Buhari’s Legacy Deserves a More Balanced Assessment
By Aniefiok Victoria Asuquo
I read with interest Blueprint’s report dated 14 July, 2026 (page 8) of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s tribute to former President Muhammadu Buhari, in which he stated that Buhari “served with courage and gave all he had to Nigeria.” While citizens are entitled to differing views on the former president’s legacy, reducing his eight-year tenure to a complete failure risks overlooking important facts and the complexities of governance in a country as challenging as Nigeria.
There is no doubt that Buhari’s administration faced serious shortcomings. Insecurity remained a persistent challenge despite repeated military operations against insurgents, bandits and kidnappers. Many communities across the North East, North West and other parts of the country continued to experience violence, displacement and economic disruption. On the economic front, Nigerians endured difficult periods marked by recession, rising inflation, unemployment and declining purchasing power. These realities cannot and should not be dismissed.
However, acknowledging these failures does not automatically invalidate the claim that Buhari gave his all to the country. Public service is often judged not only by outcomes but also by commitment, intentions and the circumstances within which leaders operate. Buhari inherited a nation grappling with falling oil prices, a fragile economy, widespread corruption concerns and an entrenched insurgency that had already claimed thousands of lives before he assumed office in 2015.
To many Nigerians, Buhari’s personal reputation for integrity remained one of his strongest attributes. His administration implemented the Treasury Single Account (TSA) on a broader scale, strengthened the Bank Verification Number (BVN) framework, expanded social investment programmes and pursued infrastructure projects, including major road, rail and bridge developments across different regions of the country. While opinions may differ on the effectiveness of these initiatives, they demonstrate that the administration was not entirely devoid of policy direction or effort.
Similarly, in the area of anti-corruption, Buhari came into office on a promise to confront graft. Critics may argue that the anti-corruption campaign was selective or insufficient, yet it would be inaccurate to suggest that no efforts were made. Several recoveries of public funds and reforms in public financial management occurred during his tenure. Whether these measures achieved their intended objectives is a legitimate subject of debate, but their existence cannot be ignored.
The assertion that Buhari lacked courage also deserves closer examination. Courage in leadership is not measured solely by popularity or immediate success. Some of Buhari’s decisions, including border closures, subsidy-related policies, exchange-rate controls and anti-corruption measures, attracted intense criticism precisely because they carried political and economic consequences. Whether those decisions were right or wrong is debatable, but making controversial choices in the face of opposition is itself a form of political courage.
History is often kinder to nuance than to absolutes. Buhari’s presidency neither delivered all that was promised nor represented an unbroken record of failure. His administration recorded achievements in some sectors and disappointments in others. Millions of Nigerians remember the economic hardship and security concerns that characterised much of his tenure. Yet many also acknowledge investments in infrastructure, agriculture, social intervention programmes and institutional reforms.
President Tinubu’s tribute should therefore be understood within the context of honouring a predecessor and former national leader. Such tributes are common in democratic societies and do not necessarily amount to an attempt to rewrite history. Equally, critics have every right to scrutinise Buhari’s record and highlight areas where expectations were not met.
Ultimately, Buhari’s place in Nigeria’s history will be determined neither by glowing tributes nor harsh condemnations alone. It will be judged by a balanced assessment of both his accomplishments and failures. To portray him as a leader who did nothing for Nigeria is as inaccurate as portraying him as a leader who could do no wrong.
The true verdict on Buhari’s legacy lies somewhere between those two extremes.
Aniefiok Victoria Asuquo
Student, Department of Strategic Communication
Yakubu Gowon University
Email: [email protected]
