By Isaac Edoboh
Recent remarks by HE Atiku Abubakar in his interview with Charles Aniagolu on Arise Television have once again brought to the fore a critical issue in Nigeria’s political evolution: the question of principle, consistency and credibility in leadership.
In that interview, Atiku made reference to the 2005 National Political Reform Conference, where he personally led the opposition that scuttled Chief Alex Ekwueme’s proposal for rotational presidency. He also recalled his 2017 declaration, made during Ekwueme’s burial, in which he expressed regret for that opposition. On the surface, this appears to be a moment of candour, even of growth.
But it is only a partial disclosure.
What remains unacknowledged is that the rotational principle, which emerged from Ekwueme’s minority report, has since evolved into perhaps the most stabilising political mechanism in Nigeria’s fragile federation. Imperfect as it may be, it has served as a necessary balancing tool in managing the country’s diversity and competing regional expectations.
The irony, therefore, is striking.
When Atiku had the opportunity to demonstrate his professed change of heart in 2023, by respecting what was widely regarded as the South’s turn, he did not. Now, as the 2027 cycle approaches, his posture and political signals suggest no clear departure from that earlier position. This disconnect between stated belief and political action raises legitimate concerns.
More troubling is the suggestion that he would entrench rotational presidency in the constitution if elected President. Such a proposition invites scrutiny. If a principle was not upheld when it required personal sacrifice, how persuasive is the promise to institutionalise it later? It risks being interpreted not as conviction, but as convenience.
Nigerians have not forgotten the consequences of the 2023 decision. The internal dislocation within the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) did not occur in a vacuum. It was the outcome of choices, and those choices continue to shape perceptions of leadership intent. It is therefore not entirely unfair that some critics question whether personal ambition has too often taken precedence over collective stability.
This concern extends beyond rotation.
In 2019, Atiku positioned restructuring at the centre of his presidential campaign, presenting it as a defining solution to Nigeria’s structural challenges. Yet, in his recent response to a question on the same issue, he appeared to downplay its relevance, suggesting it was no longer a dominant concern within the polity.
That answer was as revealing as it was unsettling.
What changed? What fundamental shift has occurred in Nigeria between 2019 and now to render restructuring less urgent? The underlying issues, federal imbalance, fiscal centralisation and uneven development, remain as pronounced as ever. If anything, they have deepened.
This apparent shift raises a broader question about consistency. Leadership demands not only ideas, but fidelity to those ideas, especially when they are presented as solutions to national challenges. When positions appear to fluctuate with the tides of political convenience, confidence is eroded.
Atiku’s long political journey, stretching back to the early 1990s, is often cited as evidence of experience. And experience, undeniably, matters. But experience must translate into depth, clarity of thought and a coherence that reassures rather than unsettles.
A leader, particularly one who seeks the highest office in the land, must be seen as anchored, not transactional. Transformational leadership requires steadiness of purpose, alignment between word and deed, and a willingness to act in accordance with professed principles, even when inconvenient.
At present, there appears to be a gap between those expectations and observable conduct.
The risk is not merely political. It is structural. When leadership choices present what seems like a false binary, where outcomes appear uncertain regardless of direction, it creates hesitation within the electorate. In such circumstances, even the prospect of change may fail to inspire confidence.
Nigeria deserves clarity. It deserves consistency. And above all, it deserves leadership that does not leave its citizens questioning whether principles are enduring convictions or shifting positions.
Since the African Democratic Congress(ADC) will be confronting a formidable ruling party in 2027, such glaring openings for a devastating political blow should be avoided by the coalition. This is why the most statesmanlike and ultimately most respectable path available to Atiku Abubakar may well be the hero’s option of graciously stepping aside.
Isaac Edoboh writes from Lagos State, South West, Nigeria.