A group of supporters of President Goodluck Jonathan has mounted a fresh defence of his administration, describing it as one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented governments in Nigeria’s history.
The group, which spoke during one of its recent meetings, acknowledged that the administration may have made what it described as a “strategic error” by failing to adequately communicate its policies and achievements to Nigerians from the outset.
According to the supporters, Jonathan initially adopted the posture of a “silent achiever”, allowing many of the projects and reforms undertaken by his administration to speak for themselves rather than aggressively publicising them.
They argued that the approach eventually became a major political disadvantage for the administration, as many Nigerians were allegedly unaware of some of the policies and developments being pursued by the government.
A senior member of the group said the failure to communicate the administration’s achievements effectively amounted to “lighting a major candle and putting it under a bushel”.
He recalled a conversation with a business associate in Las Vegas, United States, who, according to him, expressed the view that Nigeria could be making a mistake by failing to appreciate Jonathan’s leadership.
The member quoted his associate as saying that developments in Nigeria’s economy and the country’s growing attractiveness to investors were reasons foreign businesses could make long-term projections about operating in the country.
According to him, the businessman argued that investors generally require a predictable environment in which they can assess opportunities, make projections and plan for the future.
The supporters also drew attention to what they described as the administration’s approach to the rule of law, particularly its willingness to allow judicial decisions to stand even when such decisions affected elected officials.
They argued that reversals involving governorships, senatorial seats and other political offices should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of presidential weakness.
Rather, they said, respect for the rule of law should be regarded as an important feature of democratic governance.
The group further compared the period with previous years when impeachment battles involving elected public officials were, according to them, a prominent feature of Nigeria’s political landscape.
On education, the supporters pointed to the administration’s efforts in the sector, arguing that the frequency and duration of industrial disputes in tertiary institutions should be considered when assessing its record.
They also cited Nigeria’s handling of the 2014 Ebola outbreak as one of the administration’s notable achievements.
According to the group, Nigeria’s response to the outbreak demonstrated that the country was capable of managing a serious public-health emergency effectively and providing lessons for other countries.
One of the speakers argued that the significance of Nigeria’s Ebola response should not be dismissed, noting that international attention was drawn to the country’s experience in containing the disease.
He likened the development to major international achievements that could redefine how a country was perceived globally.
The group also addressed the security situation, particularly the Boko Haram insurgency, which posed a major challenge to the administration.
According to its leader, the government should be given credit for what the group described as improvements in the fight against insurgency, particularly after the situation had become a major national security concern.
“We got to a point where insurgency was really killing us and taking over the landscape. Of course, the head of the country takes responsibility,” he said.
“But if it all happens that, all of a sudden, the man is winning the battle, will we be most unfair to ourselves if we say it doesn’t matter?”
The supporters maintained that Jonathan had been largely misunderstood, arguing that the public perception of his administration did not always reflect what they considered its long-term objectives.
“We have found out that we have a man who has largely been misrepresented, and that is our principal, Mr. President,” the group leader said.
He also questioned whether “Transformation”, the slogan associated with the administration, adequately captured what he believed Jonathan was attempting to achieve.
According to him, the administration should instead have communicated its policies as part of a long-term plan for Nigeria.
He illustrated the point with the example of constructing an 18-storey building, arguing that the foundation would take considerably longer to complete than a bungalow even though the finished structure would eventually be visible.
“He ought to have communicated to his people that he was building an 18-storey building. If he did not communicate to people, they might lose patience with him,” he said.
The group further argued that Jonathan’s decision to pursue a national dialogue was significant, particularly against the backdrop of concerns over Nigeria’s unity.
According to the supporters, bringing different interests together to discuss the country’s challenges helped create an avenue for grievances and disagreements to be openly expressed.
They maintained that the willingness to engage in dialogue should be considered part of the administration’s contribution to maintaining national cohesion.
On the Almajiri School initiative, another member of the group argued that expanding access to education in Northern Nigeria was essential to addressing long-standing social and economic challenges.
He said disparities in educational opportunities could have serious consequences for the country’s future if left unresolved.
According to him, children who lacked access to quality education could become increasingly dependent on political and economic patronage, while those with better educational opportunities would have greater chances of becoming economically independent.
He argued that education remained one of the most effective ways of reducing dependency and creating opportunities for young Nigerians regardless of their geographical background.
The member also criticised what he described as the “born to rule” mentality, arguing that political power should not be regarded as the inherited entitlement of any particular group.
He maintained that expanding educational opportunities could help create a future Nigeria in which citizens compete on the basis of ability, opportunity and democratic participation rather than inherited political status.
“There will be a Nigeria where nobody will be born to rule and others are born to be subjects in their fathers’ house on their fathers’ land,” he said.
The group also turned its attention to the opposition All Progressives Congress, APC, urging its members to look beyond anger with the Jonathan administration when considering the future of the country.
According to the speakers, political parties should develop strong institutions rather than depend excessively on individual personalities.
They used the broom, which was then associated with the APC, as an illustration of the strength of collective action.
“The broom concept is that if I stand alone, you can break me, but if we are together, you can’t break us,” the speaker said.
He argued that even a politician widely regarded as possessing integrity would require strong institutions and a functional democratic structure to effectively govern the country.
The group also defended Jonathan’s preference for institutional processes over what it described as arbitrary executive action.
According to the speaker, democratic governance requires investigations, judicial processes and other institutional procedures, unlike military rule where decisions could be taken through military tribunals.
He argued that the creation of systems capable of preventing corruption and misuse of public resources was potentially more sustainable than simply relying on punishment after an offence had occurred.
“I believe that Jonathan, in being able to put road maps, structures and processes, may be slow, but the man has looked into the future,” he said.
The supporters maintained that the administration’s major challenge remained its failure to effectively communicate the direction of its policies and explain the long-term objectives behind them.
They argued that better communication could have helped Nigerians understand the reasoning behind some of the government’s decisions and given the administration greater opportunity to defend its record.
For the group, the debate over Jonathan’s re-election should therefore extend beyond immediate political frustrations and focus on the policies, institutions and long-term programmes it believes were being developed under his administration.
Their position comes amid an increasingly intense political debate over the 2015 presidential election, with supporters and opponents of the incumbent offering sharply different assessments of his record and the direction of the country.
0 Comments