The Peril of Sycophancy: Nigeria’s democracy teeters on the edge, by Emman Usman Shehu
In Nigeria, a nation of 230 million people whose democratic dreams have been tested by decades of turbulence, a single outburst can lay bare the fragility of its political soul. When Dumebi Kachikwu, a close ally of President Bola Tinubu, accused Mahmood Yakubu, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), of “undermining” the president by recognising the David Mark-led faction of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), he did more than spark a political firestorm. His inflammatory rhetoric—calling a legal, procedural act a “big middle finger” to Tinubu—revealed a dangerous mindset that threatens Nigeria’s democracy. This is not just a clash of political egos; it is a symptom of a deeper malaise, one fueled by a culture of sycophancy that President Tinubu himself has, wittingly or not, helped cultivate.
Kachikwu’s outburst reflects a troubling expectation that independent institutions like INEC should serve as extensions of the presidency rather than impartial arbiters of the law. His words are not an isolated tantrum but a manifestation of a political culture where loyalty to the leader trumps loyalty to the nation. At the heart of this culture lies Tinubu, a political titan whose storied career as a pro-democracy activist and Lagos kingmaker has paradoxically sown the seeds for the very sycophancy now eroding Nigeria’s democratic guardrails.
Tinubu’s rise to the presidency in 2023 was built on a formidable political machine, one that thrives on loyalty and patronage. As governor of Lagos State from 1999 to 2007, he mastered the art of consolidating power through a network of allies who owed their success to his influence. This approach, while effective in building a political dynasty, has fostered a cadre of loyalists who view dissent or institutional autonomy as betrayal.
Kachikwu’s attack on INEC is a case in point—a loyalist’s reflex to shield the president from perceived slights, even at the cost of undermining the rule of law. Tinubu’s failure to publicly disavow such rhetoric, or to rein in allies who pressure independent bodies, sends a tacit signal that loyalty to him outweighs fidelity to democratic principles.
READ ALSO: Tinubu’s crisis of competence and democratic backsliding, by Emman Usman Shehu
This pattern repeats across his administration. Just weeks before Tinubu’s second anniversary in office this May, the All Progressives Congress (APC), led by National Chairman Abdullahi Ganduje, hastily endorsed him as the party’s sole candidate for 2027—ignoring widespread economic hardships and public discontent. Governor Hope Uzodimma of Imo State, backed by Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas, piled on with effusive praise, framing the move as recognition of “sterling performance” amid soaring inflation and insecurity. Such premature adulation, disconnected from reality, exemplifies how Tinubu’s ecosystem rewards flattery over accountability, turning the party into an echo chamber that prioritizes his image over governance.
The sycophancy extends to absurd legislative gestures. In October 2024, House Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu sponsored a bill for the “Bola Ahmed Tinubu Federal University of Nigerian Languages,” ostensibly to promote indigenous tongues but widely derided as narcissistic overreach, given Tinubu’s limited contributions to language policy. Critics, including human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong, lambasted it as emblematic of Nigeria’s “sycophancy problem,” especially ironic amid the president’s own contested educational credentials. Tinubu’s silence on the proposal only emboldens such displays, reinforcing a culture where naming rights serve as currency for favor.
Even governors join the fray. In early September 2025, Niger State’s Umar Bago unilaterally declared himself director-general of Tinubu’s 2027 campaign, a self-serving act decried by opposition figures as undermining APC leadership while currying personal relevance. This rush to anoint Tinubu prematurely, despite his administration’s unproven record, underscores how his patronage networks incentivize loyalty displays over substantive policy.
Nor does the damage stop at optics. APC chieftain Adamu Garba warned in July 2025 that sycophants are “misleading” Tinubu with false assurances that “things are okay,” insulating him from crises like the naira’s volatility—exacerbated by his economic reforms—and rampant corruption.
This bubble has led to public gaffes, such as Tinubu’s August 2025 claim in Brazil that his government has eradicated corruption, or his September assertion that the naira stabilised from ₦1,900 to ₦1,450 per dollar—both starkly at odds with reality, where the currency hovers above ₦1,600. Such “presidential dissociative disorder,” as columnist Farooq Kperogi termed it, stems directly from an entourage that prioritizes comfort over candor.
This is not to say Tinubu actively seeks to dismantle Nigeria’s institutions. His history as a fierce opponent of military rule in the 1990s suggests a commitment to democratic ideals.
READ ALSO: When I arrived at…, by Dr Emman Shehu
Yet, as president, his leadership style—marked by a reliance on personal loyalty and a reluctance to confront sycophantic excesses—has created an environment where figures like Kachikwu feel emboldened to challenge institutional independence. Reports of his administration exerting influence over judicial appointments and regulatory agencies, though unproven, fuel perceptions of a presidency that prioritises control over accountability.
When allies like Ganduje or Kalu demand that institutions bend to the president’s will, they are not acting in a vacuum; they are reflecting a political culture that Tinubu has, at minimum, failed to curb. Indeed each new day Tinubu is coming across as a pretend-democrat while being deep in his heart an autocrat, evidenced by a closer scrutiny of his actions as Lagos State governor, and the current passion of turning the country into a one party state.
The essence of democracy lies in the strength of its institutions, not the charisma of its leaders. INEC’s recognition of the Mark-led ADC faction was not a personal affront to Tinubu but a procedural act guided by the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act. Such decisions, however messy, are the bedrock of a functioning republic, ensuring power is constrained by law, not dictated by loyalty.
Yet, when Tinubu’s allies demand that institutions prioritise the president’s interests, they erode the very guardrails that protect Nigeria from sliding into autocracy.
This sycophantic culture is a slow poison. It creates an echo chamber where criticism is branded as subversion, and independent thought is stifled. Nigeria’s history—marred by coups, electoral malfeasance, and institutional decay—offers a stark warning of where this path leads. The 2023 elections, plagued by allegations of rigging and logistical failures, already eroded public trust in INEC.
Kachikwu’s outburst, unchecked by Tinubu, only deepens this cynicism, signaling that even the mechanisms meant to ensure fairness are subject to political pressure. When citizens see institutions as tools of the state rather than servants of the public, voter apathy grows, and democracy becomes a hollow ritual.
Nigeria’s democratic fragility has implications beyond its borders. As Africa’s most populous nation and a beacon of democratic hope on a continent where authoritarianism persists, Nigeria’s trajectory matters. A faltering democracy here could embolden strongmen elsewhere, weakening democratic gains across Africa.
The world is watching, and Tinubu, as the architect of his administration’s culture, bears a unique responsibility. He can choose to lead by example—publicly affirming INEC’s independence, distancing himself from sycophantic allies like Ganduje and Bago, and fostering a political environment where dissent is valued as patriotic. Or he can allow the cult of loyalty to fester, risking a slide toward authoritarianism.
The path forward demands a reckoning.
Nigerians—politicians, civil society, and citizens—must reject the allure of sycophancy and recommit to the principles that sustain democracy.
For Tinubu, this means confronting the loyalty-driven culture he has nurtured and championing institutional autonomy. Defending INEC’s independence is not disloyalty to the president; it is a patriotic duty.
The alternative is a nation where power is unchecked, rights are negotiable, and the law bends to the will of one man. As the 2027 elections approach, Nigeria stands at a crossroads. The choice between principle and personality, between democracy and sycophancy, will shape its future. Tinubu, more than anyone, holds the power to steer the nation toward the former. The question is whether he will.
Dr Shehu is an Abuja-based writer, activist and educator.
Follow the Neptune Prime channel on WhatsApp:
Do you have breaking news, interview request, opinion, suggestion, or want your event covered? Email us at neptuneprime2233@gmail.com
