Muhammadu Buhari, born in December 1942, attended school in Daura, Katsina State and then proceeded to join the military shortly after independence. His reputation for fairness, discipline and austerity was largely attributed to his military training. As a young officer, he was affected and shaped by the coups and counter-coups that took place in the early 1960s. By 1976, he became the military governor of the North East, which today comprises six states. He would also serve as a federal commissioner for petroleum and natural resources in 1977, as well as a frontline military commander, which enhanced his stature in the army and his reputation for decisive leadership during the 1983 Chadian Affair.

In 1983, Buhari assumed office as head of state after a coup that ended the democratic administration of Shehu Shagari. In hindsight, some of the criticism that trailed his later performance as president should have been ironic given some of his actions during the strict and draconian regime he headed. Among his actions were the infamous ‘Decree No. 4’, which granted the regime the power to imprison journalists and restrict press freedoms. His government was also criticized for its poor economic policies, which resulted in job losses, inflation, and a recession. His government embarked on a ‘War Against Indiscipline’, which was an extreme form of national reorientation and led to the incarceration of hundreds of politicians and businessmen amidst an environment of fear. He was accused of restricting decisions to a small group within government and, in perhaps Nigeria’s most infamous diplomatic faux pas, tried to kidnap former transport minister Umaru Dikko from the United Kingdom. The incident, which led to the severing of ties between the two countries, was an embarrassment and added to the litany of grievances that led Nigerians to welcome the Ibrahim Babangida coup of 1985.

After his removal from office, he retired to his farm before serving as chair of the Petroleum Trust Fund under the Sani Abacha regime, a stint that was criticized for his poor supervision and lopsided project locations. This, along with his austere and simple disposition, endeared him to many who supported his repeated bids for the presidency from 2003 till his successful run in 2015. The heady optimism and hope that a new party and a ‘reformed democrat’ brought meant that, more than any Nigerian since independence, Buhari was in a position to reshape Nigeria. The mandate he received and the goodwill he enjoyed displayed would have empowered his camp to believe he was impervious to the criticisms that many past leaders experienced. Instead, it should have been a warning on how quickly the tide could turn if he disappointed.

It didn’t take long for Nigerians to notice Buhari struggling with the challenges of leading a country as diverse as Nigeria. His slow approach also belied the urgency that many expected a three-time presidential candidate to tackle Nigeria’s problems. He took six months to appoint cabinet members, kept the currency artificially high and, in doing so, created a gap between official and black market rates that was exploited by a few. He displayed a firm posture to combat insecurity and tackle corruption, but left a country still spending billions on fighting Boko Haram, the same insurgent group he had dismissed during his campaign. Buhari’s economic policy, which largely relied on redirecting funds to mass welfare projects without the requisite market reforms for sustainability, failed to yield dividends. The crippling responsibility of the presidency took its toll, and he spent weeks outside the country on several health-related trips, which in itself earned criticism after he pledged to end medical tourism and told officials not to do the same.

If one could excuse the lack of awareness of the awesome burdens of the Nigerian presidency during Buhari’s first term, it’s harder to justify Buhari’s bid to seek re-election despite the evident toll that the presidency took on his health. Still, his enduring popularity, mainly in the north, coupled with a desire to delay a potentially divisive party primary for the ruling All Progressives Congress, ensured a second term. During the next four years, Buhari focused on social welfare and established a ministry dedicated to humanitarian affairs. He also presided over a well-praised response to the COVID-19 pandemic. But this term also saw the October 2020 #EndSARS protests, which largely ended after soldiers fired at peaceful protesters in Lagos and where he decried protesters as rioters seeking to remove him from power. Months later, he would ban X, formerly known as Twitter, after the platform deleted an insensitive statement that referred to the civil war and brought memories of his regime enacting Decree Number 4. He would end his term with a series of disruptive policies, such as the since-reversed redesigned Naira scheme, which failed to achieve its aims.

A fairly aloof disposition to governance was a relic from his military era, and perhaps from an age where leaders were not accustomed to explaining themselves to civilians. It would show in flippant and disappointing gaffes, whether it was reinforcing antiquated gender norms about his wife belonging in the kitchen, justifying preferential treatment to states that gave him more votes, which were mostly in the north, or denigrating young Nigerians as ‘lazy Nigerian youths’. Perhaps most impactfully, Buhari’s speech during the #EndSARS protests, after weeks of Nigerians begging their leader to speak, was criticized for being tone-deaf and disregarding the many young Nigerians who demonstrated civic engagement by making their voices heard.

Buhari’s aversion to direct, effective communication meant that he failed to form the necessary emotional connection with the Nigerian public, which would have warranted sympathy when he fell short. His aides repeat that he was funny and jovial, but Nigerians were not laughing. His reputation for integrity and incorruptibility, which largely held, was still marred by the presence of controversial politicians in his cabinet and in the upper echelons of his party. Buhari was also criticized for engaging more with the foreign media than domestic actors. The same disillusionment that trailed his departure from office in 1985 would be present, this time with a new generation that felt disappointed by many, who believed his poor economic policies had squandered their youth. This led to the japa syndrome and further accelerated Nigerian brain drain.

Buhari’s defenders cite his extensive investment in infrastructure projects and his commitment to addressing pension payments for civil servants that had been ignored. They also cite that he inherited a difficult situation, one that would have tested even the best administrative leader. However, even the administration’s flagship programmes, ranging from the Survival Fund to the conditional cash transfer for some of the poorest families in the country, have been unsustainable due to rising inflation costs. Allies of the president will point to difficult forces against his term, but there can be no clearer mark of his failings than for a national leader who presided over billions in budget allocations and embraced nationalist campaign rhetoric to have passed on in a foreign hospital.