By Bola Babarinde, South Africa
According to Section 218 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution (as amended), the President, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, wields authority over the military, including determining its operational use and appointing service chiefs. However, the Constitution does not mandate the appointment of an Aide-de-Camp (ADC), a personal military assistant whose function is rooted purely in tradition and administrative protocol.
The continued use of an ADC by Nigerian Presidents is therefore ceremonial rather than constitutional. It is a practice that subtly reinforces the impression that Nigeria has yet to fully detach itself from its military past. While it was understandable for President Olusegun Obasanjo, a retired military general, to retain an ADC during his civilian presidency, the continuation of this practice by subsequent civilian leaders such as Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Bola Ahmed Tinubu has made it appear as though it were a constitutional obligation, when in truth it is not.
This symbol of militarism, though seemingly harmless, reflects a deeper issue. Nigeria’s constitutional and institutional structures remain products of military architecture rather than expressions of genuine civilian consensus. The 1999 Constitution, conceived under military rule, does not truly embody the aspirations, complexities, and diversities of Nigeria’s democratic society. It is therefore imperative that the nation embarks on a national consensus and referendum to craft a new people-driven constitution that reflects justice, equity, and meritocracy.
A truly democratic constitution must address long-standing issues such as resource control, humane taxation, and the abolition of the quota system that has eroded competence and elevated regional origin over merit. This system has entrenched nepotism and stunted Nigeria’s growth, as leadership positions and opportunities often depend more on where one comes from than on what one can contribute.
Equally troubling is the rotation of the presidency along ethnic lines. While intended to promote balance, it inadvertently deprives Nigeria of the best possible leaders at critical moments. The dominance of the three major tribes, namely the Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo, has marginalized minority groups and created a sense of entitlement among the majority. If not for the untimely death of President Umaru Yar’Adua, it would have been nearly impossible for Goodluck Jonathan, a man from the Niger Delta minority, to ascend to the presidency. Such structural imbalances continue to disenfranchise millions of capable Nigerians.
Another pressing national concern is the failure to conduct a credible and scientific census. Population figures have long been manipulated for political and economic advantage, creating a distorted picture of Nigeria’s realities. The oft-quoted estimate of 250 million people is, by all accounts, questionable. With modern technology, it is both feasible and necessary to carry out a transparent, data-driven census within four weeks. Only an accurate population count can guide effective policymaking and equitable resource distribution.
The recent altercation between a young military officer, Lieutenant Yerima, and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, highlights a troubling culture in which ego and personal power often overshadow the rule of law. It exemplifies a dysfunctional system where authority is wielded as a weapon rather than exercised as a trust. The military institution, whose mandate is to safeguard national sovereignty and peace, must be respected but kept entirely apart from politics.
Nigeria stands at a critical juncture. The question is no longer whether our democracy exists, but whether it is truly civilian. It is time to decide what system of governance best serves our collective interest. Meritocracy, not ethnicity or patronage, should guide leadership selection. Nepotism and corruption must attract severe consequences, not rewards.
The military must remain in the barracks, respected for its professionalism but detached from governance. To symbolize this separation, the President should abolish the ceremonial ADC and instead be served by civilian-trained aides. Similarly, state governors should replace police escorts with unarmed civilian security aides. Such actions would mark a decisive step toward demilitarizing Nigeria’s democracy, a bold declaration that civilian rule has finally come of age.
Nigeria’s progress depends on courage: the courage to rewrite our national story, to discard the relics of authoritarianism, and to embrace a future built on justice, competence, and unity. Only then can we say, with conviction, that democracy in Nigeria is not a borrowed uniform from the military past but a garment woven by the will of the people.
