President Goodluck Jonathan
The
detractors of President Goodluck Jonathan will retort scornfully that
he is a total failure, while his ardent supporters will scream that he
is a huge success. But before we decide where to place him, let us look
at a few indices upon which to assess him.
Through the Doctrine of Necessity by the Senate,
President Jonathan was made the Acting President of Nigeria on February
9, 2010, when it was clear that the de jure President, Alhaji Umaru Musa
Yar’Adua, was seriously ill despite claims to the contrary by his
aides.
With that, Jonathan became fully in charge. Upon the death of
Yar’Adua on May 5, 2010, Jonathan was sworn in as the President the next
day. At the presidential election held on April 16, 2011, Jonathan
polled 22,495,187 votes to beat his closest rival and candidate of the
Congress for Progressive Change, Maj-Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), who
polled 12,214,853 votes. And on May 29, 2011, Jonathan was sworn in
again as President on the strength of his victory at the poll rather
than on good luck.
Therefore, President Jonathan has been the
substantive chief executive officer of Nigeria for more than two years
now. That is enough time to gauge his performance as the leader of the
most populous nation in Africa and the seventh most populous nation in
the world.
What, however, are the minuses of President Jonathan?
His biggest negative, many will say, is his inability to stop the
violence from the Islamic fundamentalist group, Boko Haram. From a
radical group that fought policemen with guns, bows and arrows in 2009
in Borno State , Boko Haram metamorphosed speedily into a bomb-making,
bomb-throwing, suicide-mission-savvy group that has become a terror in
Nigeria.
A few of the institutions the group has attacked include the
Nigeria Police Force Headquarters in Abuja on June 16, 2011; the United
Nations building in Abuja on August 26, 2011; St Theresa’s Catholic
Church in Madala, Niger State on December 25, 2011; and the office of
Thisday newspapers in Abuja and Kaduna on April 26, 2012.
Even though the security authorities have recorded
occasional results against this group, the fact that Boko Haram has
continued to operate in some parts of the North, causing bloodshed and
anguish, is a factor that irritates Nigerians. Nigerians have pointed
out that since the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda attack on the United
States and the July 7, 2005 attack on the United Kingdom, no other
attack has succeeded in these two countries. It is therefore viewed as a
failure on the part of the President.
Another point is corruption, which has been a sore
point facing the Jonathan’s administration. Despite the claims of the
President that he has zero-tolerance to corruption, the fight against
corruption cannot be described as robust since he became the President.
The President has not displayed righteous anger against the pervading
influence of corruption in the polity. Even though the administration of
former President Olusegun Obasanjo was viewed as selective in its fight
against corruption, yet there was a clear sign that the war on
corruption during his tenure was fervent and yielding results.
Nigerians, especially public officers, were on their toes, for the fear
of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission led by Mr. Nuhu Ribadu
was the beginning of wisdom.
The economy is another point. Even though the economy
of Nigeria is adjudged one of the fastest growing in the world,
hovering at about seven per cent rate in the past few years, it beats
economic logic that the poverty rate has continued to rise. According to
records, about 70 per cent of Nigerians live below the poverty line.
The unemployment rate is put at 21 per cent, placing Nigeria at the
166th position in the world. These are pointers to the fact that even
though the Nigerian economy is generating wealth, the wealth continues
to disappear and never gets into the hands of the masses.
But it has not been all woes and misery since
Jonathan became the President. One glaring achievement of his
administration, for which his detractors try as much as possible not to
give him credit, is the level of transparency with which elections have
been conducted since he took charge. Unlike before when it was rare for
the ruling Peoples Democratic Party to lose an elective office, the PDP
has lost many states that it had been in control of. For example, from
controlling five of the six states in the South-West in 2003, the party
now controls no state in that zone. In the election that just held in
Edo State on July 14, the PDP lost too.
Not only that it lost, the
election was adjudged transparent to a large extent. But more
importantly, unlike in the past when up to100 per cent turnout of voters
was recorded in many states – which was clearly a sign of electoral
manipulation – most of the elections conducted under Jonathan’s watch
did not record up to 60 per cent turnout: a sign that ghosts no longer
vote in Nigeria as they used to do.
There is also the case of revamping of derelict
infrastructure. Even though some may say that the pace is slow, there is
a clear evidence that infrastructure that had been left unattended to
for decades is being taken care of. One is the airports, which were a
source of embarrassment to the nation.
Almost all the nation’s airports
are currently undergoing extreme makeover. Roads are also being
revamped. Some roads such as the Benin-Sagamu Expressway and
Apapa-Oworonshoki Road, Lagos, which were in a sorry state, for many
years, are being rehabilitated. Electricity supply, which had been a
sore point for decades too, is receiving urgent attention, and there is a
noticeable improvement in that sector. The abandoned railway
transportation is also being revived.
Agriculture, which used to be the mainstay of
Nigeria’s economy before the oil boom, is gradually being brought back
to the front-row. Fertiliser distribution, which was always a thorny
issue, seemed to have been tackled.
Since Jonathan took over, Nigerians seem to have
forgotten that petrol scarcity, especially towards the end of the year,
used to be the norm. Even though there are still unresolved issues about
fuel subsidy matters, evidenced in the current scarcity, buying
petroleum products had stopped being nightmarish in Nigeria for over two
years now.
Our foreign policy, which used to leave us at the
mercy of other countries, appears to have received a boost. Nigeria has
put its foot down in dealing with countries that treated her shabbily.
In addition, while the nation had jumped into conflicts in West Africa
headlong hitherto (with the attendant huge loss of men and materials),
since the coming of Jonathan, Nigeria has been vocal and in the
fore-front in taking well-informed positions in conflicts in Africa, as
she did on Ivory Coast and Libya, but our resources and men are no
longer wasted fighting for countries that never give us credit after all
our efforts.
In the final analysis, do we then describe Jonathan
as a failure or a success? Hardliners hardly change their positions, no
matter the strength of evidence before them. But for me, I would neither
describe Jonathan as a success nor a failure. Rather, I would say that
he has lost several opportunities to worm his way into the hearts of
Nigerians but has taken advantage of a few. He has the potential to be a
great president but seems to be too cautious not to step on toes.
Nigeria’s situation is so serious that it demands robust and prompt
attention and treatment. President Goodluck Jonathan must increase his
pace or he will be out of rhythm.
•Onwuka, a brand management strategist in Lagos, wrote in via azonwuka@yahoo.com
