I would like to examine what I believe is one of the fundamental issues affecting our nation: our system of government. My analysis will focus on Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, which began on May 29, 1999, and continues to this day. Looking critically at the leaders who have governed Nigeria since then, one important question comes to mind: Why have we not witnessed the kind of rapid transformation experienced by countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), despite Nigeria’s vast human and natural resources? The UAE achieved remarkable economic and infrastructural development between 1999 and today. Nigeria possesses abundant resources that many believe could support even greater levels of development. Yet, the results have not met the expectations of many citizens. Why is this so?
President Olusegun Obasanjo came to power on May 29, 1999, under extraordinary circumstances. Having been imprisoned by the regime of General Sani Abacha and facing serious charges related to an alleged coup plot, many Nigerians saw his eventual emergence as President as divine intervention and believed it carried a special responsibility to transform the nation. While Obasanjo made notable contributions during his eight years in office, many expected even more far-reaching change given the circumstances of his rise. President Umar Musa Yar’Adua, who served from May 29, 2007, until his death on May 5, 2010, left many questions unanswered as his administration was cut short by ill health. President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, who served from May 6, 2010, to May 29, 2015, also rose from humble beginnings that resonated with ordinary Nigerians. Millions voted for him believing a leader who had experienced hardship would better understand their pain. Although he recorded achievements in several sectors, many felt his performance did not fully meet the enormous expectations that accompanied his presidency.
President Muhammadu Buhari’s election from May 29, 2015, to May 29, 2023, was historic. For the first time in Nigeria’s democratic history, an opposition party defeated a ruling party at the presidential level. Many Nigerians saw Buhari, a former military ruler, as a man of integrity who would tackle corruption decisively. By the end of his tenure, however, opinions were deeply divided. While supporters pointed to infrastructure and anti-corruption efforts, critics argued the economy had deteriorated and insecurity remained a major concern. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, in office since May 29, 2023, is widely regarded as one of Nigeria’s most strategic politicians, with Lagos’ economic growth often cited as evidence of his capacity. Since assuming office, he has implemented bold reforms, including fuel subsidy removal and naira floating. Economists describe these as necessary, but many Nigerians are yet to feel their impact as inflation remains high and the cost of living continues to rise.
This brings me to the central question: Why do we practise a system of government largely modeled after that of the United States, yet fail to achieve similar outcomes? Is the problem the system itself, the way it is implemented, or the strength of our political institutions? As a student of political science, I conducted a comparative analysis of four countries: the United Arab Emirates with a hybrid governance system; China with a state-led model; the United States with a presidential democratic system; and Canada with a parliamentary democratic system. My preliminary conclusion is that the American model was designed by Americans to suit their own history, culture, institutions, and national realities. That is one of the reasons it works effectively for them. I am not opposed to democracy. However, I believe Nigeria must honestly evaluate whether our current version of democracy is fully aligned with our social, economic, and political realities. Perhaps the challenge is not democracy itself, but that we have adopted a system that requires modification, adaptation, and stronger institutions to better suit the Nigerian environment. If Nigeria truly desires rapid and sustainable development, we must be willing to ask difficult questions about our institutions, our leadership, and whether our governance structure is helping or hindering national progress.
