The resignation of India’s Education Minister, Dharmendra Pradhan, few days ago, following sustained protests by young people over the country’s education system offers an important lesson for Nigeria. Whether one agrees with the protesters or not, the minister accepted political responsibility for a crisis that had eroded public confidence. He stepped aside to allow the government to seek a solution.

In Nigeria, such an action is almost unheard of.

Over the years, Nigerian public officials have developed what appears to be an immunity to resignation. Even in the face of widespread public outrage, serious allegations of corruption, gross administrative failures, repeated violations of the rule of law, or nationwide protests, many public office holders cling to their positions until they are removed by the President, forced out by the courts, or complete their tenure.

This attitude has gradually weakened accountability and damaged public confidence in government.

Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, Nigeria has witnessed numerous crises that would have prompted resignations in many mature democracies. Yet resignation has become the exception rather than the rule.

During the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007), allegations of corruption and abuse of office were levelled against several ministers and public officials. While a few eventually left office after investigations or presidential directives, voluntary resignation remained rare.

Under President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua (2007–2010), the government promoted the rule of law more vigorously, but public officials still hardly accepted personal responsibility for failures within their ministries or agencies.

Outstandingly, President Yar’Adua took the road never taken by admitting that the process that brought him in was not credible. Even though he did not resign but it was a departure from the normal.

The administration of President Goodluck Jonathan (2010–2015) witnessed several national controversies. The 2012 fuel subsidy protests, which paralysed much of the country, reflected widespread dissatisfaction with government policies. Despite the enormous public backlash and questions surrounding the subsidy regime, there was no wave of resignations from top officials directly associated with the policy.

The same pattern continued during the government of President Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023). The #EndSARS protests of 2020 exposed deep concerns about police brutality and governance. Although the demonstrations drew global attention and led to the disbandment of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), very few senior political leaders accepted responsibility by resigning.

During the Buhari years, allegations involving corruption, insecurity, poor economic management, repeated fuel shortages, and prolonged strikes by university lecturers generated widespread criticism. Yet resignation remained almost absent from Nigeria’s political vocabulary.

Today, under the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Nigerians continue to grapple with economic hardship, high inflation, rising unemployment, insecurity, and growing public frustration following major economic reforms, including fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate liberalisation.

Several ministers, heads of agencies, and public office holders have faced allegations of misconduct, procurement irregularities, abuse of office, or administrative failures. Others have overseen sectors where service delivery has steadily deteriorated. Yet hardly anyone voluntarily accepts responsibility by resigning to protect the integrity of public institutions or restore public confidence.

Instead, the common response has become denial, blame-shifting, prolonged court battles, political lobbying, or waiting for investigations to fade from public attention.

Nigeria has also witnessed repeated instances where court orders are ignored, judicial processes are delayed, and constitutional principles appear secondary to political interests. Public protests by labour unions, students, civil society organisations, and ordinary citizens have become regular features of national life. Yet government officials often behave as though public opinion carries no weight.

This culture creates dangerous consequences. It weakens accountability, destroys public trust, encourages corruption, discourages ethical leadership, and fuels public anger.

Many developed democracies have established a different political tradition.

In countries such as the United Kingdom, Japan, Germany, and South Korea, ministers have resigned over examination failures, transport accidents, policy mistakes, financial scandals, plagiarism, ethical breaches, or failures within agencies under their supervision. In many cases, resignation does not necessarily imply criminal guilt. It simply reflects political responsibility.

Public office is viewed as a trust rather than a personal entitlement.

Nigeria urgently needs to cultivate the same democratic culture.

Resignation should never be interpreted as weakness. On the contrary, it often demonstrates courage, honour, and respect for public institutions. A leader who resigns when confidence has collapsed may preserve both personal reputation and institutional credibility.

The lesson from India is not merely that a minister resigned after protests. The deeper lesson is that democratic leadership requires sensitivity to public confidence. When trust is badly damaged, honour sometimes demands stepping aside.

Nigeria cannot build a strong democracy if political office holders treat resignation as an impossible option. Leadership is not measured only by the ability to obtain power; it is equally measured by the willingness to accept responsibility when governance fails.

A nation where leaders never resign risks normalising impunity. A nation where accountability becomes part of political culture strengthens democracy, restores public trust, and inspires future generations to see public service as a sacred responsibility rather than an opportunity for personal survival.

Nigeria deserves leaders who understand that the highest honour in public service is not merely remaining in office but protecting the integrity of the office itself.

On Tuesday, July 28th, 2026, democrats and majority of Nigerians who have been worried about the parlous state of the nation especially as it affects the judiciary, heaved a sigh of relief when the Appeal Court gave its verdict on the vexatious issue of deregistration of some opposition parties numbering five including the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The disappointment and angst in the land over the Federal High Court judgment that the parties be deregistered by the INEC stems from the fact that even a ‘kindergarten’ with a keen interest in the socio-political affairs of the country knows that the grounds on which Justice Lifu anchored his reasoning is not convincing.

So, when on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal cleared the road for ADC and four others to run their political business, the DISCLOSURE News associates itself with majority of Nigerians and democrats that celebrated the judgment.

We are not celebrating because the case has come to an end but because justice was seen to have done.
The three honourable justices agreed without a whimper by any. It was a relief to see that flash of courage to the extent that the judge of the lower court was berated, slammed.

The grounds upon which the lower court predicated its judgment was slippery, a quick sand and thank goodness, it caved in.

But at the DISCLOSURE News, we feel that it is not enough to berate Lifu for judicial rascality. It is also good to wield the big stick against erring judges as the consequences of such actions on the polity can not be over emphasized.

We agree with the ADC when it said in a statement, “We warmly welcome the landmark judgment of the Court of Appeal, which set aside the erroneous judgment of the Federal High Court that sought to remove the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and other political parties from Nigeria’s democratic space.”

“We congratulate the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal for their courage, fidelity to the Constitution and unwavering commitment to justice. Their judgment is a reassuring affirmation that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common man and the ultimate guardian of constitutional democracy. At a time when many Nigerians are anxious about the future of democratic governance, the Court has demonstrated that justice, when courageously dispensed, remains the strongest defence against arbitrariness.

“The appellate court rightly held that the judgment delivered on 15 June by Justice Lifu was a nullity, having been rendered in disobedience to a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal. It further found that the respondents lacked the locus standi to institute the action, describing their claims as speculative and legally unsustainable.

“The Court also clarified that Section 225A of the Constitution must be interpreted disjunctively, not conjunctively, and held that since the Osun and Ekiti election cycles were still active when the suit was filed, the action was premature.

“Equally significant was the Court’s finding that the trial court ignored the uncontroverted affidavit evidence of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which confirmed that the ADC and the other affected political parties had complied with all constitutional and statutory requirements. Having accepted INEC’s evidence, the lower court had no legal basis to manufacture additional conditions in order to arrive at what the Court of Appeal rightly described as a perverse decision.

“This judgment is far more than a legal victory for the ADC. It is a victory for every Nigerian who believes that democracy must be nurtured through free political competition rather than strangled through speculative litigation. The strength of a democracy lies not in the exclusion of political opponents but in allowing the people to freely determine their leaders through the ballot.

“We urge anti-democratic forces to resist the dangerous temptation of using the courts and other institutions of the state as instruments of political engineering. The judiciary must never be transformed into a battlefield for eliminating political competitors or shrinking the democratic space. Such conduct undermines public confidence in our institutions and diminishes the sacrifices made by countless Nigerians in the struggle to enthrone constitutional democracy.”

As the nation moves steadily towards the 2027 general election, political contests must be settled by the votes of Nigerians.
We expect the National Judicial Council to begin to wield big sticks against judicial officers whose actions tend to put the judiciary in bad light.

Recently, the Federal Ministry of Livestock Development came out to debunk reports circulating in sections of the media and on social media that alleged that the ministry budgeted funds for the rehabilitation of Emir Palaces and Mosques in the 2026 budget.

In a press statement issued by the Head of Information and Public Relations, Henrietta Okokon, the ministry described the reports as “false and misleading.”

The statement stated categorically that the budgetary provisions being referenced are not contained in the headquarters’ budget of the Federal Ministry of Livestock Development.

It explained that the items were wrongly attributed to the ministry, but are actually contained in the budget of the Federal College of Veterinary and Medical Laboratory Technology, Vom, Plateau State.

“Rather, they are contained in the budget of the Federal College of Veterinary and Medical Laboratory Technology, Vom, Plateau State, a self-accounting institution with its own distinct budgetary allocations,” the statement read.

The ministry noted that the sum of N140 million allegedly budgeted for the rehabilitation of Emir Palaces and Mosques in Kaduna State, among other unrelated projects, does not form part of its programmes and priorities.

While we are still distilling the impunity that occured at the Livestock Development Ministry, another news bomb came out within the week, alleging that the federal government allocated over N22.15bn to renovate traditional rulers’ palaces, build and renovate mosques and churches. To many Nigerians, this is a joke taken too far.

While the country and her citizens are struggling to navigate the harsh economic policies introduced by the President Tinubu-led government, the National Assembly in corraboration with the Executive arm, are busy using our budget systems to syphon or enrich their selves by way of insertion of phantom projects into our budget circles. This has been their acceptable norm, not only now but from the past eight years.

We are of the opinion that all these shenanigans thrive on basic fact that the country lacks strong institutions that will constantly checkmate our public officials including our political class.

It is a saddening reality therefore that that Nigeria’s public instructions’ framework tilts towards entrenchment of corruption and self-enrichment practices because of the loopholes they enact to perpetrate all sorts of underminings on our collective values and progress.

To consolidate a solid institutional structure in Nigeria, that will be above constant interference and manipulation, as government is only as good as the institutions that run it, all organs of the government both in the states and federal levels must seem to be citizens-prone rather than personality focused, because personality comes and goes, manifestos are made and broken, but institutions like the legislature, the judiciary, the civil service, the electoral body, the police, and the anti-corruption agencies — are the permanent machinery of the state. When they are strong, democracy works. When they are weak, misgovernance thrives.

Nigeria’s recurring crisis is not a lack of good policies. It is the collapse of the institutions meant to design, implement, and check those policies. We hold elections whose results are distrusted. We fight corruption with agencies that are themselves compromised.

That decay are aptly demonstrated by the numerous stories of budget-padding, budget-inserting and other incurrent economic ping-pongs as examplifed by this government’s lukewarm approach to anything but fighting inordinate ways of doing government businesses.

Therefore, It is obvious that current weak institutions we have in Nigeria will continue to breed misgovernance and looks more gloomy to improve in years ahead.

When the the country’s judiciary is slow and underfunded as noticed in most courts, justice is delayed and denied. Justices and magistrates are also prone to be compromised. When anti-graft agencies like EFCC, ICPC and others are politicised, and use as instruments of intimidation, coarsion, the powerful walk free while the poor are punished. Without consequences, public office becomes a license to loot.

If we have a strong civil service with an enabling well motivated workers, it ensures continuity. But a weak civil service means every new administration abandons projects and starts afresh. Roads are abandoned mid-way. Policies are reversed with every change of government. The result is wasted billions of naira and zero development.

On our electoral process and the overseeing agency INEC. When an electoral empire lacks independence and technology that propels transparent results, then there will be deficit of trust from the citizenry and political players. When citizens believe their votes do not count, they withdraw from civic duty. That vacuum is filled by godfathers, agberos, money politics, and rigging, who will eventually hijack the process and thereby breed incompetent leadership in the country.

When a police force that is poorly trained, poorly paid, and poorly equipped, it cannot protect citizens. This will resort to extortion, accidental killings. This can result in the state losing its monopoly on force, and enabling non-state actors to fill the gap, as we presently witness in terrorist attacks in all parts of the country.

Therefore, strengthening institutions is not glamorous. It does not make headlines. But it is the only sustainable cure for misgovernance.

Institutions must be free from executive interference. The appointment of INEC chairmen, judges, and heads of anti-graft agencies should go through a transparent, bipartisan process in the National Assembly. But independence must come with accountability: fixed tenures, public asset declarations, and strict audit requirements.

But institutions cannot be asked to deliver 21st-century results with 20th-century budgets. Courts need digital case management. The police need better pay and equipment. The civil service needs to recruit based on competence, not “federal character” alone. Let the best run the system.

Institutional strength today is digital strength. BVAS for elections. Treasury Single Account for public funds. Open contracting portals for government projects. Live streaming of legislative proceedings. When citizens can see what government is doing, corruption becomes harder.

No individual, no matter how highly placed, should be above the law. Court orders must be obeyed. Legislative oversight must be real, not theatrical. This is how you build public trust.

Institutions are not buildings. They are people. We need a civil service trained in ethics. We need journalists, CSOs, and ordinary citizens who understand their role in demanding accountability. A democracy cannot survive on apathy.

Misgovernance is expensive. It is the hospital without drugs. The university on strike. The road that claims lives. The youth who leave the country because they see no future.

Strong institutions do the opposite. They ensure that power is checked, that public money is spent properly, and that citizens get services regardless of who is president or governor.

Nigeria does not need another “strong man.” It needs strong systems.

We must move from governance by personality to governance by institutions. That means funding them, protecting them from political capture, and demanding performance from them.

The task ahead is deliberate and difficult. It requires constitutional amendments, political will, and patience. But the alternative — another cycle of weak institutions and misgovernance — is one we can no longer afford.

A nation is built not on the charisma of its leaders, but on the strength of its institutions.