By. Mazi. Godson. Azu. BA. Hons. MA. FOSHA. AMILM. MIoD.
“Every society gets the kind of leadership it deserves, and every leadership reflects the contradictions of its society.”
— Claude Ake, Democracy and Development in Africa
Nigeria stands today at a profound historical junction. The political trumpet is sounding from South to North, East to West—signalling not merely electoral competition, but a deeper struggle over the soul, structure, and survival of the Nigerian state. Beneath the noise of elite contestation lies a more fundamental question: Is Nigeria moving toward reformative change, or entrenching continuity through elite reproduction?
As the country inches toward the 2027 General Elections, pressures are mounting across political, economic, institutional, and civic fronts. Legislative gridlocks, reform delays, elite defections, and rising popular discontent suggest that Nigeria is no longer negotiating routine democratic politics—but a stress test of its nation-state project.
⸻
The Structural Fault Lines: Reform Deferred, Trust Eroded
At the heart of current discontent lies the unfinished business of democratic reform. Key legislative and institutional reforms remain contested, diluted, or stalled:
• Electoral Reform and INEC Independence
• Judicial Reform and electoral justice
• Campaign finance regulation
• Devolution of powers and federal restructuring
Despite amendments to the Electoral Act in 2022, the credibility of elections remains fragile, undermined by logistical failures, judicial reversals, vote trading, and elite capture. As Richard Joseph warned decades ago, Nigeria’s political system continues to operate within a framework of “prebendalism—where public office is treated as personal entitlement rather than public trust” (Joseph, 1987).
The consequence is a democratic paradox: elections occur regularly, yet legitimacy declines steadily.
Zoning, Power Rotation, and the Crisis of National Consensus
The contest over the presidency remaining in the South versus northern efforts to “break the cycle” exposes the unresolved tension between constitutional democracy and informal power-sharing norms.
Zoning, while not constitutional, has functioned as a stability mechanism in a deeply plural society. Its erosion without a credible alternative risks reopening historical wounds of exclusion and domination.
As political scientist Eghosa Osaghae observes:
“In divided societies, elite consensus is not a luxury; it is a condition for survival.”
Ignoring this reality does not strengthen democracy—it destabilizes it.
Tinubuism, Atikuism, Obism — and the People
Nigeria’s political battlefield is increasingly framed around personalised political tendencies rather than ideological platforms:
Tinubuism
Characterised by:
• Elite coalition-building
• Patronage networks
• Strong party machinery
• Pragmatic, power-centric governance
Supporters see political mastery; critics see democratic centralism and transactional politics.
Atikuism
Rooted in:
• Liberal economic reform
• Privatisation and market-driven growth
• Longstanding elite continuity
However, Atiku Abubakar increasingly symbolizes political persistence without generational renewal. In a moment demanding fresh legitimacy, many argue—respectfully—that statesmanship now requires honourable retirement, not perpetual candidacy.
“When leaders overstay their political moment, they weaken both themselves and the system.”
— Francis Fukuyama
Obism (The Obidient Movement)
Represents:
• Youth-driven mobilisation
• Anti-establishment sentiment
• Moral protest against corruption and waste
Yet Obism faces its own challenge: can movement politics translate into durable institutions, national coalitions, and governing capacity?
As history shows—from Arab Spring movements to Occupy—mobilisation without structure risks dissipation.
And the People?
Caught between money politics, propaganda, ethnicity, and distrust, the Nigerian voter remains both the most invoked and the most marginalised actor in the system.
Money Politics and the Architecture of Distrust
Nigerian politics remains driven by:
• Money
• Personality
• Patronage
• Clientelism
• Media manipulation
Campaign finance excesses and vote-buying have transformed elections into investment ventures, where public office becomes a means of capital recovery.
Larry Diamond captures this danger succinctly:
“When elections are reduced to auctions, democracy becomes a shell—procedural without substance.”
Danger Signals: Defections, Democratic Dictatorship, and Mass Rebellion
The warning signs are unmistakable:
• Mass elite defections hollowing out parties
• Judicialisation of politics replacing popular mandate
• Centralisation of power under democratic cover
• Rising youth alienation and economic despair
This creates fertile ground for what scholars call “democratic dictatorship”—where electoral rituals coexist with authoritarian practice.
Equally dangerous is the opposite extreme: mass rebellion, civic disengagement, or unconstitutional expressions of frustration.
Neither path leads to stability.
Which Way Forward? Reform or Rupture
Nigeria’s choice is no longer abstract. It is immediate and consequential.
Change does not mean chaos. Continuity does not mean stagnation. What Nigeria urgently requires is:
1. Completion of meaningful electoral and judicial reforms
2. Respect for power-sharing norms while negotiating long-term restructuring
3. Generational transition in political leadership
4. Issue-based politics over personality cults
5. Rebuilding trust between state and citizen
As Chinua Achebe reminded the world:
“The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership.”
But leadership failure is not only about leaders—it is about systems that reward the wrong incentives.
Conclusion: 2027 as a Defining Moment
The 2027 General Election will not merely determine who governs Nigeria—it will signal whether the Nigerian state can still reform itself peacefully.
Between Tinubuism, Obism, residual Atikuism, and the silent majority of citizens, the decisive question remains:
Will Nigeria choose renewal through reform—or gamble with continuity until rupture becomes inevitable?
History suggests that nations rarely get unlimited chances.
