Recently, two weeks ago to be precise, I found myself in an ambush, facing something akin to a Spanish Inquisition. I had attended the wedding of a friend’s daughter in London. There I met some old Nigerian friends, some based in Nigeria, who I hadn’t seen for several years. We exchanged pleasantries and banters. Then, one of them said: “I read your newspaper column, why are you always critical of President Bola Tinubu.” He said being resident in the UK, I was detached from the reality in Nigeria and couldn’t recognise the “great things” Tinubu was doing. The others agreed, and said Tinubu was “really transforming Nigeria.”
He’s Nigeria’s “saviour”, they claimed. I was aghast but immediately detected Yoruba solidarity at work – they are all Yoruba! When I asked whether their views were shared across Nigeria, they said only the Hausa/Fulani and the Igbos really disliked Tinubu. But why? Well, because Tinubu’s removal of the fuel subsidy and scrapping of the fixed exchange rates hurt the Northern elite, which, for years, benefitted from the distorted subsidy and exchange-rate regimes. The North also hated his “sensible” decentralisation” agenda and “meritocratic” Yoruba-dominated appointments. As for the Igbos, what do you expect? They are mostly “Obidients”, supporters of Peter Obi, Tinubu’s arch-rival! Tinubu is doing extremely well, they insisted, albeit ruffling feathers!
That was not the first time I had heard Yoruba elite – middle and upper classes – strenuously defend President Tinubu. To them, Nigeria’s current challenges are the handiwork of Tinubu’s political enemies. Ask about poverty, they would say it’s not Tinubu’s problem. Tinubu has passed savings from subsidy removal to state governments, which are now unusually awash with money. So, it’s the governors’ responsibility to tackle poverty, not Tinubu’s. Ask about insecurity, they would tell you it’s not Tinubu’s fault but the nefarious work of his enemies. They would echo Pastor Adeboye, General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), who recently said that “Tinubu has done his bit” on insecurity, having “given instructions to his subordinates”.
Suddenly, the buck no longer stops at the top! But think about it. If the debilitating insecurity, grinding poverty and general malaise happened under a non-Yoruba president, would the Yoruba be so generous and make excuses for that president? Of course not. Recent history shows otherwise. The Yoruba were the most vociferous and most visceral attackers and traducers of Presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Muhammadu Buhari during their respective presidencies. Under those two presidents, the Yoruba allowed their scepticism to descend into cynicism. But under Tinubu, they harbour not even a shred of scepticism. Well, the Yoruba-Tinubu kumbaya is a subject for another column. My focus here is the view of the Yoruba elite that Tinubu is Nigeria’s saviour.
Those hailing President Tinubu’s “transformative” leadership base their assessment on his reforms since coming to power in 2023. The most eye-catching of the reforms are the withdrawal of the fuel subsidy, the scrapping of the pegged exchange rates and floating of the naira, the introduction of the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), the push for local government financial autonomy, the tax reform and, latterly, the commencement of the legislative processes for the creation of state police. In truth, considering the above list, at least at face value, it’s hard to accuse Tinubu of inaction; he has a personal zeal for reform. But here’s the critical question: would Tinubu’s reforms turn Nigeria around. Put more specifically, would they tackle poverty and engender prosperity? Would they end low and jobless growth? Would they guarantee security of lives and property? Would they drastically reduce, if not eliminate, corruption? Would they induce government effectiveness and guarantee the delivery of essential services and basic amenities? The list goes on. But crucially, any reform that doesn’t generate prosperity and significantly improve living standards is a failed reform. Unfortunately, Tinubu’s reforms are hardly transformative.
First, there’s the credibility problem. Take the fuel subsidy. Tinubu mobilised the country against President Jonathan’s attempt to withdraw the fuel subsidy in 2012, accusing him of breaking the social contract with the people. When I put this point to my friends in London, they said “that’s politics”. But if withdrawing the fuel subsidy is such a great reform, for which Tinubu is now hailed as Nigeria’s saviour, why was he vehemently against it? Why did he sponsor the “Occupy Nigeria” protests to torpedo it in 2012? Take also the forex regime. In the eight years that President Buhari pegged naira’s exchange rate, Tinubu didn’t once speak against the policy, even though Nigeria was heavily haemorrhaging foreign exchange through forex arbitrage.
Why? Of course, Tinubu was right to remove the fuel subsidy and scrap the fixed exchange rate, but those decisions were, respectively, twelve years and eight years too late. Had Tinubu not mobilised against the fuel subsidy removal in 2012 and had Buhari not introduced the pegged exchange rate in 2015, Nigeria would have been a lot better off economically today. Sadly, by the time Tinubu was consumed by “courage” and the zeal of a convert to abolish the fuel subsidy and fixed exchange rate in 2023, the economy couldn’t withstand their unintended effects, namely, deepening poverty and massive naira devaluation. These consequences have been locked in, with irreversible and costly impacts, such as ever-deepening poverty and misery. That’s not transformative leadership!
Take the other reforms. NELFUND is a good idea. But where would the graduates, burdened with enormous debt, find gainful jobs in an economy where less than 15 per cent of the working-age population is employed in the formal sectors, according to the World Bank. Perhaps, they would have to “sell akara, roasted corn and kuli-kuli” to eke out a living, as President Tinubu’s wife recently counselled the jobless. But NELFUND’s shortsightedness apart, the scheme is beset by maladministration and corruption, with large disparities reported between “disbursed” funds and funds actually paid for tuition fees, while students never regularly receive the minuscule N20,000 monthly stipends. Similar, more generous, schemes run smoothly elsewhere, but Nigeria’s minimalist version is dysfunctional.
Then, there’s local government “autonomy” for which Tinubu is also hailed. In July 2024, the Federal Government secured a Supreme Court judgement that local governments’ Federation Account allocations must be paid directly to them and not through the state governments, as the Constitution prescribes. But two years later, that judgement has not been implemented, precisely because, as I argued at the time, it was a perverse verdict. Conflicts between state and local governments must be resolved through a political and constitutional settlement, not judicial activism. But in his quest for populist but unimplementable “reforms”, Tinubu seized on the Supreme Court verdict as a major achievement. The same misguided zeal is behind the current push for the politically driven “state police”. Truth is, ramshackle “state police” won’t end insecurity in Nigeria. Only a holistic, root-and-branch restructuring of Nigeria along regional lines, with sophisticated regional police, can guarantee security and prosperity.
Which, finally, brings us to the most thoughtful of Tinubu’s reforms: the tax reform. I said “thoughtful” because the tax reform went through rigorous design and consultation. Yet, if the tax reform aims to increase revenue mobilisation it’s likely to fail because no tax system can do so in a largely unproductive economy, of which the informal sector accounts for nearly 90 per cent. Recently, the World Bank said Nigeria’s challenge is not high debt but low revenue. But low revenue is pushing Nigeria into high debt. Domestic borrowing reached N40.38trn in May 2026, and the government recently advertised for Transaction Advisers in the Financial Times for a prospective Eurobond issuance, increasing foreign debt. Some say Tinubu is focusing on the macroeconomy. But the macroeconomy, while a bit stable, is not strong. Yet only a stable and strong macroeconomy can undergird a productive and prosperous economy. So, yes, Tinubu has shown a reforming zeal. But, no, his reforms are not so transformative and seismic as to make him Nigeria’s saviour!
*Dr Fasan is the author of ‘In The National Interest: The Road to Nigeria’s Political, Economic and Social Transformation’, available at RovingHeights bookstores.
