As of May 29, 2025, President Tinubu’s administration will mark its two-year milestone in office. This midpoint in a four-year presidential term offers a crucial opportunity to assess the effectiveness of the government, particularly in a democracy where governance is ideally responsive to the needs of the people. While other nations, such as the United States, provide their citizens a chance to reposition their government every two years through staggered elections, Nigeria’s electoral system locks its citizens into a fixed four-year cycle, making interim assessments all the more significant for accountability.
One of the most defining aspects of Tinubu’s first two years has been the implementation of controversial economic policies, including the removal of the fuel subsidy and the floating of the naira. These decisions, aimed at addressing long-term fiscal challenges, have had immediate and widespread ramifications.
The removal of the fuel subsidy led to a dramatic spike in fuel prices, from N195 to N617 per litre. The intended benefit—reducing government expenditure and fostering a market-driven economy—came at a steep cost to the average Nigerian. Transportation and energy expenses soared, driving up the prices of goods and services and worsening inflation. Economist Bismarck Rewane’s skepticism regarding the rebasing of inflation metrics suggests the real economic impact on households may be even more severe than officially reported.
Similarly, floating the naira caused unprecedented currency depreciation, with the exchange rate plummeting to nearly N2,000 per dollar before stabilizing at approximately N1,600 per dollar after significant government intervention. An $8 billion expenditure was reported to stabilize the naira, yet the effects of initial instability continue to reverberate. The weakened currency has made imports prohibitively expensive, forcing major foreign companies such as GlaxoSmithKline, P&G, and Unilever to scale back or exit the Nigerian market. This exodus has contributed to the shuttering of approximately 50 percent of manufacturing companies, as indicated by the Manufacturing Association of Nigeria, exacerbating unemployment and reducing national productivity.
The economic strain has had profound societal repercussions, with hunger, poverty, and protests becoming increasingly visible. Reports of children being arrested for treason during protests, and fainting in court due to malnutrition, highlight the humanitarian crisis unfolding across the nation. Critics have questioned the ethical responsibilities of governance, arguing that the government’s policies appear disconnected from the realities faced by its citizens, particularly vulnerable populations.
The societal dissatisfaction has eroded trust in the government, with calls for more compassionate and inclusive policymaking growing louder. The administration’s perceived failure to prioritize the welfare of the populace has sparked widespread discontent and fueled conversations about moral legitimacy in governance.
Beyond economic policies, Tinubu’s administration has faced criticism regarding democratic accountability. Unlike staggered systems like the United States, Nigeria’s electoral structure does not provide midterm opportunities for citizens to recalibrate governance. This rigidity means Nigerians must endure the consequences of legislative and executive governance for the full four-year term, irrespective of its effectiveness.
The administration’s ability to address systemic challenges, including insecurity, unemployment, and healthcare deficits, remains under intense scrutiny. While some progress has been cited in certain sectors, the overarching narrative has been one of deepening economic inequality and societal unrest. Transparency and clear communication, essential hallmarks of a democratic government, appear to have fallen short, further alienating citizens from their elected leaders.
As Tinubu’s administration steps into its third year, the halfway point offers an opportunity for recalibration. Reflecting on the past two years, several lessons emerge:
- Economic policies must be implemented with a balance between long-term fiscal goals and immediate societal welfare.
- Inclusion and empathy should be cornerstones of policymaking, particularly for vulnerable groups such as children and low-income families.
- Efforts to restore trust between the government and its citizens are paramount, requiring greater transparency and responsiveness.
Moving forward, the government must prioritize measures that alleviate the suffering of its people, focusing on inflation control, job creation, and poverty reduction. Strengthening democratic accountability mechanisms—perhaps by enabling staggered elections or midterm citizen reviews—should also become a topic of national discourse.
At the two-year mark, Tinubu’s administration stands at a crossroads. While the policies enacted thus far have aimed to address systemic economic challenges, their implementation has caused immediate hardship for many Nigerians. The next two years will be critical in determining whether the government can steer the nation toward stability and prosperity, fostering not only economic growth but also societal cohesion and democratic accountability. For Nigerians, this period remains a test of resilience and hope, as they look to their leaders to prioritize the well-being of the populace in the pursuit of governance and reform.
The government policies recently implemented in Nigeria, including the removal of the fuel subsidy and the floating of the naira, have generated significant debate and stirred widespread concern among citizens. These policies, introduced during President Tinubu’s administration, have triggered profound economic and societal changes, with far-reaching impacts on the daily lives of Nigerians and the nation’s broader economic landscape.
The removal of the fuel subsidy announced during President Tinubu’s inauguration led to a sharp increase in fuel prices, rising from approximately N195 to N617 per litre. While the stated goal of this policy was to reduce government expenditures and foster a more market-driven economy, the immediate effect was a steep rise in transportation costs and energy expenses. This, in turn, has dramatically increased the cost of goods and services, amplifying the financial burden on households already grappling with economic challenges.
The fuel subsidy removal disproportionately affects the poorest strata of society, who rely heavily on affordable fuel for their livelihoods. Many Nigerians find it increasingly difficult to afford basic necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter. The resulting inflation has compounded the hardship, with prices skyrocketing across all sectors. Although inflation metrics were reportedly rebased to reflect a lower rate of 24 percent, economist Bismarck Rewane has expressed skepticism about the accuracy of these figures, suggesting that the real impact on consumers remains devastating.
The decision to float the naira has led to unprecedented currency depreciation, shifting the official exchange rate from N420 to nearly N2,000 per dollar before stabilizing at around N1,600 per dollar following government intervention. The administration reportedly spent $8 billion to stabilize the naira, yet the ripple effects of the initial currency instability continue to reverberate through the economy.
The weakened naira has made imports more expensive, adversely affecting industries reliant on foreign goods and services. As a result, major foreign companies such as GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), P&G, Unilever, and PZ Cussons have either scaled back operations or exited the Nigerian market entirely. The Manufacturing Association of Nigeria has reported that approximately 50 percent of manufacturing companies have shut down, further exacerbating unemployment and reducing the nation’s productive capacity.
The economic strain caused by these policies has led to severe societal repercussions. Hunger and poverty levels have escalated, prompting protests from citizens, including children. The arrest and arraignment of protesting children for treason highlight the growing desperation among the populace and the perceived insensitivity of the government to the plight of its citizens. Reports of children fainting during court proceedings due to malnutrition underscore the alarming humanitarian crisis unfolding in the country.
The harsh realities of these policies have raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of governance. Critics argue that any administration failing to prioritize the welfare of its citizens—especially vulnerable groups such as children—risks losing moral legitimacy. The policies’ perceived draconian nature has sparked widespread dissatisfaction, fostering distrust between the government and its people and igniting calls for more compassionate and inclusive policymaking
While the removal of the fuel subsidy and the floating of the naira were intended to address long-term economic challenges, their implementation has led to immediate and severe economic and societal consequences. The rising cost of living, inflation, and widespread business closures have profoundly impacted Nigerians, particularly those in the lower-income brackets. Moving forward, it is essential for the government to reassess its approach, seeking solutions that balance fiscal responsibility with the urgent need to alleviate the suffering of its citizens. Only through inclusive and empathetic policymaking can the nation hope to foster economic stability and social cohesion.
