Politics

Lest Nigerian Youths Be Deceived By Obasanjo’s Sanctimony And Revisionism

Published

3 years ago

January 2, 2023

News Net Global

Lest Nigerian Youths Be Deceived By Obasanjo’s Sanctimony And Revisionism

By: Dele Alake

On the whole, the latest epistolary misadventure by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo is a gratuitous insult on the collective intelligence of Nigerians. In particular, his laborious attempt to prey on the innocence of much younger generation constitutes a grievous assault on public morality, seeking to force morsels of sheer falsehood down the throats of a demography perhaps too young to comprehend events which Obasanjo furiously tried to misrepresent.
It is noteworthy that it was the Obasanjo administration that abolished the teaching of history in Nigerian schools ostensibly to aid this kind of historical revisionism he routinely engages in; a decision now happily reversed by the President Muhammadu Buhari government.

Contestants for the presidential office in Nigeria routinely consult with and court Obasanjo , not because of his electoral value which is minuscule, but out of respect for his status as a former Head of State. It is, however, obvious that the man himself has no respect for that status, as he continuously embroils himself in partisan politics in a most pretentious and dishonest manner and refuses to rise to the demands of statesmanship.

In the statement entitled “My Appeal To All Nigerians Particularly Young Nigerians”, General Obasanjo rtd plumbed into new depth in hubris and hypocrisy never seen in all his career as political busybody after office who seems to see Nigeria as a movie where only he is the all-conquering hero while others are doomed villains. Some psychoanalysts are wont to diagnose this Obasanjo’s peculiar political affliction as post-power-withdrawal-syndrome (PPWS): false omniscience compounded by chronic inability to accept the reality of being out of political office.

Even in the US, whose variant of presidential system of government we practise, former Presidents maintain a decorous distance from government after office, opting wisely not to be a distraction to their successors. Not so the meddlesome Obasanjo.

That same mindset led him to stab MKO Abiola in the back in faraway Harare, Zimbabwe, by saying he was not “a messiah” even when most Nigerians had started viewing the winner of the June 12 polls of 1993 as the symbol of democracy after the annulment. It soon came to light that whereas a group of retired generals including Muhammadu Buhari and Theophilus Danjuma were resolute in their call for the de-annulment through the platform of a “committee of elders”, Obasanjo, the supposed “convener”, was said to have plotted the floating of an “interim government” to replace the now discredited Babangida regime.

While Obasanjo’s right to support any candidate of his choice in the forthcoming presidential polls must be recognized as guaranteed by the Nigerian constitution, how condescending of him to decree his preference on Nigerians based on a cocktail of bare-faced lies and crude revisionism. In fact, there’s a widespread allegation that the latest gambit by the political busybody of Ota is part of a larger nefarious scheme to incite disorder around the country with a view to clearing the grounds for the resurrection of his favourite contraption: interim national government (ING) !

Third term agenda

Contrary to his posturing as a democrat who came to office for the second time at a questionable age 62 and left at 70, Obasanjo’s feverish gamble for life presidency between 2005 and 2006 was actually thwarted by a pro-democracy coalition of progressives like Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and several others.

Bribes ranging from N50m to N100m (amounting to whopping N20bn of public funds) were allegedly handed over to federal lawmakers to approve a clause smuggled into the list of amendments proposed by a “confab” (hurriedly set up by Obasanjo), removing the cap on the two-term limit enshrined by the 1999 constitution. Despite the outrage expressed across the land, Obasanjo had soldiered on through his battalion of political foot soldiers. But on the day the contentious bill was to be decided, the lawmakers voted their conscience and stood firm on the side of Nigerians against Obasanjo’s imperial life presidency ambition.
Is it not therefore ironic that a man unwilling to vacate Aso Rock at 70 (in 2007) is now moralizing against anyone above age 70 aspiring for the same office today? It’s always been known that Obasanjo suffers deep insecurities manifesting in his “Mr. Too Know” antics. But never did anyone imagine that the chicken farmer would carry his accustomed charlatanism as far as arrogating medical expertise to himself as to now also be certifying who is fit or not for the rigor of office through nothing but the estimation of the eyes based on “my own personal experience”.

Obasanjo’s waste versus Buhari’s prudence

While it can be said that prevailing anaemic circumstances of the world economy in 2015 were not quite favorable to the Buhari administration upon takeoff, we make bold to say that, contrary to doomsday scenario painted by Obasanjo, President Muhammadu Buhari has been more prudent in the management of the little the country has earned. How ironic that Buhari that inherited a wrecked economy in 2015 from PDP under the influence of Obasanjo is now being blamed for the hardship suffered by Nigerians, hardship that truly resulted from systemic damage inflicted by PDP’s 16 years of sustained squandermania. Discerning Nigerians surely know better. They can see and feel the relief brought about by Buhari’s rail revolution, massive investment in infrastructure like the second Niger Bridge and numerous roads built or reconstructed across the country. However, despite that oil price averaged $100 per barrel for most of the Obasanjo years and two subsequent PDP administrations, Nigeria has very little or nothing to show for it, other than tales of bare-faced looting and waste for 16 years.

Under Obasanjo’s watch, a senate panel found that national assets — indeed our common patrimony built from independence in 1960 — worth $100bn were auctioned to cronies and fronts at a ridiculous $1.3bn through a dubious privatization programme. This constituted the root of the massive joblessness in the country.

Also, House of Reps committee found that Obasanjo wasted $16bn on the so-called power projects. Rather than electricity, Nigerians experienced worst darkness. According to his deputy then and incidentally the present PDP’s flag bearer, Atiku Abubakar, “In some cases, some contractors were paid 100 percent of the contract sum’’ …without performance !
So pervasive was sleaze under Obasanjo that Atiku, while testifying before another senate committee in 2007, revealed that his boss was fond of “sending handwritten notes to PTDF (Petroleum Trust Development Fund) to release money to buy vehicles for his girlfriends”.

In one last act of moral, political and financial atrocity in 2007, Obasanjo literally commandeered captains of industry and PDP governors to Ota to raise over N7bn for the building of his personal library (memorably dubbed “Presidential Laundromat” by Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka).
For a man who enrolled in PDP in 1998 with only N20,000 reportedly in his bank account after a stint in prison, Obasanjo left power in 2007 stupendously wealthy with vast farm estates in many states and private university.

False claim of mentorship

Typically, megalomaniac Obasanjo lied that the leading presidential candidates who had visited him addressed him as “mentor” and that, according to him, their respective quest for the No 1 job in the land was to continue where he stopped his “good work”. We presume that included Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. It is another shameless lie by a meddlesome interloper in an orgy of self-adulation.

To start with, many will easily recall that the same Obasanjo had issued a statement shortly after the APC candidate paid him a courtesy call months back categorically stating that the visit was “non-political” in response to “misconception in a section of the media”. So, how come this contradiction now? In any case, keen watchers of political events will attest that Tinubu’s accustomed progressive leaning is antithetical to Obasanjo’s imperial messianism. It is an ideological contestation dating back to 1999.

All through Obasanjo’s eight-year imperial presidency, Tinubu’s fidelity to progressive ideology led him to challenge Obasanjo’s excesses through the instrumentality of the courts and constitutionalism. Indeed, through constant diligent litigations, Lagos under Tinubu was able to win over 13 landmark cases against the federal government at the Supreme Court that not only enriched constitutionalism but also extended the frontiers of federalism in Nigeria.

Tinubu’s opposition also manifested in his refusal to be deceived by Obasanjo’s antics in 2003 in the latter’s desperation to capture the South-west and end his personal shame as a President without political home-base. It is on record that Tinubu emerged the only Yoruba governor who survived Obasanjo’s onslaught against the entire South West. Ever so treacherous, Obasanjo betrayed the other five AD governors by rigging them out of office, with Tinubu becoming “the last man standing”.

His petty hatred for Asiwaju and lack of vision led him into scuttling the first-of-its-kind Independent Power Project (IPP) initiated by Lagos State in 1999. It also explained Obasanjo’s illegal withholding of councils fund belonging to Lagos for over two years following the creation of 37 additional council areas. Even after the Supreme Court ruling directed the release, Obasanjo continued his unconstitutional perfidy of withholding the state’s local government revenue, to punish Lagos. The funds were not released until President Umar Yar’Adua assumed power in 2007.

Indeed, the redrawing of Nigeria’s electioneering calendar is a testament of Obasanjo’s rigging inclination. Today, off-season governorship contests are organised by INEC in states like Edo, Osun, Ekiti, and Kogi due to the theft of popular mandate under Obasanjo’s watch, having declared the 2007 polls a “do or die” for his party. In Edo, Osun and Ekiti in particular, it is a well-known fact that Tinubu spear-headed the struggle to retrieve the stolen mandates through the court. So, how could Obasanjo therefore list Tinubu among his “mentees” who wish to continue where he “stopped”?

He mischievously twisted Tinubu’s ‘Emilokan’ statement before the APC presidential primaries out of context in a futile bid to de-market the APC candidate. The very poor understanding of that phrase by a supposed Yoruba (?) man will only fuel doubts already expressed in some informed quarters about Obasanjo’s roots. Tinubu made his statement within the context of the internal dynamics of APC , and the fact that he later emerged as candidate by an overwhelming majority shows that his claims are infallible. Nobody worked as hard as Tinubu to win the support of delegates during the primaries and today he is second to none in aggressively seeking the support of voters across the country to achieve success in next month’s elections. Ironically, the only concrete reason Obasanjo offers for supporting Peter Obi is that it is “the turn” of the South-East! What a contradiction!!

READ ALSO: https://newsng.ng/reuters-mercenary-journalism-and-nigerian-military/

Capacity to identify and nurture leaders

It is laughable that Obasanjo has the temerity to deem himself qualified to lecture Nigerians on who to elect as a leader. Throughout his political trajectory in public life, he has unfailingly demonstrated gross incompetence in this regard. In 1979, his military regime was designed to produce the weakest leadership in a political terrain that had such proven leadership talents as Adamu Ciroma, Aminu Kano, Maitama Sule, Waziri Ibrahim, Nnamdi Azikwe or Obafemi Awolowo among others. In 2007, after his two-term tenure and the failure of his third term agenda, he influenced the emergence of two PDP successors who failed partly because of weak institutional foundation he had laid and partly because of their own limitations. Obasanjo in a fit of mindless hypocrisy claims that strength and vitality are requirements for the presidency but was the same man who knew of the late good man Umaru Yar a dua’s terminal condition and still used the coercive agencies of state to impose him on Nigeria ! The late president Yar adua himself publicly acknowledged that the 2007 election under Obasanjo was extremely flawed . This is in sharp contrast to Lagos State where the Tinubu administration designed a 25-year development Masterplan for the state and inspired a succession of competent leaders who not only sustained but also improved on the legacies of Tinubu’s administration, making Lagos the fastest growing in Nigeria and the 5th largest economy in Africa today.
In endorsing Obi, Obasanjo resorted to verbose and nebulous generalities without telling Nigerians in concrete terms what were his preferred candidate’s track record of performance as governor in Anambra state.

The shame of Anambra

Perhaps the most laughable of the megalomaniac stunts by Obasanjo was naming Peter Obi among his “mentees”. Older Nigerians and just anyone old enough to comprehend series of abominable occurrences on the political landscape around 2003 must have reacted to such claim with derisive laughter and guffaw. It is perhaps a reflection of Obasanjo’s penchant to prey on the poor memory of the average Nigerian that he now seeks to dress Obi, his one-time victim, as a “mentee”. Given the well-known facts of history, many are left wondering if it was not the same Obi that Obasanjo’s thuggish enforcer, Chris Uba, robbed of Anambra governorship in 2003. It took the refusal of Dr. Chris Ngige to surrender Anambra’s treasury to Obasanjo’s surrogates (Chris Uba and co) for Nigerians to know that the polls were rigged in favour of PDP in Anambra at the expense of APGA’s Peter Obi. While the dirty fight lasted between the electoral robbers in Anambra, the police were implicated in a botched attempt to kidnap the then sitting Anambra governor and force him to resign from office. When that failed, hapless people of Anambra woke up one morning soon afterward to witness a reign of terror unleashed on Awka, the state capital, with Government House and other government structures either razed or vandalized by armed thugs. Fingers were pointed at Chris Uba, the self-styled “godfather of all godfathers”. While the show of shame lasted, it came to light that the Uba was working for Obasanjo. When asked to clarify his relationship with Chris Ubah during a Presidential Chat transmitted live by NTA soon afterwards, Obasanjo shamelessly downplayed the infamy by describing him as an “enthusiastic party (PDP) supporter” in Anambra!

With this brazen attempt at revisionism by this political megalomaniac, discerning Nigerians are unlikely to miss the audacity of willful mendacity. This speaks to Obasanjo’s incorrigible penchant to always twist facts, manufacture lies to launder his dirty undergarment and project himself as Nigeria’s only messiah since independence.

But informed Nigerian voters surely can see through Obasanjo’s chicanery. That is why they will not heed his self-serving call. Rather, come February 25, they will go out in large numbers and vote Asiwaju Bola Tinubu as the only one among the present parade of candidates with the requisite capacity, competence and character to leap Nigeria from a country of potentials to one of greatness.

Obasanjo’s selfish plot to impose a puppet and regain his lost maniacal grip on power shall fail , again…just as his perfidious and pernicious third term agenda !

Alake , former commissioner for Information and Strategy Lagos State, is the Adviser Media, Communications and Public Affairs of the APC Presidential Campaign Council.

Lest Nigerian Youths Be Deceived By Obasanjo’s Sanctimony And Revisionism

Politics

The Unmatched Humility of Vice President Kashim Shettima: A Testament to Leadership in Nigeria

Published

2 weeks ago

October 14, 2025

News Net Global

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

Published

3 weeks ago

October 7, 2025

News Net Global

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.”

Published

4 weeks ago

September 30, 2025

News Net Global

Vice President, Kashim Shettima

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.”