Who will be Nigeria's President in 2023?
Qries Girl in a jacket

Who will be Nigeria's President in 2023?

By Segun Ige

NIGERIA’s ThisDay newspaper, on August 9, while posing the big-story question – “2023: Who Leads Nigeria?” – highlighted particularly a certain number of public figures who potentially could be messianic in quelling the virulent storms of political demagogueries the country has since been enwombed in their own special functions of competence and performance.

Meanwhile, on August 6, General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida chiefly speculated on the Arise News Channel exclusive interview the criteria from which to pull out the ideal leader from the cesspool of leadership dilemma.

In that interview, IBB said the ideal president would be the person who’s well-travelled, friendly and notably within the age bracket of 60. Ageism, I believe, is not a sure-footed criterion to lean upon, as we have Bill Clinton and Barack Obama bagging presidency in their 40s and performing enviably wonderfully well.

Clearly, the 2023 presidential election is undoubtedly much at the heart of Nigerian leaders than any other present problem the country is embattled and bedeviled with. As extreme domestic terrorism gains more sweeping power across the country, presidential wannabes continue to make intensive, incisive and intentional low-key campaigns and calibrations. Party-leader reshuffling and massive cross-carpeting are necessarily born out of the bid to be more grounded and firm in winning lots and lots of presidential polls, or even primaries.

The question of who will be the president come 2023 is, relatively speaking, an easy-as-well-as-difficult one to answer. Easy because the guttersnipes, the “out and down”, for obvious reasons, would not dare jump the gun into the grapevine of elective despotism or nepotism; difficult because the mudslingers, the “in and up”, do find it abundantly arduous ‘rounding up’ the table.

This is not supposedly a fact-or-fiction speculation. And the situation, needless to say, is not as crass as one might think.

Repudiating the a posteriori is as preposterous as saying the sun rises in the west. Inasmuch as it could be postulated, a priori, that the sun rises as such, then it should be very much unsurprising to experience, as usual, undemocratic usurpatory pronouncement, however ‘unseen’.

And it’s not a shame that these sailors of slummery and advocates of anarchy are foremost forebears of fractional distillation of nationhood, that is to say, nation-beingness. While the book of hope has been closed by the sit-back-to-see-what-happens “spectators”, the nervously apprehensive(potentially dictatorial!) “participators” are earnestly contending the fate of the fateful day.

If the “economic arm” and “political arm”, as one argues, emanating from the same “body”, are essentially complementary to achieve a uniform purpose, why do they find it troubling and distressing co-functioning? Simply because the same blood isn’t running in the veins? In the same vein, how democratically accreditable is it to have these arms, again from the same body, serve the very purpose, ideal and existence of a ‘nation’?

Quite arbitrarily, there could be some sort of conflictual interest inspired spiritually by the instinctual propensities of self-aggrandisement and self-enguzzlement. The conditional probability, I must stay, really proves that such practice is fundamentally far-fetched, and either should go maimed for sustainable political progression, or for avoidance of intellectual detestation.

The mind and the method of governance, not really the 1999 Constitution per se, principally ought to change. Every other humanly possible desired change would be crucially consequent upon that. Once the mind’s been changed, our method of leadership would clearly be distinguishable for the democratisation of the Americas.

“We the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria” ought to come to the pertinent realisation of self-actualising a functional federalist system special, suitable and soothing to our firmament, temperament and attainment.

And this special kind of leadership structure should be measured on political, economic and ethical grounds. And I trust the socio-economic scientists would be unreservedly bearing to serve their enviable epistemic humility. History does not disproportionately have a lot to do with the lot of a new Nigeria in its very newest version.

Consequently, having been ushered into an ideally new political age, our democratic processes should be purged of all forms of hypocritically palatial manufacturing and manifestation of consent born of the “necessary illusions” to even more viscously perpetuate the chasm between the unbecomingly “bewildered herd” and the conventionally “programmed nerds”.

Vanguard News Nigeria

Post a Comment