In the span of just two weeks, two pivotal events underscored Nigeria’s enduring challenges: economic hardship, governance failures, and an ever-deepening trust deficit between those in power and the people they govern. The visit of the Patriots Group, led by Chief Emeka Anyaoku, and the recent National Council of State meeting sparked new conversations about Nigeria’s future. However, these gatherings—more political theatre than substantive discourse—have done little to address the core issues facing the country. At their root lies a crisis of governance that fails to address Nigeria’s structural flaws, lack of political accountability, and the detachment of its ruling elite from the pressing needs of ordinary citizens.
Central to these discussions is the growing call for a “people’s democratic constitution,” an idea championed by Chief Anyaoku. His advocacy for a national constituent assembly to draft a constitution that truly reflects Nigeria’s diverse society is not new, yet it has never been more urgent. The 1999 Constitution, a vestige of the departing military regime, lacks democratic legitimacy, having been imposed without genuine popular consent. For over two decades, this flawed document has stifled accountability and entrenched civilian autocrats who operate with little regard for the democratic values they claim to uphold. As a result, it has contributed to Nigeria’s governance crisis and the disconnect between government and the governed.
The National Council of State, in its recent meeting, failed to confront these underlying issues. Instead of using the opportunity to offer genuine solutions, the Council ended up delivering little more than a symbolic vote of confidence in President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Governor Abdulrahman Abdulrasaq of Kwara State touted this endorsement as an achievement, yet it ignored the escalating social unrest and economic suffering that have accompanied Tinubu’s economic reforms. What should have been a forum for meaningful debate and a strategic rethinking of the nation’s direction became another exercise in political self-congratulation, a missed opportunity to address the real crises gripping the nation.
“These are the very challenges that demand urgent action, yet they continue to be ignored by a political system that protects those in power from both risk and accountability.”
This is where the core of the problem lies: Nigeria’s ruling elite seem more focused on maintaining their grip on power than addressing the structural issues afflicting the country. The August 12, 2024, BusinessDay editorial, “Can we stitch a fractured nation back together?” outlined some critical issues: bridging the north-south divide, rethinking urban governance, addressing Southeast alienation, rebuilding trust, reforming the police, and uniting the political class around a shared national vision. These are the very challenges that demand urgent action, yet they continue to be ignored by a political system that protects those in power from both risk and accountability.
What the Council of State should have done is evident. It should have issued a communiqué grounded in empathy and realism, acknowledging the economic pain ordinary Nigerians are enduring. The Council needed to recognise the legitimacy of the nationwide protests that have erupted in response to Tinubu’s reforms—reforms that have pushed millions deeper into poverty. The Council should have responded to protesters’ calls for better governance, lower costs of living, and a more inclusive political system. Instead, by glossing over these critical issues, the Council only deepened the public’s sense of alienation and disillusionment with their political leaders.
Without a fundamental rethinking of the country’s governance structure—without a truly democratic constitution—Nigeria will continue its downward spiral. The ruling elite must come to terms with the fact that political power is neither a birthright nor immune to the demands of accountability. The consequences of ignoring the people’s grievances are clear: social unrest, economic instability, and the further erosion of national unity.
Chief Anyaoku’s proposal for a national constituent assembly offers a potential solution—a “silver bullet” that could help Nigeria move forward. But for it to be effective, this assembly must be truly representative of Nigeria’s diverse population, free from elite manipulation, and empowered to draft a constitution that genuinely reflects the democratic aspirations of the people. Only then can the country begin to rebuild the trust between its government and citizens, forge a collective vision for the future, and heal the deep divisions that threaten its stability.
Until that happens, these high-profile meetings and editorials—however well-intentioned—will remain little more than rhetorical exercises. They may generate headlines, but without the courage to tackle Nigeria’s fundamental governance crisis, they will be nothing more than echoes in the void of a broken political system. The country’s elites may continue to speak of reforms and reconciliation, but without meaningful action, their words will remain hollow, unable to bridge the widening gap between the rulers and the ruled.
