Lessons from #EndBadGovernance Protests

Whether the #EndBadGovernance protests across the country were successful or not, they, however, provided an opportunity for the people to clearly express their dissatisfaction with President Bola Tinubu’s economic policies, which have caused widespread suffering and hunger, Wale Igbintade writes

Though the #EndBadGovernance protests which took place across the country may have  lost steam as of yesterday, August 3, 2024, there is not doubt that it sent a clear message to the federal government that Nigerians should not be taken for granted and that they should be put at the centre of its policies.

In every democracy, protests serve as the instrument through which the populace can express dissatisfaction, challenge the status quo, and demand change. This is why the planned protests stood as a reflection of a society grappling with profound issues that affect its very fabric.

Under the President BolaTinubu-led All Progressives Congress (APC) government, a continuation of failed policies from previous administrations has only served to exacerbate the issues at hand. Instead of steering the ship towards progress and prosperity, the government’s missteps and lack of vision have further plunged the populace into hardship and despair.

The undercurrent of dissatisfaction has been swelling for years, fed by persistent hunger and endemic bad governance. Hunger, a stark indicator of economic disparity, reflects the failure of social safety nets and the inefficacy of policies meant to bridge the gap between the haves and have-nots. On the other hand, bad governance manifests through corruption, nepotism, and a lack of accountability, eroding public trust in institutions. These twin maladies had catalysed the protests.

The planned protest is primarily a response to pervasive hunger and poor governance. Citizens across various demographics have voiced their frustration and helplessness, citing the inability to afford basic necessities and the government’s failure to address systemic corruption and inefficiency. The rising cost of living, unemployment, and dilapidated infrastructure have all contributed to a general sense of despair among the populace. For these individuals, taking to the streets represents not just a call for immediate relief but a demand for systemic change.

One glaring example of the government’s ineptitude is its handling of the economy. With rising inflation rates, unemployment, and a widening gap between the rich and the poor, the administration’s economic policies have failed to provide much-needed relief to the masses. The lack of sustainable and inclusive economic programs has only deepened the cycle of poverty and destitution for many.

Furthermore, the government’s approach to governance and accountability has been riddled with corruption and inefficiency. Cases of embezzlement, mismanagement of public funds, and lack of transparency have eroded the trust of the people in their leaders. Instead of serving the interests of the citizens, the government seems more preoccupied with self-serving agendas and maintaining the status quo.

In addition, the issue of hunger and food insecurity has reached alarming levels under the current administration. Despite promises of agricultural transformation and food security initiatives, the reality on the ground tells a different story. Many Nigerians continue to struggle to put food on the table, with inadequate access to basic necessities and skyrocketing food prices pushing them further into poverty.

The government’s reactions to the protests were largely marked by defensive rhetoric and veiled threats, casting a shadow over its intent and ability to engage constructively. Officials’ verbal and body language had come across as dismissive and antagonistic, further fuelling public anger. Statements emphasising the potential for violence and disruption, coupled with a heavy security presence, had only served to escalate tensions and create a climate of fear. This approach, rather than fostering dialogue and understanding, had alienated the very citizens it seeks to govern.

It is disheartening, to say the least, to witness the government’s response—or lack thereof—to the crisis at hand. The verbal and body language of the government has been spectacularly off the mark, revealing a profound disconnect between the ruling class and the aggrieved populace. Instead of empathy and proactive measures, the government has often resorted to defensive posturing and superficial reassurances.

In public statements, most officials, though acknowledged the reactions of the protesters, downplayed the severity of hunger crises, in some instances trivialising the lived experiences of millions who struggle to put food on the table. Such remarks not only amplify the chasm between the government and the governed but also betray a shocking insensitivity to human suffering. This verbal miscalculation extends to assurances of combating bad governance, which remain largely unfulfilled as corruption continues to pervade the system.

The government’s failure to address the pressing needs of its people, coupled with its indifference to their suffering, only serves to highlight the urgent need for change and reform. The protesters are not just raising their voices against hunger and bad governance; they are fighting for a better future for all Nigerians. The protest against hunger and bad governance is not merely a demonstration of dissatisfaction; it is an urgent plea for survival and dignity.

The protest’s outcome, regardless of its success or failure, is an opportunity for the government to bring about the much-needed reforms to ensure a renewed sense of hope. In the first place, the crux of the matter was the failure of the leadership to understand and address the root causes of discontent. The government’s body language—infamous for its rigidity and disconnection—mirrors its verbal gaffes. There was an apparent reluctance to engage meaningfully with the populace, to listen genuinely to their grievances, and to implement enduring solutions.

This intransigence erodes the social contract, wherein the governed entrust the governance with the mandate to ensure their well-being and security. With each dismissive remark and hollow promise, the trust between the rulers and the ruled frays further. The erosion of this trust is a loss for everyone: a populace that feels unheard and uncared for, and a government perceived as incompetent and unresponsive.

To reverse the tide of this shared defeat, a radical shift in approach is required. The government must shed its veneer of indifference and actively engage with the populace. Acknowledging the severity of hunger and committing to transparent, effective governance are critical first steps. Structural reforms aimed at providing social safety nets and rooting out corruption must be prioritised.

Security agents may have been deployed to the streets, appeals, harassments, intimidations may have been carried out and resources may have also been deployed to calm protesters, but one thing that is clear, is the planned protest against hunger and bad governance is both a beacon of hope and a harbinger of potential peril.

Even though at the end of the two-day protests, the federal government may have invoked the entire war-making apparatus of the state on the protesters, the message was clear – a hungry man is an angry man.

It is now incumbent on both the state and its citizens to strive for a symbiotic relationship wherein grievances are heard, responses are considered, and progress is shared. Only through such genuine engagement can we transition from a landscape of loss to one of collective prosperity.