Tinubu-Shettima foreign trips, despite explanations from the Presidency, continue to generate serious concerns from prominent Nigerians. The timing, justification and impact come to question.
Some prominent Nigerians have voiced strong reactions to the foreign trips undertaken by President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima.
The Labour Party’s presidential candidate during the 2023 elections, Peter Obi, criticized their travels as fiscal irresponsibility. He raised concerns about the timing of these trips, especially as the country faces serious domestic economic challenges. The Conference of United Political Parties (CUPP) followed.
Tinubu departed for the United Kingdom on October 2 for a two-week working leave. He then traveled to France on October 11 for “another important engagement,” according to his Senior Special Assistant on Political and Other Matters, Ibrahim Masari. Meanwhile, Shettima left Abuja on Wednesday for Sweden on a two-day visit to represent Nigeria in bilateral engagements.
Obi reacted, stating, “While it is arguable that with the President and Vice President absent from the Villa, there is no vacancy in the Presidency, it’s concerning for a country with such myriads of domestic problems.” He expressed disappointment over Tinubu’s extended absence, saying, “The President had told us he would only be gone for 14 days. The 14 days have passed now, and we are waiting to see him in the country.”
He further emphasized the need for leadership, highlighting, “One would have expected him to return earlier, considering the volume of work that needs to be done in a troubled nation like ours.” Obi pointed out the hardships Nigerians face due to the administration’s policies.
Criticism of Tinubu-Shetima travel decisions
Obi questioned the necessity of delegating Shettima to Sweden while Tinubu was in France. “Again, since the President is reportedly in Paris, France, which is just about 833 nautical miles from Stockholm, Sweden, one wonders why he did not just attend the 2-day working visit to Sweden,” he said.
He suggested that Tinubu could have easily made the trip to Sweden en route back from France. “This would have saved time and the very scarce national resources we need critically at this time.” The decision to send Shettima instead meant that he had to travel over 3,000 nautical miles to attend the engagement.
Obi stated, “This does not represent the kind of fiscal responsibility and common sense expected of leaders whose people are facing severe hunger and poverty.” He urged leaders to prioritize the well-being of the people and manage resources effectively.
CUPP echoed these sentiments, describing the simultaneous absence of Tinubu and Shettima as a “dereliction of duty.” Chief Peter Ahmeh, the National Secretary of CUPP, condemned their decision to leave the country amid numerous pressing challenges.
‘Resulting vacuum’ from Tinubu-Shettima foreign trips
Ahmeh said, “At a time when Nigeria is grappling with a plethora of challenges, including a struggling economy and worsening insecurity, the leaders’ decision to abandon their posts is irresponsible.” He criticized their absence as a recipe for disaster, stating that it exacerbates the already dire situation.
“The resulting vacuum in governance undermines trust and sends a disturbing signal to international partners,” he added. He emphasized the need for steadfast leadership, noting that critical decisions are stalled in their absence.
Nigerians deserve leaders who prioritize the nation’s interests above personal convenience. Ahmeh concluded, “President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima must return immediately and attend to the pressing issues facing the nation.” Their absence, he claimed, reflects systemic failures that have plagued Nigeria for decades.
Leave feedback about this