The presidency (and by extension, the president) is a victim of, or a participant in, the same vicious cycle of vacillations that have led us to where we are today with regards to the insecurity that in truth has no end in sight, and also the embarrassing and needless face-off with the popular ‘non-state entity’, Twitter.

Before I delve in, I would like to point out that this is not the usual criticism of, or attack, on the present administration. This disclaimer is necessary in light of recent events, and in the attempt to make the reader comprehend, and without any predisposition of bias towards or against this government, as far as this submission is concerned.

Any detailed review of past administrations’ decisions during several crises will show consistent trends of seemingly irrational, misguided and clueless decisions that always boomeranged, shooting the government of the day on the foot.

The current and past administrations had highly educated and experienced technocrats and politicians with C.Vs one could only dream of having. Intriguing still, the fact that most of those in government had been ‘intelligent’ critics of previous governments, offering logical and proactive advice to the governments they were not a part of.

And they get offered the roles of paid advisers and assistants (usually as a result of their display of knowledge of these issues, as against the roles they must have played in the emergence of the person in power).

What changes them when they get to Aso Rock? Veteran journalist, and a former media aide of the presidency, Reuben Abati once opined that there could be some form of voodoo present in the highest office in the land that would explain the reasons for the strange happenings therein.

Most recently, the ban of Twitter in Nigeria meant that government and people of Nigeria could not access one of the most popular platforms for freedom of expression, and sharing of information in the world. Several statistics have been put forward as to how much (in billions) the country has lost, and is still l, as a result of this ban.

We cannot confirm the veracity of this. Now, how is this a bad decision? Not only have the ‘lazy’ youths circumvented the inability to access the platform by using Virtual Private Networks to ‘tweet’, they now have exclusive access because the government through its aides, agencies, ‘Bots’ and social media promoters cannot engage the millions of ‘fencists’ and negative propaganda machines set up to ridicule the government of the day.

Government spin doctors cannot use the platform to create or manage public opinion in favor of the government, because of the ban that they must comply with. The same platforms that have been perceived by the federal government to have used twitter to ‘threaten the corporate existence of the country’ are still tweeting, along with the millions of Nigerians using VPN to tweet.

Save for government and its defenders, every other person still use the platform, seemingly. What ban, really? How is this decision benefiting the government? Or, how was it that the expert aides within this government could not foresee the fact that freedom of access to information via any app is very difficult to ban, in this digital age?

Nipping an issue in the bud before it gets out of hand seems to be an extremely evasive task for the Nigerian government. Rewind back to 2014 when 276 Chibok school girls were kidnapped by Boko Haram. The hesitancy from the govt of the day by first denying it even happened, to claiming it was staged to undermine the administration, you got to say, contributed to their loss in the polls in 2015.

While the security crises in the country was not birthed during the Jonathan administration, the general perception was that it was worsened by it, largely due to slow and wrong decisions. One could go on about the handling and timing of the fuel subsidy removal of 2012, which led to the ‘Occupy Nigeria’ protests, another public relations disaster.

Again, the government blamed the opposition until the damage on the administration’s public opinion was done. And then the decision was reversed. Too late.

Go back again to 2001/2002, when Boko Haram was formed and began to spread during Chief Obasanjo’s administration. Who would have known that the radical preaching group could turn violent in less than a decade? The government of course! Indecision. This is to show how inter-twined government decisions are, and how the consequences of these decisions outlive the respective governments of the day.

At this point, it will help to draw analogy between how the development, growth and spread of cancer cells occur within the human body and how a negligible issue brews to become a national crisis.

Early detection almost always saves lives and money because the cells could be destroyed without any damage to the body. Late diagnosis almost always proves fatal. In 2009, the clampdown on members of Boko Haram by the government in Maiduguri was supposed to be decisive and final. It is safe to say it was far from a final clampdown. Was this action decisive?

The government of the day has so much to learn from its predecessors, and indeed from itself. The president may not be seeking re-election in 2023, but his legacy is at stake. Posterity will always be there to judge, as it has his predecessors. Among his legacies include individuals who will most likely run for various elective offices, riding on his goodwill, as many have before.

Two years is enough time to bow out with a positive public opinion and only time will tell if this admini- stration was decisive enough in its actions? Because they do have a lot of literature to draw from as far as being decisive is concerned.

Sulaiman, freelance writer and banker, writes from Sokoto.

Not only have the ‘lazy’ youths circumvented the inability to access the platform by using Virtual Private Networks to ‘tweet’, they now have exclusive access because the government through its aides, agencies, ‘Bots’ and social media promoters cannot engage the millions of ‘fencists’ and negative propaganda machines set up to ridicule the government of the day.

Government spin doctors cannot use the platform to create or manage public opinion in favor of the government, because of the ban that they must comply with. The same platforms that have been perceived by the federal government to have used twitter to ‘threaten the corporate existence of the country’ are still tweeting, along with the millions of Nigerians using VPN to tweet.

Save for govt & its defenders, every other person still use the platform, seemingly. What ban, really? How is this decision benefiting the government? Or, how was it that the expert aides within this govt could not foresee the fact that freedom of access to information via any app is very difficult to ban, in this digital age?

Powersurge:
Who has noticed that since the threat of secession has thickened in Nigeria, especially in the south, Nigerian Military is suddenly having some gains against insurgency?

Those bankrolling insurgency and banditry in the north are having second thoughts about their existence should the country break.

Monogamy:


Government has not been fighting insurgency.. Yhen Yhen Yhen

Now that the government are having upper hand against the criminals, story don change...