Former Kaduna Central Senator and prominent human rights activist, Shehu Sani, has delivered a sharp rebuke to critics comparing President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration to Nigeria’s past military dictatorships, labeling such comparisons as “dishonest” and “historically inaccurate.” Speaking with the authority of someone who was jailed and exiled during the struggle for democracy, Sani argued that those calling the current government a dictatorship from the comfort of their homes are ignoring the harsh realities of the past and the fundamental freedoms that exist today.
In a series of recent media appearances, Sani has offered a complex analysis of the current political landscape. He defends the democratic space under Tinubu, critiques the motives of the opposition, and places the burden of creating a viable political alternative squarely on the shoulders of the opposition parties themselves.
A False Equivalence: Remembering the Cost of Freedom
Drawing from his personal experience as a pro-democracy activist, Senator Sani passionately argued that any comparison between the current civilian government and military rule is fundamentally flawed. He reminded Nigerians of a time when basic freedoms were non-existent and dissent was met with brutal force.
“Some of us went to jail, into exile, and lost loved ones,” Sani stated, recalling the immense sacrifices made to restore democracy. He pointed out that under military regimes, it was virtually impossible to organize protests, hold critical conferences, or express dissenting views without facing severe consequences.
“When people comfortably sit in their living rooms and call this regime a dictatorship, we simply laugh. It’s not true.”– Shehu Sani
Sani insisted that while Nigeria’s democracy is far from perfect, it provides a level of civic space and freedom that was unimaginable under military jackboots. “You cannot say what we have today is worse than military rule,” he added. “Democracy is not yet 100 per cent, but we are very far from where we came from, and we can do better from here.” He also pointed to President Tinubu’s own history as a key figure who funded and participated in pro-democracy protests, suggesting that this background should foster a government that is tolerant of public dissent.
Unmasking the Opposition: A “Frustrated” Elite?
Beyond defending the current democratic framework, Shehu Sani launched a pointed critique of the figures and groups currently mobilizing against the Tinubu administration. He dismissed their movements as being driven not by national interest, but by personal grievances, failed political ambitions, and frustration over being excluded from the corridors of power.
He described many of today’s opposition leaders as being part of the same political establishment they now vehemently attack. “It’s not that they are now Marxists or trade unionists confronting a capitalist order — they’re all from the same bourgeois political class,” he asserted. “Many of them have been in power since 1999.”
According to Sani, these “disgruntled elements” use Nigeria’s challenges as a weapon to present themselves as a better alternative, when in reality, their primary motivation is a desire to regain access to the system from which they have been sidelined.
A Disunited Front: The Opposition’s Internal Crisis
Sani further argued that the opposition’s weakness is a self-inflicted wound. He has repeatedly warned that without a united coalition, no single opposition party—be it the PDP, Labour Party, or NNPP—can effectively challenge the ruling APC in the 2027 elections. He pointed to their failure to form an alliance in 2023 as a key reason for their loss and cautioned that history is likely to repeat itself if they remain fractured.
He criticized the tendency of opposition parties to blame President Tinubu for their internal problems. Sani finds it irresponsible for parties embroiled in leadership tussles and factional crises to expect the president, who leads the rival party, to solve their problems for them. He stressed that it is the duty of the opposition parties to enforce discipline, resolve their internal conflicts, and build a cohesive structure capable of challenging the government, rather than looking for an external scapegoat.
Conclusion
Shehu Sani’s intervention provides a nuanced and challenging perspective on Nigeria’s current political climate. As a veteran of the democracy struggle, his words carry significant weight. He is simultaneously defending the democratic system he fought for, while also holding all political actors to account. His message is twofold: a reminder to critics to maintain historical perspective and appreciate the hard-won freedoms of today, and a stark warning to the opposition that their path back to relevance depends not on criticizing Tinubu, but on achieving the internal unity and ideological clarity they currently lack. His analysis suggests that until the opposition gets its own house in order, the political landscape is unlikely to change.
Stay woke. Stay tuned. Stay with AKEWE NEWS.
