By MA Iliasu
Niger Republic’s military leader, General Abdourahamane Tchiani, appeared in a video that has since gone viral, making big allegations against the Nigerian government, claiming a collusion between Nigeria and France to destabilize his country.
The Federal Government of Nigeria, in a statement via its mouthpiece, has since denied the allegations as non-existent and baseless, while the wave of public opinion has moved to trying to determine who is to be trusted between Nigeria’s government and the military leader.
So far, opinions are split across three different categories. One segment of Nigerians, whose number isn’t encouraging, have sided with their government by outrightly rejecting Tchiani’s allegations, citing many reasons that they believe have blown the military leader’s accusations out of the water regardless of the doubts that one might have against the Nigerian government.
Another segment, dominated by citizens feeling the heat of Tinubu’s reforms, has sided with General Tchiani simply because they prefer his integrity, even as an undemocratic dictator, over whichever word could come from their disappointing government’s mouth.
Meanwhile, the last segment is reluctant to commit to any side because they don’t trust either of them.The regional dilemma has, expectedly, turned into a battle of narratives. Each side is trying to see its narrative prevail.
And, obviously, General Tchiani is not doing any hard job convincing people compared to the Nigerian government, which so far is left to play catch-up. Any discerning mind could observe the massive role public trust is playing in that.
To the people, believability has always been a matter of trust, regardless of where the truth lies. And who is to be trusted is determined by how much effort is put in place to connect with the people, to inform the people, to be seen by the people, to be understood by the people, and for national issues to be made clear to the people—what’s called transparency and accountability, which consequently forms the integrity of the government and, finally, earns the trust of the people.
And in which of the mentioned metrics has the Nigerian government been doing well?President Tinubu’s administration so far has largely been dominated by his economic reforms, which, among others, include the fuel subsidy removal, the deregulation of the oil market, the floating of the exchange rate, and the proposed tax reform bill.
The first three have connived to exacerbate inflation and destroy purchasing power beyond anything witnessed in Nigeria’s democratic history, while the last one has promised to take more money out of people’s hands, make education more expensive, grant companies more discretion, and increase inequality among states.
With the exception of the tax reform bill, no citizen plays any role before the execution of the reforms. No citizen was asked whether the subsidy should be removed. No citizen was consulted on whether the oil industry should be deregulated.
No citizen was informed in any way on whether the exchange rate should be floated, despite Nigeria being a twenty-five-year-old uninterruptedly democratic country with Executive, Legislative, and Judicial arms that are constitutionally charged with checking the excesses of one another.
How could Nigerians then tell the difference and make a sound preference between an undemocratic foreign military dictator and their so-called democratic government that lacks transparency and integrity?All the reforms are largely Tinubu’s policies that have no blessings of the citizens even though they concern every citizen, and they’re executed nevertheless.
Even the tax reform that has been given the minimum courtesy of reaching the overly political National Assembly seems pre-determined. The president appeared on national television to destroy any hope for its revision when he said, “It’s here to stay,” hinting at the irrelevance of any suggestion that qualifies to be considered.
Worse is how whichever way the government promises the impact of the reforms will go, it has gone the opposite way. The deficit budget itself that wishes to make amends has zero participatory prints of the citizenry.
What then is the basis upon which the Nigerian government can say it’s serving the interest of the people when the people do not, in any way, know, understand, connect, or play any role in the formulation of the policies that have a massive say on their present and future?The Nigerian government’s biggest challenge at this critical juncture is the fast erosion of public trust.
That’s why currently it doesn’t matter whether it’s innocent or guilty; the people simply don’t trust it. And that’s why it will continue to be an easy target in a sub-continent where democracy is slowly turning into the exception rather than the norm.
The only way it can pass that challenge is by restoring public confidence and trust through adopting and implementing transparency and accountability measures advocated by organizations like the Center for Fiscal Transparency and Public Integrity.It can start by apologizing to the people for its erratic disregard for their cries and insights.
Then, by adopting communication strategies that leverage modern technology to reach out to them over critical issues. Let it carry each citizen on its wing by making its policy actions trustworthy through a radical fight against corruption, reforming the size of the government, cutting the cost of governance, enabling tracking of government projects, ensuring the availability of information on each process of governance, avoiding fusion of power among the three arms of government, and each narrative will suddenly appear believable.
