Nigeria is a diverse nation facing unprecedented insecurity and ethno-religious violence. Implementing a rotational presidency would undoubtedly promote peace, unity, tolerance, and rapid development across the country. It’s crucial to recognise that since the beginning of our democracy, certain geopolitical zones have yet to produce a president. This situation poses a significant threat to our democracy, as some regions and ethnic groups are agitating for disintegration.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, from Ogun state in the Southwest, ruled Nigeria for a consecutive eight years from 1999 to 2007. After his tenure, the late Umaru Musa Yar’Adua from Katsina state in the Northwest assumed the presidency for two years. Following his death, Goodluck Ebele Jonathan served as interim president for two years and was re-elected in 2011; he hails from Bayelsa state in the Southsouth geopolitical zone.
In 2015, Muhammadu Buhari took office and served for eight consecutive years, also representing the Northwest, the same zone as the late Yar’Adua. Currently, Bola Ahmed Tinubu holds the presidency and is from the same geopolitical zone as Obasanjo. This indicates that power is primarily rotating among just three geopolitical zones—Southwest, Northwest, and Southsouth—out of the six that exist in the country. The Northeast, Southeast, and Northcentral zones have never produced a president.
This exclusion has sparked calls for disintegration, particularly from the Southeast, which feels marginalised despite its significantly contributing to the nation’s revenue. Additionally, the Northcentral and Northeast have never had a president, even though they have historically supported the Northwest and Southwest in producing presidents multiple times. Clearly, the focus of power rotation is limited to the Southwest and Northwest, with the Southsouth having produced a president only once, seemingly by chance.
This narrow rotation undermines democracy, exacerbates instability, and hinders development in the other zones While the Northwest and Southwest are currently the most developed zones in the country, power must rotate among all six geopolitical zones rather than being restricted to just two.
Therefore, the recent rejection of the rotational presidency bill by the National Assembly is an undesirable and undemocratic move, given the nation’s diversity. Passing this bill into law would enhance Nigeria’s global standing and strengthen its democracy. It is high time the three underrepresented zones began producing presidents, rather than just vice presidents. Accomplishing this would foster a sense of belonging among all Nigerians and significantly improve national peace, unity, and development.
However, the continued exclusion of certain zones from presidential opportunities compromises the nation’s overall development, as each new leader may not view Nigeria as a cohesive nation. It is essential to urge the National Assembly to reconsider the bill for a better Nigeria.