In Nigeria, One Year in Office (OYO) has become popular governance traditions. At every level, elected government officials and their associates hold events to reflect and report their achievements to their respective constituencies.
Observing, reflecting and reporting one's stewardship in government is good, especially, when the prime intention is to demonstrate accountability but, it is a bad one when the whole exercise turns out to be a mere political jamboree or playing to the gallery, a sort of.
Transparency and accountability are the hallmark of governance; the absence of these good governance index in any government is a glaring recipe for institutional corruption that has become a recurrent decimal in the governance system of developing countries like Nigeria.
On May 29, except states that have off-season governorship election, His Excellency, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Commander-in-Chief of the Arm Forces, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR and 30 out of the 36 governors of states clocked one year in office on May 29, 2024.
Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the president and governors of states are being sworn-in on the same day, May 29, of every general election year until legal twists and dynamics that led to annulment of governorship mandates of the affected states introduced off-season elections.
Off season election means those elections conducted on a date(s) other than the ones fixed for general elections, be it presidential and governorship poll. States that are having off-season elections because of tribunal judgements are Bayelsa, Edo, Ekiti, Imo, Osun, and Zamfara (five from the Southern and one from the Northern parts of the country).
One year in office in Nigeria's political landscape is a buzzword. It is when elected government officials having stayed in office for a period of, at least, 365 days in office, dedicate time and resources to showcase their achievements to the public. It is a mad rush to prove the can-do-spirit of the elected official.
OYO has become a sustained practice but the fundament question to ask is this: What can election government officials with a tenure of four years, reasonably, achieve in one year? On the recurrent side public expenditure, something can be achieved within short time but on the capital side of it, i doubt. It is hard to achieve anything tangible in one year let alone in 100days which proponent of the First Hundred Days in Office (FHO) which is becoming another popular event will want the public to believe.
In conventional practice, performance evaluations are done based on three critical elements. The first, is the need to put in place well defined Key Performance Indices (KPIs); the second, is to determine the nature of the projects involved, that is, knowing whether the projects are recurrent or capital funded nature and, finally, established whether the projects are short-term (one year), medium term (2 to 4 years) or long-term (5 to 8 years) as the case may be.
The project time framework used in this exposition is hypothetical within the context of constitutional four years in office in the first instance and, another four in office if reelected as allowed by the Nigerian constitution and the Electoral Act 2023 as amended.
While recurrent expenditure-based projects are operated on short term basis (daily or week (wages), monthly (payment of salaries) or annual budget for renovations and part of capital projects); capital projects require huge capital outlay and their realisation take longer time. This means that one year in office is mostly rooted in politics of showmanship where political actors hyped on statements of intention of those in power.
During campaign, generally, political parties, politicians and candidates make promises to the electorates. It is on the basis of these promises that candidates are elected into various offices. The reality, however, is that most of the promises politicians make during the campaigns are bigger than what they can possibly achieve in one year. Bogus campaign promises cannot just translate into concrete achievements by merely restating them. Deliberate commitment and practical actions are required!
It is true that, unlike the statesman who always think of the next generation, the mind of a typical politician is always on the next election except otherwise refined. A genuine politician (statesman) who is committed to delivering enduring legacies to his constituents will never be in a haste to report literally superficial or whitewashed successes but, instead, takes time to work and score big cards that will be visible to all and can stand the test of time.
Truth be told, when a politician begins to rush into hyping and celebrating one year or 100 days in office, the bid is tailored towards securing the next possible mandate. In other words, one year or 100 days in office to a natural politician is the beginning of the politics of the next election!
Politics of the next election in the first year can be distractive. It will distract political office holders from focusing on the responsibilities of governance, especially, when praise singers and hypers become so loud praise singing and hyping spree towards reelection.
It is important to note that sometimes, the one year/100 days in office is a deliberate response to opposition elements who might not allow time for elected officials to settle down for real governance business. Holding opposing political views is good but not when this is taken out of proportion. Crash opposition or political critics often criticised just for the sake of it.
Most times, comments coming from members of the ruling party/those in government or their supporters are praised bias even if nothing notable has been achieved. On the other hand, comments emanating from the opposition are mostly criticisms even when something notable is achieved by the government. Understandably, these binary stand offs are rooted in politics interest. However, governance is not about political interest but welfare and security of the citizenry. Politics must not be played with the fibre of governance at all but objective service no matter what side of the divide one belongs.
Objectivity demands that government actions, at all times, should be scrutinised and criticised where criticism is necessary or applaud where commendation is appropriate. This is the kind of balance that can make a difference as far as politic and governance of sustained development are concerned.
A lot has happened as it affects the well-being of citizens in Nigeria and people in states. However, time allowance is required to make better and more objective assessment of those in power. In a four years tenure, better assessment can be done when a tenure goes half-way. That is not to say that nothing can be done in one year but whatever is done can hardly be capital intensive projects except those inherited and are at the verge of completion by predecessors.
At the moment, it may be right or wrong to say that some credible steps have been taken by elected government officials but, certainly, there is so much that is yet undone and requiring prompt and concentrated attention from government to make life bearable for the citizenry too. There are enough rooms for improvement to make Nigeria and its component units but no time to waste at all!
Instead of celebrating one year or 100 days in office, elected government officials are called upon to consider reviewing their four years tenure mid-way or towards the end of their tenure in office. They should use the occasion to render full account of their stewardship to the people they are serving or have served. This will make for better scrutiny by the people.
Tackling existential problems require haste; political promises or solutions are often overrated or amplified while the task of providing concrete governance-based solutions to societal problems in a democratic regime, do not come cheaply. Solving corporate problems require rapt attention to details and weighing the implication of all decisions to be made on behalf of the people. Therefore, the powers that be must be prepared to provide satisfactory explanation to people on whose behalf they make decisions (policies or laws).
When an elected official is doing well, he/she knows. Pretense can only be claimed as a strategy for mischief but those lacking in governance capacity yet willing to learn for better performance, will listen to wise counsels from objective critics who says it is wrong when something is actually wrong and go step(s) further to give alternative solution(s) that are better!
No comments:
Post a Comment