By Ikemefuna Ozobi
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s Democracy Day address to the joint session of the National Assembly on June 12, 2025, came at a critical juncture in Nigeria’s democratic and economic trajectory. While his speech was rhetorically polished, historically expansive and symbolically generous, it also appeared tone-deaf to the economic suffering endured by ordinary Nigerians.
Tinubu’s oration was rich in democratic symbolism and historical references, rightly situating the June 12 struggle within a broader narrative of national sacrifice. However, the address failed to adequately reflect the urgency of Nigeria’s current economic crisis. Millions of Nigerians are grappling with soaring food prices, crippling inflation, stagnant wages and the sharp decline of purchasing power. Against this backdrop, the President’s proclamations that “inflation is easing gradually” and “the naira exchange rate has stabilised” border on economic gaslighting.
The data presented—such as 2024’s 3.4% GDP growth and improved foreign reserves—may be technically accurate but lack credibility when not grounded in lived experience. These macroeconomic gains have not translated into improved standards of living. Instead, they reflect the kind of technocratic detachment that has come to characterize economic policymaking under Tinubu’s administration.
One of the most elaborate sections of Tinubu’s speech was his tribute to democracy heroes, including posthumous honours to MKO Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Ken Saro-Wiwa and other notable activists, journalists, and politicians. While these gestures are emotionally resonant and symbolically valuable, they may also function as a distraction from the political inertia and socio-economic dislocation plaguing the country.
By invoking the heroism of past democratic actors, the president shifts attention from the democratic impunity in Rivers State, and gradual slide to dictatorship. It also rankled with urgent challenges of today – rampant insecurity, youth unemployment, and decaying infrastructure. This rhetorical move, though common in political speeches, is not harmless; it subtly suggests that the present hardships are mere growing pains in a long democratic journey rather than the result of specific policy failures.
Tinubu cited several initiatives such as the Nigerian Consumer Credit Corporation (CREDICORP), the fibre optic broadband rollout, the National Credit Guarantee Company, and tax reforms as evidence of economic revitalization. Yet, these claims are aspirational at best and misleading at worst. The consumer credit schemes, for instance, benefit a small percentage of the population – mainly civil servants – while the vast informal sector, which forms the bulk of Nigeria’s workforce, remains excluded. Moreover, the fibre optic project, though promising, is still largely conceptual. In a country where epileptic power supply and poor internet infrastructure remain the norm, the promise of a digital revolution feels premature and exaggerated.
The president spent a considerable portion of his address dispelling fears of Nigeria slipping into a one-party state. He referenced his history as a stalwart of opposition politics to assure Nigerians of his democratic credentials. However, the ongoing wave of political defections – especially the high-profile decampment of governors and legislators from the opposition to the ruling APC – suggests otherwise. Paradoxically, as the President was addressing the National Assembly, the Ebonyi State governor was threatening to deal with any traditional ruler in the state who fails to campaign for the second tenure of Mr. President.
The irony was not lost when Tinubu mocked parties losing members, saying, “Try your best to put your house in order. I will not help you do so. It is, indeed, a pleasure to witness you in such disarray.” Such triumphalism undermines his earlier call for bipartisan cooperation and exposes the contradiction between democratic ideals and Machiavellian power consolidation.
Tinubu’s claim that Nigeria’s highways are safer and that coordination among security agencies has improved contradicts widespread reports of insecurity in rural and urban areas alike. Kidnappings for ransom, banditry, and insurgent attacks remain persistent threats across several states.
While the president’s praise of the Armed Forces was fitting, his assurances lacked the necessary gravitas and specificity that could reassure a nation battered by violent extremism. Security reforms under his watch remain opaque, and citizens have seen little change in their daily sense of vulnerability.
Towards the end of his speech, Tinubu spoke with statesmanlike clarity about the values of democracy – dialogue over dictatorship, persuasion over suppression, tolerance for dissent, and the need for vibrant civic engagement. Yet, his administration has faced criticism for shrinking civic space. From the harassment of journalists to the suppression of peaceful protests, actions on the ground contradict the president’s lofty pronouncements.
His defence of free speech—“Call me names, call me whatever you will, and I will still call upon democracy to defend your right to do so”—rings hollow when placed against the backdrop of growing state hostility toward critical voices.
Tinubu’s address made sweeping claims about achievements but glossed over some of the most pressing issues Nigerians face: The decision to remove fuel subsidies, while economically rational, has led to skyrocketing transportation costs and increased prices for goods and services across the board. No significant cushioning measures have been implemented, despite repeated promises.
Although Tinubu declared that Nigeria is on the path to “food sovereignty,” the reality is that food inflation continues to surge. Local production is hampered by insecurity in agrarian regions, poor logistics, and a weak value chain.
The president failed to address the deepening trust gap between government and citizens. Many Nigerians perceive government reforms as elite-centered and disconnected from the struggles of everyday people.
The conferment of national honours on both living and deceased activists and journalists is a noble gesture that aligns with the spirit of June 12. It offers some moral capital to an administration that sorely needs it. However, symbolic gestures, no matter how well-intentioned, cannot substitute for practical governance that alleviates suffering and restores dignity. The nominations for the national honours lacked thoroughness as some important heroes of democracy were omitted for inexplicable reasons. Until the government can demonstrate how these recognitions translate into protections for human rights, press freedom, and economic justice today, such gestures risk being seen as performative.
President Tinubu’s 2025 Democracy Day address was an oratorical triumph but a governance letdown. It succeeded in unifying historical memory, honouring past sacrifices, and articulating democratic ideals. But it failed to engage honestly with the economic despair millions of Nigerians face daily. It read more like a campaign address than a solemn reflection of a president halfway through his term, accountable to a population burdened by hunger, joblessness, and insecurity.
As the nation marks 26 years of uninterrupted democracy, Nigerians yearn not just for speeches that elevate history but for leadership that understands the urgency of now. Democracy, after all, must not only be remembered, it must be felt. And until the average Nigerian can afford food, safety, and dignity, democracy remains an idea deferred.
