Torchlight on Tinubu's Reversal of Appointments

The sudden reversal of Usman Dakingari’s ambassadorial posting to Turkey, occurring less than an hour after its initial announcement, is not an isolated event but rather a hallmark of the current administration’s governance style.

This "announcement-and-retraction" pattern has been witnessed in several high-profile instances, such as the last-minute withdrawal of Maryam Shetty’s ministerial nomination while she was already at the Senate for screening, and the dramatic four-hour window between the reappointment and replacement of Muheeba Dankaka at the Federal Character Commission. Even broader policy shifts, like the initial list of 175 presidential pardons being slashed to 120 after public outcry over the inclusion of convicted drug traffickers, demonstrate a presidency that frequently hits the pause button.

These episodes highlight a recurring struggle between the official administrative machinery and the "cabals" or powerful interest groups that often manipulate government decisions behind the scenes, yet they also reveal a leader who refuses to let bureaucracy or deceptive manipulation have the final word.

Whether these reversals signify strength or weakness is a subject of intense debate, but there is a compelling argument that they represent a unique brand of institutional strength.

In the high-stakes world of Nigerian politics, where cabals often entrench themselves to ensure their interests are served regardless of the public good, the greatest strength a leader can show is the humility to say, "I was wrong," and the courage to correct a mistake before it causes permanent damage. A weak leader would stubbornly forge ahead with a flawed appointment or policy simply to avoid the "embarrassment" of a U-turn, effectively allowing the deceptive influences around them to win.

By choosing to reverse and correct what he identifies as a wrong step—even at the cost of immediate social media criticism—President Tinubu is teaching a masterclass in the idea that bureaucracy should not be a cage. It suggests that for this administration, a decision is never truly "over" if it is found to be unjust or technically flawed, prioritizing the ultimate outcome over the optics of initial consistency.

These corrections have brought a certain level of pragmatism to Nigeria’s ways of doing things, even if the process appears messy.

The reversal of the Dakingari appointment, for example, was reportedly linked to a "naming error" and the fact that his name had not actually been cleared by the Senate, highlighting a move toward stricter adherence to constitutional protocols and due diligence.

Similarly, the revisions to tax reform guidelines and the suspension of the "Expatriate Employment Levy" after stakeholder pushback show a government that is responsive to the "pulse of the people" rather than one that is ideologically rigid.

While critics see these flip-flops as evidence of a lack of foresight, supporters see them as the mark of a "listening presidency" that is willing to dismantle the deceptive manipulations of the elite in real-time.

In this light, the willingness to reverse course is not an act of shame, but a necessary tool for a leader navigating a complex political landscape where the "right step" is often obscured by those seeking to have their way at the nation's expense.