A powerful column by respected journalist Lasisi Olagunju, titled “A Nation of Defectors”, published in the Nigerian Tribune on April 28, 2025, has reignited the national conversation on loyalty, political consistency, and the long shadow of opportunism in Nigeria’s democracy.
The article praises President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s political evolution from opposition stalwart to President of the Federal Republic, presenting him as a rare example of strategic patience, resilience, and loyalty to cause — a stark contrast to the recent wave of defections from opposition parties, particularly the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Delta State.
“If Tinubu had feared arrest and trial for his sins… he would have abandoned his ACN and run into Goodluck Jonathan’s party in 2011,” Olagunju writes, emphasizing Tinubu’s principled refusal to jump ship in the face of adversity.
His narrative echoes a core truth in Nigerian politics: those who endure storms without betrayal often reap long-term rewards.
Defectors and the Parable of Betrayal
Drawing on classical definitions of betrayal from Latin (tradere) and Greek (paradidomi), Olagunju castigates modern political defectors as traitors, invoking the language of war, loyalty, and moral obligation. He warns that desertion during conflict — political or military — weakens institutions and kills armies.
“A trainee who jumped ship would sell his craft to the enemy if put in the cockpit.”
This metaphor aptly captures the public outrage at career politicians who switch parties not out of principle but perceived personal risk, ambition, or inducement.
But his critique doesn’t stop with individuals. Olagunju also attacks a broader political culture that rewards short-term gains over long-term vision — where political genius does not necessarily translate into effective governance.
“Why is the genius in politics not felt in governance?” he asks, before citing World Bank reports and UN humanitarian forecasts warning of worsening poverty, food insecurity, and malnutrition in Nigeria.
Critique: A Fairer Appraisal of Tinubu’s Governance
While Olagunju’s essay is sharp and analytically rich, its criticism of President Tinubu’s governance achievements risks being overly dismissive or even unfair, particularly when viewed against the complexity of Nigeria’s inherited systemic challenges.
It is important to note that Tinubu’s political genius is not merely tactical but reform-oriented. Since taking office, President Tinubu has initiated bold economic and structural reforms aimed at addressing decades of policy rot:
Fuel subsidy removal, though controversial, was a long-avoided but necessary step to stop wasteful government spending.
The unification of exchange rates under a market-driven system is creating a more transparent financial framework.
Digitalization of public services is now being deployed to block leakages and dismantle entrenched corrupt structures.
The declaration of a state of emergency on food security, coupled with irrigation initiatives like the construction of earth dams nationwide, targets a fundamental solution to inflation and hunger.
These are not cosmetic changes. They represent a strategic reset. Yet, like all major reform efforts, they require time, resilience, and patience to bear fruit.
As one administration official recently stated, “We are cleaning up 60 years of rot — you can’t disinfect decades of decay in two years.”
Indeed, Tinubu has not claimed perfection. But to dismiss his reform agenda as hollow, as Olagunju appears to suggest, is to ignore the cumulative weight of decades of institutional dysfunction and the difficulty of change in a country rife with competing interests, vested elites, and powerful rent-seeking actors.
Olagunju’s commendation of Tinubu’s political sacrifices and loyalty is accurate and unbiased. However, his claim that Tinubu’s genius “is not felt in governance” misses a crucial point: governance transformation is a marathon, not a sprint.
What Tinubu is attempting is not just power consolidation — it is systemic overhaul. He is plugging corruption pipelines before deciding how to confront the individuals behind them. That strategy may not look dramatic in the short term, but it is often more sustainable in the long term.
Moreover, defectors were not forced into Tinubu’s party. Their sudden exit from the opposition is more likely linked to internal disputes, fear of exposure, or genuine admiration for the ruling party’s direction. Blaming the President for their choices assumes a coercion that has not been proven.
Conclusion: Defections, Discipline, and Democracy’s Future
Lasisi Olagunju’s article is a stirring reminder that Nigeria’s democracy suffers not from a lack of elections, but from a deficit of loyalty and courage. His focus on Tinubu’s political evolution is both timely and commendable.
Yet, in seeking to critique the defects of opportunism, his piece underplays the difficult and ongoing effort to reform governance under Tinubu’s administration. There is more happening beneath the surface than critics often see. The man who mastered politics may yet master Nigeria’s transformation — if given the space to finish what he started.
The real challenge for Nigeria lies in not just condemning defectors, but demanding discipline, consistency, and results from every side of the political spectrum. The time for political games is over; the time for results has arrived.
Dr. G. A. Fraser. MFR
The National Patriots.
