In a searing indictment of Nigeria’s current political system, renowned political economist, Professor Pat Utomi, has delivered a sensational critique that sent shockwaves through the nation’s political landscape. His sharp rebuke, directed at the perceived dysfunction of the National Assembly and judiciary under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration, lays bare a harsh reality: Nigeria is facing its worst-ever political and institutional crisis. Utomi’s statement, far from being a mere commentary, is a chilling diagnosis of a democratic system on life support, where the very institutions tasked with safeguarding democracy have become complicit in its erosion.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with one of Nigeria’s most widely circulated national daily newspaper, The PUNCH, Professor Utomi lamented what he described as the total capture of the legislature and judiciary, underscoring the profound dangers posed by this unchecked centralisation of power. His remarks come at a time when Nigeria’s socio-political fabric is fraying, and the once-heralded “giant of Africa” is struggling to maintain its footing amidst escalating internal crises. With a grim assessment that Nigeria is currently a failure, Utomi’s comments expose the stark reality that democracy in the country is no longer functioning as it should.
Utomi’s Alarming Accusation: Judiciary and National Assembly in Disarray
Utomi’s critique spares no punches. He labels the National Assembly the “worst thing that has happened” to Nigeria, blaming it for failing in its role as a platform for robust debates and alternative thinking. Instead of fostering the critical discourse needed to steer the nation toward progress, Utomi claims that the legislative body has become captured by vested interests, reducing it to a mere shadow of what a true democratic institution should represent.
His accusation is particularly damning in its implications. According to Utomi, the capture of both the judiciary and legislature has left the country without any room for alternative thinking, a situation that has only deepened Nigeria’s current woes. This, he asserts, is not just a political failure but an existential crisis for the nation’s democracy.
The implication of such a capture is far-reaching. When both the legislative and judicial arms of government, which are supposed to act as checks and balances to the executive, become co-opted, the very foundation of democratic governance collapses. Utomi’s words resonate deeply because they challenge the core of Nigeria’s democratic experiment. What remains of democracy when the pillars that support it are compromised?
A Failure of Leadership and National Vision
Utomi’s blistering critique extends beyond the legislature and judiciary. He takes aim at the Nigerian political class, accusing them of being self-centred and bereft of any commitment to the national good. This elite, Utomi argues, has become so engrossed in personal enrichment and political manoeuvring that they have forgotten the very essence of governance—serving the people.
Drawing on historical examples, Utomi points to past leaders like Olusegun Obasanjo, who in the face of an economic crisis in the 1970s, adopted austerity measures, cutting down on his personal lifestyle to reflect the nation’s struggles. Utomi contrasts this with the lavish spending habits of today’s political class, arguing that leaders who fail to lead by example cannot inspire the sacrifices needed to pull Nigeria out of its current mess.
His frustration is palpable. Nigeria, he asserts, is at war—not a war fought with guns and tanks, but a moral and political war that requires urgent action. But instead of rallying together to confront these existential threats, Nigeria’s leaders are, as he puts it, “on a binge,” indulging in profligacy while the country teeters on the brink.
The War Room Approach: A Call for Political Consensus
One of the most striking elements of Utomi’s analysis is his call for a “war cabinet.” He insists that Nigeria is in the moral equivalence of a war and that, like any nation at war, it must adopt a war room approach to tackle its problems. This means gathering the brightest minds and forging a national consensus on how to navigate the country out of its current quagmire.
However, Utomi’s call for unity and a war-time mentality seems to fall on deaf ears. He points out that there is no political will to bring people together and no leadership willing to make the hard decisions necessary for progress. Nigerian politicians, Utomi laments, are too busy running in different directions, distracted by personal gain and the next election, to recognise the scale of the crisis.
What Utomi envisions is not merely a return to austerity but a radical shift in mindset. For the economy to recover, for democracy to flourish, Nigeria’s leaders must recognise the severity of the situation and act accordingly. The current political inertia, he argues, is akin to a country sleepwalking toward disaster.
IMF, World Bank, and Nigeria’s Economic Woes: A Case of Misapplied Solutions
As part of his broader analysis, Utomi touches on Nigeria’s economic policies, particularly its reliance on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank for solutions. While acknowledging that these global financial institutions provide templates for economic recovery, Utomi insists that it is ultimately up to local actors to adapt these templates to Nigeria’s specific needs. This, he contends, is where Nigeria has repeatedly failed.
For Utomi, the problem lies not in the IMF or World Bank’s recommendations per se, but in the inability of Nigeria’s intellectual and political elite to evaluate these policies in a way that benefits the country. He suggests that instead of blindly following external prescriptions, Nigeria needs to cultivate its own homegrown solutions, leveraging local expertise and knowledge to tailor economic policies to the country’s unique context.
Utomi’s assessment of Nigeria’s failure in this regard is a damning indictment of the country’s leadership. Whether due to ignorance or selfishness, he argues, the political class has consistently failed to act in the national interest. This failure to think critically and adapt policies to local realities, he suggests, is one of the root causes of Nigeria’s current economic malaise.
A Broken System: The Consequences of Legislative and Judicial Capture
The consequences of the legislative and judicial capture, as outlined by Utomi, are manifold. First, it undermines the very essence of democracy, rendering institutions that should protect the rights of citizens and ensure accountability powerless. Second, it creates a culture of impunity where the political elite can act with little fear of repercussion, knowing that the institutions designed to check their excesses are compromised.
Utomi’s assertion that the National Assembly has become a mere collection of hustlers seeking to extract as much as they can from the system without considering the broader national interest is perhaps the most damning aspect of his critique. This portrayal of a legislative body driven by personal gain rather than public service is a stark reminder of how far Nigeria’s political institutions have strayed from their intended purpose.
Furthermore, the judiciary, which should serve as the last line of defense for the ordinary citizen, has also been ensnared in this web of political capture. With both the legislative and judicial arms of government compromised, Utomi argues that Nigeria is left with no real avenue for reform or alternative thinking. The system, as it stands, is designed to perpetuate itself, rewarding those who play by its rules and punishing those who seek to challenge it.
The Path Forward: Can Nigeria Be Saved?
Utomi’s analysis leaves one with a sobering question: can Nigeria be saved from this downward spiral? While his critique is undeniably harsh, it also carries within it a glimmer of hope. By calling for a war room approach and a national consensus, Utomi is essentially urging Nigeria’s leaders to rise above their petty squabbles and act in the national interest.
But the road to recovery, as Utomi himself acknowledges, will not be easy. It will require a level of political will and moral commitment that has been sorely lacking in recent years. It will demand that Nigeria’s leaders not only recognise the severity of the crisis but also be willing to make the sacrifices necessary to solve it.
In the end, Utomi’s message is as clear as it is urgent: Nigeria is at a critical juncture, and the choices made today will determine whether the country sinks deeper into dysfunction or emerges as a stronger, more resilient democracy. The capture of the National Assembly and judiciary, as catastrophic as it may seem, is not an insurmountable obstacle. With the right leadership, the right vision, and the right commitment to the common good, Nigeria can still chart a path toward recovery.
Nigeria’s War Room: The Call for a National Consensus
Pat Utomi’s call for a war cabinet and a national consensus rings as a stark reminder of Nigeria’s crossroads. His assertion that Nigeria is in the “moral equivalence of a war” highlights the severity of the country’s problems and the lack of urgency in addressing them. In his view, a country at war pulls its resources and human capital together to solve its problems, yet Nigeria’s political elite continue to pursue individualistic and self-serving agendas.
A “war room,” as Utomi suggests, is a metaphor for an emergency response strategy, one that coordinates and aligns the nation’s energies toward a single goal: rescuing the country from its current economic, political, and social crises. This vision is critical to tackling Nigeria’s deep-rooted challenges, but it’s a vision that has been conspicuously absent from the government’s approach.
The absence of a coordinated national strategy, particularly in times of severe economic downturns and social unrest, is a testament to the dysfunction within Nigeria’s ruling class. In a war room, decisions are made swiftly and with the country’s best interests in mind. However, in Nigeria, politicians are more concerned with securing their next political positions or hoarding wealth, creating a leadership vacuum that exacerbates the country’s woes. The lack of a cohesive national plan reflects a failure of governance and leadership that is systemic, not merely a matter of individual incompetence.
The National Assembly: A Stage for Debate or Political Hustle?
Utomi’s critique of the National Assembly as the “worst thing that has happened to the country” is arguably the most scathing indictment of the institution’s role in Nigeria’s democratic process. The National Assembly should be the arena for robust debate and the incubation of policies that address the nation’s pressing issues. However, Utomi argues that the Assembly has been captured by selfish interests, transforming what should be a space for democratic deliberation into a platform for political hustling.
This critique is particularly relevant given the Assembly’s recent track record. Instead of enacting legislation that addresses Nigeria’s most critical challenges—such as unemployment, insecurity, and corruption—the Assembly has been embroiled in self-serving controversies, ranging from inflated salaries to opaque budgetary allocations. While the country faces severe economic strain, legislators continue to allocate millions to luxury vehicles, overseas medical trips, and other forms of extravagance that starkly contrast with the sacrifices they demand from ordinary citizens.
Moreover, Utomi’s indictment of the judiciary aligns with growing public sentiment that justice in Nigeria is for sale. The inability of the judiciary to act as a neutral arbiter, especially in political cases, has eroded trust in one of the core pillars of democracy. The recent spate of controversial rulings, often favouring political elites, has led many to conclude that the judiciary has become another extension of the ruling class’s stranglehold on power, rather than a check on it.
The Legal Elite: Agents of Change or Guardians of the Status Quo?
Prof. Utomi’s mention of the legal elite as part of the problem rather than the solution underscores the depth of Nigeria’s institutional failures. In many advanced democracies, the legal community plays a crucial role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the political class is held accountable. However, in Nigeria, the legal elite have often been complicit in perpetuating the very problems they are supposed to solve.
Nigeria’s legal system, rife with corruption and inefficiency, has become a significant barrier to progress. Court cases drag on for years without resolution, and wealthy defendants are often able to buy their way out of justice. This undermines public confidence in the system and perpetuates the culture of impunity that has plagued the country for decades.
Rather than serving as champions of the common good, many members of Nigeria’s legal elite are more interested in preserving the status quo. They benefit from a system that rewards connections and wealth over merit and justice. This failure of the legal profession to act in the national interest has had far-reaching consequences for the country’s development, as it has allowed corruption and incompetence to flourish unchecked.
IMF, World Bank, and the Question of Sovereignty
Utomi also touches on Nigeria’s reliance on external financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, institutions that have played significant roles in shaping the country’s economic policies. However, his critique is nuanced. While he acknowledges that these institutions offer valuable insights and templates for economic reform, he argues that it is ultimately up to local actors to adapt these templates to Nigeria’s unique circumstances.
The problem, as Utomi points out, is not necessarily the advice given by the IMF or the World Bank but the failure of Nigeria’s political class to critically evaluate and implement these suggestions in ways that benefit the broader populace. For decades, Nigeria has followed the prescriptions of these global financial bodies, often to the detriment of its local economy. Structural adjustment programs, deregulation policies, and other reforms have frequently been implemented without a clear understanding of their long-term impacts on Nigeria’s socio-economic landscape.
Utomi’s criticism is that Nigerian leaders have often lacked the intellectual and moral capacity to tailor these external recommendations to the country’s specific needs. Instead, they adopt these policies wholesale, resulting in policies that exacerbate poverty, inequality, and unemployment. This lack of critical engagement with international economic advice is another example of the broader problem of a political class that is disconnected from the needs of the people it is supposed to serve.
The Political Economy of Sacrifice: Lavish Leaders, Suffering Citizens
Utomi’s criticism of the lavish lifestyle of Nigerian leaders, even as they call for sacrifices from ordinary citizens, strikes at the heart of the nation’s governance crisis. It is a pattern that has persisted for decades: while the government imposes austerity measures on the populace, politicians continue to live in opulence, further alienating the citizens they claim to represent.
The disconnect between the ruling elite and the ordinary citizenry is most evident in the government’s handling of public resources. While millions of Nigerians live in poverty, unable to afford basic necessities, political leaders continue to indulge in extravagant spending. This glaring disparity erodes the public’s trust in government and undermines any calls for national sacrifice.
In 1977, as Utomi references, former military ruler Olusegun Obasanjo set a rare example by adopting a low-profile mode in response to an economic crisis, reducing government spending and setting a tone of frugality. However, contemporary Nigerian leaders have done the opposite. Their lavish lifestyles are a testament to their disregard for the sacrifices being made by everyday Nigerians. The result is a deeply unequal society where the benefits of political office are disproportionately enjoyed by a small elite, while the majority are left to bear the brunt of economic hardship.
Conclusion: The Way Forward for Nigeria
Prof. Pat Utomi’s comments are a sobering reminder of the state of governance in Nigeria. His critique of the political class, the judiciary, the legal elite, and the National Assembly paints a grim picture of a country that has lost its way. Yet, his insights also offer a path forward.
For Nigeria to overcome its current challenges, there must be a collective recognition of the severity of the situation and a willingness to make the necessary sacrifices. This includes not only cutting back on the lavish lifestyles of political leaders but also fostering a genuine commitment to the common good. A national consensus, as Utomi advocates, is essential. This consensus must transcend party lines, ethnic divisions, and regional biases. It must be driven by a shared recognition that Nigeria is, indeed, at war—not a war of guns and bullets, but a war for its very soul.
Only through a genuine commitment to reform, a respect for the rule of law, and a focus on the common good can Nigeria hope to emerge from this crisis stronger and more united. The road ahead will not be easy, but as Utomi suggests, it is a road that Nigeria must travel if it is to avoid becoming a “tragic failure.”