Rebuttal of Baba-Ahmed’s Apocalyptic Verdict: A Point-by-point Analysis

Introduction: Clarifying the Record: Acknowledging Reality

The administration acknowledges Nigerians are experiencing hardship. Fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate unification — Two essential structural reforms, stemming from decades of policy paralysis, caused undeniable hardship for families nationwide. Food prices are still high, purchasing power has decreased, and millions of families are struggling financially. President Tinubu has consistently described the reforms as “bitter medicine” essential for national recovery. The administration has always aimed to build institutional support to mitigate the impact and foster sustainable, broad-based recovery, rather than denying the situation.

Dr Hakeem Baba Ahmed‘s apocalyptic portrayal of Nigeria in the Nigerian Tribune, depicting unprecedented insecurity, deepening poverty, and a disconnected government, culminating in his assertion that a second term for President Tinubu would “put an end to this country,” is an overstatement. This rhetoric, while potentially serving political aims, is contradicted by verifiable data, constitutional facts, and the government’s documented efforts. The administration, fully aware of the suffering, is implementing Nigeria’s most extensive social safety net and fiscal decentralisation programs, demonstrating a multi-pronged approach to national challenges.

This response refutes Dr Baba Ahmed’s claims, replacing hyperbole with evidence and ideology with an honest account of the Tinubu government’s achievements. It also clarifies the constitutional responsibilities of state and local governments, which have received unprecedented resources from this administration.

CLAIM 1: “We are living with the highest level of insecurity that we have ever lived with.”

This claim is factually inaccurate. According to an analysis by Beacon Security and Intelligence Limited (BSIL) and the Institute of Economics and Peace’s Global Terrorism Index, a comparison of the last two years of the Buhari administration (July 2021 to May 2023) with the first two years of the Tinubu administration (June 2023 to April 2025) reveals a measurable, albeit modest, improvement. The BSIL database recorded 18,572 fatalities, 9,795 abductions, and 8,483 violent incidents under the previous administration’s final two years, compared to 17,617 fatalities, 16,462 abductions, and 15,437 violent incidents in the first two years of the current one. The increase in reported incidents and abductions is in part a function of improved reporting and documentation, but the critical metric — fatalities — has declined. Every life lost is a tragedy, but the trend line contradicts the claim of “unprecedented” insecurity.

Second, the federal government’s fiscal response has been historic. Budgetary allocations to the security sector rose from ₦1.25 trillion in 2023 to ₦3.25 trillion in 2024 — a 160% increase — and further to ₦4.91 trillion in 2025. This represents the largest security budget in Nigeria’s history, with the 2025 allocation underscoring the priority accorded to security in the fiscal framework. Beyond funding, the administration has established new institutional structures to address root causes: the Livestock Development Ministry to tackle the centuries-old farmer-herder conflict, and the National Commission for Almajiri and Out-of-School Children Education to prevent the recruitment of vulnerable children by armed groups.

Third, between March 2024 and August 2025, the federal government released ₦2.45 trillion directly to the 36 states and the FCT for infrastructure and security projects — fixing roads, bridges, schools, health facilities, and strengthening security operations at the community level.

Critically, the Constitution assigns primary responsibility for grassroots security to state and local governments. While the Nigeria Police Force remains under federal control, day-to-day community safety, local law enforcement coordination, and community vigilante arrangements fall within the purview of state governors (who serve as the chief security officers of their states) and local government chairmen. With the historic increase in FAAC allocations now flowing to these tiers (detailed below), the question is: what have they done with these unprecedented resources to secure their communities?

CLAIM 2: “Poverty levels are unprecedented” and the government is “too removed from the people.”

The Tinubu administration inherited an economy crippled by decades of fuel subsidies that disproportionately benefited wealthy elites and smugglers, and a multiple-exchange-rate regime that bred arbitrage and systemic corruption. The removal of these distortions — while genuinely painful in the short term — has been acknowledged by independent observers, including the World Bank, as essential to restoring macroeconomic stability and renewing growth momentum. GDP growth reached 4.23% in Q2 2025, the fastest pace in four years and ahead of the IMF’s 3.4% projection. Inflation has declined from a peak of 34.8% in December 2024 to 20.12% by August 2025, the lowest level in three years.

Against this backdrop, and precisely because the government acknowledges the hardship, it has mounted the most ambitious social protection programme in Nigeria’s history:

* Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) / National Social Safety Net Programme (NASSP): The federal government has disbursed ₦330 billion to poor and vulnerable Nigerians through the National Social Safety-Net Coordinating Office (NASSCO). As of September 2025, 8.1 million households (with a beneficiary coverage rate of 54%) had been paid at least one tranche of ₦25,000, with some households receiving two or three tranches. The programme is designed to reach 15 million poor households at three instalments of ₦25,000 each, funded by an $800 million World Bank facility. The national social register now captures approximately 19.7 million households, representing about 70 million Nigerians — an expansion from the initial 15-million-household target.

* Digital, Transparent Delivery: Beneficiaries are identified biometrically via their National Identification Number (NIN) and paid directly through bank accounts or mobile wallets, eliminating the ghost-beneficiary problem that plagued previous schemes. The National Coordinator of NASSCO confirmed that 7.9 million households have been visited physically, with 9.6 million NINs validated by NIMC.

* Youth Support via NELFUND: The administration established the Nigeria Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), signed into law in April 2024, which provides interest-free loans to students in public tertiary institutions for tuition and living expenses. So far, over ₦150 billion has been disbursed to approximately 788,000 students across 36 states and the FCT, covering 228 higher institutions.

* Enterprise and Credit Access: The Investment in Digital and Creative Enterprises (iDICE) programme, a $617 million initiative, supports Nigerians aged 15–35 through enterprise funding, digital skills training, and ecosystem development across the tech and creative sectors. The administration also established the National Credit Guarantee Company (NCGC) in May 2025, capitalised with ₦100 billion, to de-risk lending and expand credit access to MSMEs, local manufacturers, women, and youth entrepreneurs.

* Additional Food Security and Micro-Infrastructure Programmes: These include subsidised grains and fertilisers to curb inflationary pressure, the ₦200 billion in loans to farmers and agro-processors, the Renewed Hope Ward Development Programme (RH-WDEP) targeting all 8,809 electoral wards, state-level cash transfer top-ups, and the First Lady’s Renewed Hope Initiative food outreach scheme.

Describing a government implementing these verified interventions as “removed from the people” is dishonest. The administration has deployed a unified, data-driven framework that has been scrutinised by the World Bank. Dr Ahmed’s claim is not supported by evidence.

CLAIM 3: “The country is more divided now than it has ever been.”

This assertion is unsubstantiated by any empirical metric. The Tinubu administration has consistently pursued policies of regional inclusion and fiscal decentralisation:

* VAT Reform and Fiscal Decentralisation: In the tax reform bills transmitted to the National Assembly in October 2024, the federal government reduced its share of VAT from 15% to 10%, increasing the states’ share to 55% and local governments’ share to 35%. This constitutes a deliberate transfer of fiscal resources to sub-national governments to bring governance closer to the people.

* Local Government Financial Autonomy: On 11 July 2024, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment affirming the financial autonomy of Nigeria’s 774 local governments, ruling that it was unconstitutional for state governments to retain or manage funds meant for local councils and ordering that allocations be paid directly to councils. The federal government, under President Tinubu, was the plaintiff that brought this historic suit — a reform designed to end the systematic strangulation of grassroots governance by state governors who, over 16 years, controlled over ₦23 trillion in local government funds.

* Inclusive Institutional Appointments: The administration has appointed seasoned and diverse professionals across security, economic, and social sectors, reflecting deliberate regional balance.

*Economic Diversification Across All Zones: Increased oil production from the Niger Delta (from approximately 900,000 bpd in 2023 to about 1.7 million bpd currently) has been complemented by investments in agriculture, solid minerals, and manufacturing across all geopolitical zones.

The claim of unprecedented division is unsupported. The administration has taken deliberate, structural steps to strengthen Nigeria’s federal character and distribute resources more equitably than ever before.

CLAIM 4: “The President is incapable of securing Nigerians and is blaming criminals… rather than dealing with the sources, the manifestation of insecurity.”

This characterisation is misleading and selective. The evidence shows a multi-pronged strategy:

1. Massive Funding Increase: Security allocations rose from ₦1.25 trillion (2023) to ₦4.91 trillion (2025) — a nearly 300% increase in two years.

2. Structural Solutions Addressing Root Causes: Establishment of the Livestock Development Ministry to resolve farmer-herder conflicts, and the National Commission for Almajiri and Out-of-School Children Education to prevent exploitation of vulnerable minors.

3. Direct Support to Sub-National Governments: ₦2.45 trillion released to states and the FCT between March 2024 and August 2025 for infrastructure and security.

4. Leadership and Tactical Enhancements: Appointment of seasoned security officers to head various agencies and extension of tenures of other security leaders to foster stability.

5. Measurable Outcome: Fatalities from violent incidents declined in the comparable two-year periods following the transition from the previous administration.

The President’s characterisation of criminal networks as a “gang-up” threat is a factual description of a national security challenge, not an abdication of responsibility. And again, state governors — as the chief security officers of their respective states, a role recognised by the Constitution — must be held accountable for the deployment of the unprecedented resources now at their disposal.

The administration has significantly increased resources for sub-national governments, empowering states and local entities to fulfil their constitutional duties, contrary to suggestions of federal neglect.

The Numbers

Metric 2023 2024

* Increased States’ Share (FAAC) ₦3.58 trillion ₦5.81 trillion 62%

* Local Governments’ Share (FAAC) — — 47%

* Federal Government’s Share ₦3.99 trillion ₦4.95 trillion 24%

Source: NEITI FAAC Quarterly Review, reported in Vanguard; corroborated by Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu.

From June 2024 to June 2025, total FAAC disbursements to states and local governments combined reached ₦11.195 trillion — ₦6.492 trillion to states and ₦4.704 trillion to local governments — out of ₦27 trillion shared in the period. Total FAAC disbursements for 2025 are projected to exceed ₦21 trillion, the highest annual distribution on record.

These figures represent the highest level of fiscal transfers to sub-national governments in Nigeria’s history. Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State — a figure not given to hyperbole — publicly stated: “Ask any governor or local government chairman and they will tell you how much revenues have surged under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.” He confirmed that allocations to states rose by 62% while local governments received 47% more.

If states and local governments are receiving record allocations — and they are — the question that must be directed at every governor, every local government chairman, and indeed every citizen is: what has been done with these funds? When the wives of local government chairmen plan study tours abroad, when state governors charter private jets for personal travel while local roads remain impassable, when local councils fail to deploy funds for community security — the accountability deficit lies at the doorstep of the sub-national executives, not at Aso Rock.

The Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy, secured by this administration, is precisely the structural solution designed to re-channel these funds directly to the communities that need them, bypassing the gubernatorial gatekeeping that has historically diverted grassroots resources.

A significant portion of the critique rests on a misunderstanding — deliberate or otherwise — of Nigeria’s federal architecture. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) delineates responsibilities across three tiers of government:

* Defence, national security, and the armed forces

* Foreign affairs and international relations

* Currency, banking, and monetary policy

* Customs and excise duties

* Aviation, railways, and trunk roads

* Immigration and emigration

* Primary and secondary education

* Health services (excluding tertiary/specialist federal institutions)

* State roads, water supply, and sanitation

* Agriculture and rural development

* Urban and regional planning

* Coordination of internal security (governors as chief security officers)

* Implementation of social welfare programmes

* Establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, markets, motor parks, and public conveniences

* Primary health care services

* Primary education (in conjunction with states)

* Rural roads and water supply

* Community-level security and development (in collaboration with state and federal agencies)

The 1999 Constitution further establishes the Federation Account and the revenue-sharing formula: 52.68% to the Federal Government, 26.72% to the states, and 20.60% to local governments, with a 13% derivation fund for oil-producing states.

The implication is explicit: the federal government is not constitutionally responsible for building local roads, staffing primary health centres, managing community markets, or maintaining rural water infrastructure. These are the responsibilities of state and local governments — the very tiers that have received a 62% and 47% increase in allocations, respectively, under the Tinubu administration. To blame President Tinubu for the failure of state governors to deliver on their mandates is to misunderstand the basic structure of Nigerian federalism.

Dr Baba Ahmed dismisses the President’s characterisation of political coordination against his administration by suggesting that the only gang-up is “a gang up of criminals and bandits and killers and kidnappers that the same president has not been able to contain.”

This rhetorical flourish collapses under the weight of evidence. The President’s reference to political coordination is a matter of political judgment. But the suggestion that the administration has not tackled criminality is factually unsustainable, as the security spending data, the establishment of new institutional structures, the direct funding to states for security infrastructure, and the modest but real decline in violent fatalities all demonstrate.

Furthermore, state governors from both the ruling APC and the opposition PDP — at a meeting in April 2025 — publicly decried the escalating insecurity. This underscores that insecurity is a collective national challenge requiring coordinated action across all three tiers of government, not a partisan conspiracy.

Dr Baba Ahmed’s prognosis — that a second term for President Tinubu would “put an end to this country” — is not supported by evidence. It is political rhetoric. The verifiable facts tell a different story:

* Insecurity: Fatalities have declined marginally, and the administration has committed the largest security budget in Nigeria’s history (₦4.91 trillion in 2025), established new institutional structures targeting root causes, and directed ₦2.45 trillion to states for security and infrastructure.

*Poverty Alleviation (Acknowledging Hardship): While the economic reforms have caused genuine pain — a reality this administration has never denied — the response has been the most expansive social protection programme ever mounted in Nigeria: 8.1 million households receiving direct cash transfers, ₦330 billion disbursed via a digitally verified NIN-linked system, 788,000 students receiving interest-free loans (₦150 billion disbursed), a $617 million youth enterprise programme (iDICE), and a ₦100 billion credit guarantee company (NCGC) to unlock MSME financing.

* Fiscal Transfers to Sub-Nationals: States have received a 62% increase in allocations; local governments, 47% — the highest levels in Nigeria’s history — empowering them to fulfil their constitutional mandates.

* Economic Stabilisation: GDP growth accelerated to 4.23% in Q2 2025 (the fastest in four years), inflation dropped from 34.8% to 20.12%, and external reserves rose to over $40 billion (reaching approximately $43 billion by November 2025), the highest levels in years.

* Constitutional Architecture: The division of responsibilities under the 1999 Constitution assigns primary responsibility for grassroots development, social welfare delivery, and internal security coordination to state and local governments — the very tiers that have received record budget allocations.

Nigerians should not entertain apocalyptic predictions from political opposition, but hold every level of government—federal, state, and local—accountable for using unprecedented resources to improve security, infrastructure, and human welfare. Dr Baba Ahmed’s critique would be more impactful if he also challenged state governors and local government chairmen who have received record funds to deliver results. The evidence suggests the Tinubu administration, aware of current challenges, has established macroeconomic and institutional foundations for recovery. The focus should now be on consolidation, accountability, and continuity, rather than the termination that political opponents propose.