A glorious exit: The good, the bad, and the Buharian (2)

What is glorious about the exit of a Head of Government as President Muhammadu Buhari?

Despite the 8 positive achievements of the Buhari government in 8 years (2015-2023), do the negative metrics not outweigh the positive?

Let’s see.

If one took a cursory look at the trend(line) of the Fragile States Index (FSI), Mr Buhari firmed up the state apparatus more than his predecessors.

Everything seems not so bad with President Buhari’s performance as Nigeria’s Head of State if one ignores these 3 facts:

• the high state fragility score of 98 out of a maximum fragility score of 120 in 2023,
• the fact that Nigeria currently ranks as the 15th most fragile state among 179 countries,
• and the fact that the fragility score worsened by 0.80 points in 2023 compared to 2022.

READ ALSO: A Glorious Exit: The Good, the Bad, and the Buharian

This hasty observation would make only these 3 good points apparent:

• Nigeria’s high state fragility levels were reduced in 5 of Buhari’s 8-year tenure and increased only in 3 of the 8 years.
• In the past 5 years (during Buhari’s tenure), the fragility index reduced by 1.9 points
• That in the past 10 years (8 of which were during Buhari’s tenure), the fragility index reduced by 2.7 points 

Yet a thorough assessment shows that the Nigerian state was worse during the 8 years of Muhammadu Buhari as the Head of State than in the past 17 years under review.

Buhari is leaving the Nigerian State more fragile than the average levels in 17 years, and worse than 2 of his 3 predecessors.

Within the Obasanjo years (2006-2007), the average aggregate state fragility score was 95.0. For Yaradua (2007-2010), the average aggregate was 97.8. And for Jonathan (2010-2015), the average aggregate score increased further to 100.7 points.

However, the average aggregate of all the Presidents (2006-2023) is 99.1 points.

Mr Buhari mishandled the Nigerian state worse than the already bad average levels, with a higher fragility score of 99.6 points.

In essence, President Muhammadu Buhari’s performance, as the Head of State between 2015 and 2023, is worse than all the 3 previous presidents combined.

Why is this the case?

Could it be that Muhammadu Buhari’s bad leadership qualities outweigh his good leadership qualities?

To weigh his bad markers against the good, let’s see details of the 8 things Buhari worsened in his 8 years in office.

1. The Buhari Administration mismanaged the Nigerian Economy more than any other in the past 17 years

The Muhammadu Buhari-led government showed its greatest incompetence in economic management. It heightened the levels from 7.6 in 2015 to 8.8 in 2023.

Whether pre or post-COVID-19 pandemic, the country was steered by the poorest team of economic managers since 2006.

According to the Fund for Peace, the Economic Decline Indicator reviews the performance of a country with regard to the following:

• patterns of progressive economic decline of the society as a whole as measured by per capita income, Gross National Product, unemployment rates, inflation, productivity, debt, poverty levels, or business failures. 
• sudden drops in commodity prices, trade revenue, or foreign investment, and any collapse or devaluation of the national currency. 
• the Government’s responses to economic conditions and their consequences, such as extreme social hardship imposed by economic austerity programs, or perceived increasing group inequalities. 
• illicit trade, including drug and human trafficking, capital flight, or levels of corruption and illicit transactions such as money laundering or embezzlement.

2. Buhari’s government worsened the security situation in the country leading to increased refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs)

The Refugees and IDP indicator measures “the pressure upon states caused by the forced displacement of large communities as a result of social, political, environmental or other causes,” according to the Fund for Peace.

These pressures include inadequate governmental spending for the settling, security, and welfare of the refugees and IDPs. 

This could in turn lead to congestion in the camps, an outbreak of diseases and epidemics, a surge in the number of unemployed people, and new waves of crime by and against the displaced persons.

During the Buhari Administration, government officials severally attributed a new wave of crime, kidnappings, and killings in the country to the influx of unsettled people from neighbouring countries north of the country. 

There were also many reports of mistreatment of IDPs, sexual abuse of women and exploitation of children among the IDPs. This includes blocking aid and relief materials to refugees and IDPs, and bombing of IDP camps, among other violent treatments of civilians severely affected by conflicts.

All these build up immense social, economic and political pressure on the state, alongside other disturbing demographic pressures that characterised the Buhari years.

3. Under Buhari’s watch, Demographic Pressures increased to disturbing levels

Demography pressures describe pressures associated with the structure of the population in a country.

“The Indicator considers demographic characteristics, such as pressures from high population growth rates or skewed population distributions, such as a “youth or age bulge,” or sharply divergent rates of population growth among competing communal groups, recognizing that such effects can have profound social, economic, and political effects,” the Fund for Peace notes.

To understand the enormity of the problem Buhari allowed to degenerate, the following are details of the Fund for Peace’s measurement of the demographic pressure sub-index:

• Population

• Population Growth: Is the population growth rate sustainable?
• Population Distribution: Is the current and projected distribution reasonable?
• Population Density: Is population density putting pressure on areas of the state?
• Infant Mortality: What is the infant mortality rate – actual and projected?
• Orphan Population: Is there a high orphan population?
• Public Health

• Disease Control: Is there a system for controlling the spreading of diseases or pandemics?
• Disease Epidemics: Is there a high likelihood or existence of diseases of epidemics?
• HIV Aids: What is the rate of spread of HIV Aids cases—most recent and projected?
• Food and Nutrition

• Food supply: Is the food supply adequate to deal with a potential interruption?
• Drought: Is there are high likelihood of droughts or is there currently a drought?
• Starvation: Is there a short-term food shortage that needs to be alleviated?
• Malnutrition: Are there long-term food shortages affecting health?
• Resources

• Resources: Does resource competition exist and are there laws to arbitrate disputes?
• Land competition: Does land competition it and are there laws to arbitrate land disputes?
• Water Supply: Is there access to an adequate potable water supply?
• Environment

• Environment: Do sound environmental policies exist and are the current practices sustainable?
• Likelihood of Natural Disasters: Is a natural disaster likely, or recurring?
• Impact of Natural Disasters: If a natural disaster occurs, is there an adequate response plan?
• Deforestation: Has deforestation taken place or are there laws to protect forests?

4. Buhari looked on as human rights records surpassed that of his predecessors combined

While Buhari struggled to manage human rights abuses that peaked under his watch, the level of abuses the people suffered, whether they survived or were smothered, exceeded the average levels of abuses suffered under Buhari’s predecessors. 

The average human rights abuse score during the Obasanjo, Yaradua, and Jonathan governments was 8.2 points. Buhari exceeded that with an 8.6 points average during his 8 years.

Buhari maintained his hold on the state apparatus through several cases of human rights abuse, ranging from attacks on the judiciary, stifling of the civic space through indiscriminate bans on social media, disregard for court injunctions, attacks on the press and incarceration of voices of dissent and other non-political civilians.

A case in point was a gentleman that was arrested because he named his beloved dog Buhari.