Rotational Debate Isn’t About Fairness – Prof. Okey Ikechukwu

Oplus_131072

A Strategic Management and Human Capital Development expert, Prof. Okey Ikechukwu, has criticised recent remarks by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), George Akume, regarding leadership rotation in Nigeria. Speaking during an interview with ARISE NEWS, Ikechukwu described Akume’s comments as unnecessary and a distraction from pressing political realities.

“The statement by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation was totally unnecessary. It created a distraction and directed fights that are phantom fights. To that extent, I’m not sure he has even served his party well,” Ikechukwu remarked.

He argued that debates on fairness or regional entitlement to the presidency serve the ambitions of individuals rather than addressing structural issues in Nigeria’s political landscape. According to him, political realism must take precedence over abstract notions of fairness.

Historical Perspective on Leadership Rotation

Addressing Nigeria’s leadership history, Ikechukwu highlighted the dominance of the north in holding the presidency since independence. However, he suggested focusing on the past 24 years, since the return to democracy in 1999, when the south has held the presidency for 17 years.

“Obasanjo was around for eight years; Yar’Adua came on to stay for eight years. The constitution provides that when the president cannot carry out his functions, the vice president takes over. But this is a country where anything can be configured despite constitutional provisions,” he stated.

Recalling past transitions, he noted, “The north didn’t like that Yar’Adua passed, or that Goodluck Jonathan took over. The doctrine of necessity only came up after lengthy negotiations. Let us not forget that it was the north that allowed Jonathan to contest. The backlash came when he did not fulfil all expectations.”

Critique of Political Platforms

Ikechukwu dismissed the ideological distinctiveness of Nigeria’s major political parties, the APC and PDP, describing them as platforms for personal ambitions. “For me, there is no such thing as the PDP or APC. If you look at the personnel, many key figures in APC were once in PDP, including Atiku Abubakar,” he said.

He accused political actors of switching platforms to suit their ambitions. “Atiku is now on a platform he suspects will not be viable for 2027, so he is crying out in the name of the north. This is about individuals wanting the presidency, using any available platform to achieve that.”

On Political Realism and the Incumbency Factor

Looking ahead, Ikechukwu argued that attempts to unseat the incumbent president, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, would likely be unrealistic. “It’s a question of political realism. Is it possible to dislodge the incumbent president? The aspirations to do so are somewhat delusional, speaking politically and realistically in the context of Nigeria.”

He also suggested that the presidency might shift to the south again by 2027. “It would be difficult to argue successfully that the presidency should not be in the south by 2027. While I understand Akume’s context, I don’t think he needed to make the statement.”

Fairness vs. Realism

Ikechukwu concluded by emphasising that leadership rotation debates are less about fairness and more about political pragmatism. “Even when we invoked the doctrine of necessity, it was about practicality, not fairness. At this moment, invoking fairness is a misplaced priority.”

On Atiku Abubakar’s stance, Ikechukwu remarked, “Atiku is making a point, but no matter how credible it may sound, it is ultimately self-serving.”

Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *