and pragmatism.
* James Bwala, PhD, writes from Abuja.
The NLC vs. Shettima: A Misplaced Blame Game in Labor Rights
Politics
VP Kashim Shettima: In President Tinubu’s words, “Competent, Capable, Reliable, and Able.”
VP Kashim Shettima: In President Tinubu’s words, “Competent, Capable, Reliable, and Able.”
By: Dr. James Bwala
In the contemporary landscape of Nigerian politics, the choice of leadership partners has become a critical discussion point, especially in light of the recent election that brought President Bola Ahmed Tinubu into office. When asked about his selection of Kashim Shettima as vice president, Tinubu articulated four words: competent, capable, reliable, and able. These descriptors not only reflect Shettima’s professional credentials but also signify a deliberate strategy aimed at revitalizing the hope of Nigerians for effective governance. Emphasizing these qualities offers a compelling argument in favor of Shettima’s appointment while countering any skepticism stemming from opposition narratives.
To begin with, the term “competent” underscores the necessity of skill and expertise in governance. Shettima’s track record as the former governor of Borno State is a noteworthy testament to his competence. He served during a period when the state faced severe challenges, particularly due to the Boko Haram insurgency. His ability to implement policies that fostered socio-economic development amidst chaos illustrates not only his technical acumen but also his adeptness in crisis management. This experience is pivotal for Nigeria, a nation grappling with issues ranging from security to economic recession. Competence in leadership ensures that policies are not merely theoretical constructs but actionable strategies tailored to address the nuances of Nigeria’s complex societal fabric.

Shettima’s capability extends beyond mere professional qualifications; it encompasses a unique blend of vision and pragmatism. The socio-political context of Nigeria is fraught with multifaceted challenges that require innovative yet realistic solutions. Shettima has shown an understanding of this intricate balance through various initiatives he spearheaded as governor. His administration focused on infrastructural development, education, and health care—all essential pillars for national growth. By choosing a partner who demonstrates such capability, Tinubu is not just making a political statement; he is assembling a team prepared to confront Nigeria’s pressing issues with informed solutions and strategic planning.
Reliability is another crucial aspect that Tinubu highlights in describing Shettima. In politics, reliability is often synonymous with trustworthiness and consistency. Shettima’s tenure in public service has been characterized by accountability and transparency, traits that are increasingly vital in a political arena often marred by corruption and scandals. For the Nigerian populace to invest their hopes in a new administration, they must feel assured that their leaders are dependable. Shettima’s history of fulfilling promises and maintaining integrity throughout his career establishes him as a figure of reliability—a necessary trait in a vice president who is often required to step into the president’s shoes.

READ ALSO: https://newsng.ng/the-state-security-service-dg-adeola-oluwatosin-ajayi-and-the-challenges-of-leadership/
The word “able” encapsulates the essence of readiness and capability to perform in high-pressure environments. An able vice president must not only support the president but also be prepared to take the helm in case of unforeseen circumstances. Shettima’s diverse experiences, encompassing governance, public policy, and even crisis intervention, equip him to adapt and respond aptly to any situation. This versatility is paramount as Nigeria undergoes transformations that demand agile responses from its leadership. The pandemic, economic downturns, and security crises present scenarios where an able leader can make significant differences in outcomes.
Critics may argue that Shettima’s background, particularly his association with the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the political turmoil in Borno State, tarnishes his reputation. However, such assertions fail to acknowledge the broader context of his accomplishments and the essential qualities that define his leadership. Political affiliations should not overshadow individual merit. Shettima’s resume includes innovative approaches to governance that have garnered both regional and national recognition, proving that his capabilities extend beyond partisan lines.

Amidst opposition claims, it is crucial to recognize that discourse surrounding leadership choices often reflects broader political machinations rather than genuine concerns for national welfare. The framing of Shettima as someone unfit for the vice presidency serves more to galvanize opposition factions than to serve the interests of the Nigerian people. The essence of democracy lies in constructive dialogue and debate, yet dismissive rhetoric without substantial evidence is counterproductive. As citizens engage with political narratives, it is vital to discern between legitimate criticisms and those motivated by the desire to undermine progress. We have seen that in those coming on air to push it from a myopic mind.
For those still talking as we look towards the 2027 general elections, it becomes essential to reiterate that the terms “competence,” “capability,” “reliability,” and “ability” are not mere buzzwords—they are the very foundation upon which effective governance rests. Shettima embodies these attributes, positioning him as an invaluable partner in Tinubu’s vision for a renewed hope for Nigeria. The country faces numerous challenges, and only through a collaborative and well-equipped leadership can Nigeria navigate its path toward prosperity.

As citizens, it is incumbent upon us to critically assess our leaders and their choices, demanding accountability while remaining vigilant against unfounded allegations that seek to derail progress. By focusing on tangible results and the attributes that make effective leaders, we can foster a political culture that values competence and integrity over opportunism. The clarion call for partnership, led by Tinubu and Shettima, emphasizes the notion that effective governance requires teamwork, resilience, and a steadfast commitment to the people of Nigeria. In this shared journey, every Nigerian has a role to play in holding their leaders accountable, ensuring that hope translates not merely into rhetoric but into real, actionable change that uplifts the nation as a whole.
* James Bwala, Ph.D., writes from Abuja.
VP Kashim Shettima: In President Tinubu’s words, “Competent, Capable, Reliable, and Able.”
-
News2 years agoRoger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
-
Opinions4 years agoTHE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
-
Opinions4 years agoPOLICE CHARGE ROOMS, A MINTING PRESS
-
News2 years agoEYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
ACADEMICS2 years agoA History of Biu” (2015) and The Lingering Bura-Pabir Question (1)
-
Columns2 years agoArmy University Biu: There is certain interest, but certainly not from Borno.
-
News6 months agoFAILED COUP IN BURKINA FASO: HOW TRAORÉ NARROWLY ESCAPED ASSASSINATION PLOT AMID FOREIGN INTERFERENCE CLAIMS
-
Opinions2 years agoTinubu,Shettima: The epidemic of economic, insecurity in Nigeria
