The fallacy of the ‘decent young man’ — by Wale Bakare
“I know Goodluck Jonathan very well. He is a decent young man, but also inexperienced, and I believe that contributed to his inability to manage the affairs of the country, particularly when he was faced with challenges.” – Atiku Abubakar
Around 2016, a groundswell of disaffection with the trajectory of the then 17-year-old ‘nascent’ 4th Republic swept across Nigeria. It was fuelled by the disenchantment of youths with what they considered the less than stellar performance of the old guard who held the political space in a chokehold. In a country where over 60% of the population, being below 30, were constitutionally precluded from even aspiring for political office, the movement quickly gathered momentum, finding support across a wide spectrum of tendencies around the country and even internationally. The diadem was the Not-Too-Young-To-Run Act of 2018 (signed into law by President Buhari). The law sliced off a healthy five-year waiting period from almost all political offices across the land, including the minimum age of the President, which was reduced from 40 to 35 years. Now, even a 25-year-old can become a Member of the House of Representatives.
The foregoing preamble then brings into sharper focus the quoted statement of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. While the backhanded insult on President Jonathan might have been inadvertent, Atiku’s rather geriatric condescension in reference to the former president unveils a mindset which many thought had faded by 2018. Though the words “He is a decent young man” suggest he was speaking in the present tense, it is likely he was referring to Jonathan’s age at the time he was President. Jonathan will be 69 in November, while Atiku will be 80. That makes him just 11 years older. This does not make him old enough to be his father, and a man nearing the proverbial ‘threescore and ten’ cannot reasonably be described as a “decent young man.” The term is difficult to justify when used to describe someone who led Nigeria for six years. Jonathan may be a decent man, but young—clearly not.
If it is assumed that Atiku mixed up his tenses and intended to refer to Jonathan’s age when he became President, the argument still falters. Jonathan became President at 52, following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. At that age, he was by no means a young man. Many global leaders assumed office at younger ages. Barack Obama became President of the United States at 47, Emmanuel Macron of France at 39, Giorgia Meloni of Italy at 45, Justin Trudeau of Canada at 39, and David Cameron became UK Prime Minister at 43. Even Vladimir Putin first assumed the Russian presidency at 47.
The irony in Atiku’s position is that when he was sworn in as Vice President in 1999, he was also 52, turning 53 later that year. Had circumstances similar to those that elevated Jonathan occurred shortly after his inauguration with President Olusegun Obasanjo, would he have considered himself a “young man” unfit to lead? Would he have called for a new election in favour of an older candidate? Less than two years later, at age 54, he reportedly began positioning himself for higher office, aiming to assume the presidency by 2004 at 56. Decades later, he still believes he is the best candidate to lead Nigeria—now as a “decent old man.”
On the question of experience, it is unclear what Atiku meant. The concept of “cognate experience” often comes into play in professional settings, where employers seek candidates with relevant, practical background. Political participation alone does not necessarily equate to governance experience. Jonathan became President after serving as Local Government Chairman, Deputy Governor, Governor, and Vice President. Atiku, on the other hand, rose to national prominence from a career in the Nigeria Customs Service before becoming Vice President. This raises the question of what specific experience qualifies one individual over the other. In some contexts, certain experiences may even disqualify rather than qualify individuals for leadership roles, much like in corporate settings where irrelevant experience can hinder suitability for a position.
Atiku Abubakar remains constitutionally entitled to contest for the presidency for as long as he is eligible. Across Africa, there are several leaders who continue to govern well into their later years. Paul Biya of Cameroon is 91, Jean Lucien Savi de Tove became president at 86, while Alassane Ouattara of Côte d’Ivoire, Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo of Equatorial Guinea, and Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe are all in their eighties. Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, at 81, has also remained in power for decades. In that context, Atiku, at 80, would not be out of place among such leaders. However, belonging to that age bracket does not necessarily mean he represents what Nigeria currently needs.
