President Bola Tinubu’s decision to abstain from investigating past military expenditures has ignited significant debate, with prominent political figure Shehu Sani leading criticism against what he describes as an inconsistent approach to fighting corruption in Nigeria’s public sector.
The controversy deepened Tuesday when Sani, a former Senator who represented Kaduna Central in the 8th National Assembly, highlighted what he perceives as a glaring contradiction in the administration’s anti-corruption strategy. Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today, Sani pointed out the disparity between the government’s aggressive probe of the Central Bank of Nigeria under former governor Godwin Emefiele and its hands-off approach to military spending during the previous administration.
Sani’s critique comes in direct response to President Tinubu’s recent media chat, where the Nigerian leader explicitly stated his disinterest in investigating military expenditures under former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration. This stance, according to the former lawmaker, effectively “rewards larceny and corruption” rather than addressing it.
The former senator articulated his concerns about the selective nature of the government’s investigative approach, questioning why the administration appears willing to “move backward” when it comes to the Central Bank but adopts a forward-looking stance regarding military expenditure. It’s a bit contradictory; you can move backward in CBN but you can’t move backward in security,” Sani observed during the television interview.
Drawing from his legislative experience, Sani emphasized that proper governance requires a comprehensive approach to accountability, particularly in a nation grappling with critical issues. He suggested that the president’s position should have been more nuanced, advocating for investigations wherever credible evidence of corruption exists, regardless of the sector involved.
The former lawmaker’s comments touch on a broader debate about accountability in Nigeria’s public sector, particularly concerning security spending. His criticism implies that the selective application of investigative scrutiny might undermine the administration’s overall anti-corruption efforts and create dangerous precedents for future governance.
Beyond the specific issue of military spending, Sani acknowledged the broader context of the Tinubu administration’s economic reforms. While recognizing the hardships these reforms have imposed on Nigerian citizens, he noted that such economic transformations historically face public resistance, regardless of their long-term benefits. Economic reforms have never been popular with the citizens,” he remarked, placing Nigeria’s current situation within a global and historical context.
The controversy highlights a crucial moment in Nigeria’s ongoing struggle with institutional accountability and transparency. Sani’s intervention raises important questions about the balance between moving forward and addressing past irregularities, particularly in sectors as critical as national security and defense.
The former senator also emphasized the importance of presidential accountability, insisting that Tinubu must take responsibility for his policies and his cabinet’s performance, especially given his public assertion that all his ministers are performing effectively. This call for comprehensive accountability suggests a broader concern about governance standards and the need for consistent application of oversight mechanisms across all sectors of government.
As this debate unfolds, it underscores the complex challenges facing Nigeria’s anti-corruption efforts and the delicate balance between pursuing accountability and maintaining political stability. The controversy also reflects broader public concerns about transparency in military spending and the government’s commitment to comprehensive reform across all sectors.
The situation continues to evolve as various stakeholders weigh in on the implications of the president’s stance, particularly regarding its potential impact on future anti-corruption efforts and public sector accountability in Nigeria. As the nation grapples with these important questions, the outcome of this debate could significantly influence the direction of governance and accountability measures in Africa’s largest democracy.
