By Thomas Danjuma Abu
In a world where democratic leadership is expected to be guided by clear visions and measurable promises, Nigeria seems to be pioneering a new governance style—let’s call it the “Just Vibing” strategy. Rather than offering well-defined plans for the future, we are left with the ambiguous “emilokan” (translated as “it’s my time”). This phrase, open to various interpretations, invites us to ask: what exactly are we moving towards?
Throughout history, leaders have been held accountable for their ability to deliver on promises made. From Nelson Mandela’s commitment to reconciliation in South Africa to John F. Kennedy’s bold goal of landing a man on the moon, these figures were explicit about their intentions. The public could measure their success or shortcomings against these promises.
In Nigeria, former leaders such as Olusegun Obasanjo and Umaru Musa Yar’Adua presented tangible agendas. Obasanjo’s NEEDS (National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy) aimed at restructuring the economy, while Yar’Adua’s Seven-Point Agenda set specific goals for sectors like education and healthcare. These were clear plans that provided a basis for evaluation, allowing citizens to assess their progress.
Fast-forward to the present era, where “emilokan” seems to be the guiding principle. This phrase can be interpreted in many ways, from “it’s my time to lead” to “it’s my time to enjoy,” but it doesn’t offer much in the way of concrete action. The risk with such ambiguity is that there is no clear benchmark to measure performance. Without a set of promises or plans, leadership becomes difficult to assess, leaving citizens without a framework for accountability.
Democracy is built on accountability. Leaders are elected to serve the people, and their time in office is supposed to be about fulfilling the trust placed in them by the electorate. The absence of a clear agenda leaves room for uncertainty, making it harder for citizens to evaluate how well their government is working for them.
In the past, Nigerians have held leaders accountable based on their campaign promises. When promises were not met, the people had a basis for critique. However, with the broad and vague notion of “emilokan,” it becomes challenging to demand specific results when there are no clear commitments in the first place.
Looking to global examples, effective leadership has always been about providing a vision and delivering on it. Winston Churchill famously rallied Britain during a difficult time by stating, “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.” His message was one of clear purpose. Similarly, Nigeria’s founding leaders like Nnamdi Azikiwe and Obafemi Awolowo articulated specific goals for the nation’s development, ensuring that citizens knew what to expect.
As we navigate this era, we must reflect on the importance of leadership that offers clarity and direction. Vague slogans alone are not enough to move a country forward. Leadership should be about service, setting goals, and achieving results for the people. The idea of “emilokan” as a philosophy of governance must be accompanied by clear policies and a defined vision to ensure that the country progresses.
In conclusion, if we allow the concept of “emilokan” to guide governance without further explanation, we risk entering an era of leadership where accountability becomes harder to enforce. Nigeria deserves leaders who offer more than just slogans—leaders who set clear goals and take responsibility for their time in office. Only with such clarity can we ensure a future of progress and stability for the nation.
Abu can be reached via danjumaabu3750@gmail.com or +2348062380296
Peoplesmind
