Could Nigeria's careful ethnic balancing act be under threat?
In Nigerian politics, there has long been an informal understanding: presidential appointments should carefully balance the country's many ethnic and religious differences. Today, there are growing concerns that this is being ignored.
While the constitution requires regional representation in cabinet positions, the broader distribution of other prominent roles has traditionally followed a convention aimed at fostering national cohesion.
Nigeria's fractious divisions have in the past torn the country – Africa's most populous – apart.
Concerns about fairness in presidential appointments are not new, but a chorus of criticism is growing over President Bola Tinubu's picks, with some accusing the head of state – who has been in power for two years – of favouring people from his own Yoruba ethnic group.
The presidency vehemently denies the accusation.
There have long been fears that members of one ethnic group would come to dominate key positions – and this means that presidential appointments are closely scrutinised whenever they are announced.
There are over 250 ethnic groups in the country with Hausa-Fulanis, Igbo and Yoruba – hailing from the north, south-east and south-west respectively - being the three largest.
Critics say that Tinubu, a southern Muslim, showed signs of ignoring precedent from the onset when he picked another Muslim (although from the north) to be his running mate for the last election.
Since the return of democracy in 1999, the major parties had always put forward a mixed Muslim-Christian ticket, as the country is roughly evenly divided between followers of the two religions.
Tinubu's appointments since becoming president in May 2023 are facing growing cricisim.
Although there are dozens of roles for a head of state to fill, there are eight jobs that "are the most crucial for every administration", according to political analyst and barrister Lawal Lawal.
These are the heads of the:
central bank
state-owned oil company, NNPC
police
army
customs service
intelligence agency
anti-corruption agency and
revenue service.
There is no constitutional ranking of positions, but collectively these roles control the key financial and security apparatus of the country.
Every president inherits his predecessor's appointees, but has the prerogative to replace them.
As of April, all eight positions under Tinubu are now filled by Yorubas.
The recent appointment of former Shell boss Bayo Ojulari to head the state-owned oil company, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC), in place of a northerner turbocharged the debate about the apparent monopoly of one group in top positions.
Looking at who filled the same posts under Tinubu's two immediate predecessors, there was no such dominance of one ethnic group at the same stage of their presidencies.
Goodluck Jonathan – who served from 2010 to 2015 – had a relatively balanced team of two ethnic Fulanis, two Hausas, one Atyap, one Igbo, one Yoruba and one Calabar.
When it came to Muhammadu Buhari – in power from 2015 to 2023 – the situation was less clear.
In the top eight he had three Hausas, two Kanuris, one Igbo, one Yoruba and one Nupe.
But in the minds of many Nigerians, Hausas, Kanuris and Nupes are all seen as northerners – and therefore there was a perception that Buhari, who is from the north, showed favouritism.
Some argue that Tinubu's appointments have merely continued the trend, but the 100%-Yoruba make-up of the eight key positions is unprecedented.
"For a democratically elected president, I cannot remember at any point in Nigerian history where you have this high concentration of a particular ethnic group holding most of the sensitive positions," history professor Tijjani Naniya told the BBC.
This is not just about what has happened in the past but it could have an impact on the unity and even the future of the country, the professor said.
"For me, the fear is what if the next president continues on this path and picks most of the sensitive positions from his ethnic group, it diminishes the feeling of belonging among the rest and also reduces belief in democracy," he said.
In the last two years, many northerners, mostly Hausa-Fluanis, have looked at the apparent direction of travel with alarm.
The current men (there are no women) in charge of the NNPC, the police, customs and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) all replaced northerners.
The removal of Abdulrasheed Bawa, a Hausa, as boss of the EFCC in 2023 just two years after he was appointed was especially controversial.
He was arrested, accused of abuse of office and detained for over 100 days before the charges were dropped.
He was replaced by Ola Olukoyode, an ethnic Yoruba.
Some from the north felt Mr Bawa was unfairly treated and pushed aside to make way for Mr Olukoyode.
"The president needs to know that the Yoruba people are just a part of the country, and all appointments should be spread across all ethnic groups and regions," social affairs analyst Isah Habibu told the BBC.
Without addressing specific cases, a Tinubu spokesperson has said the president is being fair and balanced, by taking the wider view of all appointments.
Media aide Sunday Dare did try to go into detail, saying overall, 71 northerners and 63 southerners had been appointed by Tinubu. But his 9 April post on X was later deleted, after people pointed out errors in his claim.
He promised an updated list, but more than six month slater, it has yet to appear.
Tinubu faces critics even from within his own party.
Senator Ali Ndume is from the north and – like Tinubu – belongs to the All Progressives Congress. In one television interview he said he had gone on air to talk about the president's appointment "wrongdoings".
Ndume said he was shocked, describing them as "non-inclusive and not reflecting the president's 'Renewed Hope' agenda, which promised to carry every section of the country along".
Another presidential aide, Daniel Bwala, disputed the idea that some positions were more significant than others.
"All I know is that the constitutional provisions [regarding appointments] have been taken care of by the president - there's nowhere in the constitution [where it is] mentioned top five, top 10 and the rest," he told the BBC.
"The way we see it is that any position or appointment that one is privileged to serve in is very critical and important.
"The national security adviser is from the north-east, the chief of defence staff is from the north-west and the secretary to the federal government is from north-central."
The Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, which coordinates policy on behalf of the presidency, released a statement on 12 April saying Tinubu was being fair.
"This administration is dedicated to ensuring that all regions and demographics of the country are adequately represented in its institutions and agencies," it said.
Political analyst Mr Lawal said the president should appoint the best person for the job, irrespective of their ethnic origin – and agues that this is what Tinubu is doing.
"It's high time Nigeria looks beyond ethnicity," he said.
There could be a time when Nigerians no longer obsess over the ethnic origins of those in the upper echelons of government, but historian Prof Naniya says this is still some way off.
He believes it can only happen when the country gets at least four presidents in succession who give every section a sense of belonging in terms of projects and appointments.
"I think it can be done but needs the right leaders."
Nigeria's spectacular horse parade closing Ramadan
'I scarred my six children by using skin-lightening creams'
'How I survived Nigeria attack that killed my 16 friends'
Are Nigerians abroad widening the class divide back home?
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Africa Daily
Focus on Africa
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Week in Pictures: May 30 - June 6, 2025
From Muslim pilgrims performing Hajj, continued conflict in the Middle East and the German chancellor's visit to Washington to the North Korean leader meeting Russia's security chief, dpa international presents its Pictures of the Week.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What exactly is Trump's new travel ban about? Not national security
A version of this story appeared in CNN's What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here. Any reasonable American could objectively ask what exactly President Donald Trump's new travel ban, which affects a dozen countries, is about. Is it about protecting Americans from 'murderers,' as Trump said Thursday, or punishing small countries for a modest number of students who overstayed their visas? The drive for Trump's first-term travel ban in 2017 and 2018 was clear. He was seeking to deliver on an ugly campaign promise to ban all Muslims from entering the US. That morphed, over the course of years as the administration adapted to court cases, into a ban on travel to the US by people from certain countries, most of which were majority-Muslim. It was only by agreeing to ignore Trump's anti-Muslim 2016 campaign statements and focus solely on the security-related language in his third attempt at a travel ban that the US Supreme Court ultimately gave its blessing to that ban. '… We must consider not only the statements of a particular President, but also the authority of the Presidency itself,' wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in the majority opinion. Trump is using that authority again in his second term. But this time, as he said Thursday in the Oval Office, the ban is about removing 'horrendous' people who are in the country now and about keeping murderers out. The data suggest the travel ban will primarily affect students and businesspeople from countries in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean as well as the Middle East. It was an attack on Jewish community members in Colorado by an Egyptian national that convinced Trump to speed up plans to ban people from a dozen countries from entering the US, restarting the travel ban policy he pioneered during his first term. But Egypt is not on the travel ban list. Neither is Kuwait, the country where Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the suspect in the Boulder attack, lived before coming to the US. 'Egypt has been a country we deal with very closely. They have things under control,' Trump told reporters Thursday. Instead, the travel ban includes countries that Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who assembled the list, feel don't have things under control. That includes places like Equatorial Guinea in Africa and Burma, also known as Myanmar, in Asia. Neither is a nexus of terror threatening the American homeland. Trump's order announcing the travel ban explains that these countries have high rates of students and other travelers overstaying their visas in the US. It points to a report of DHS 'overstay' data from 2023 to argue that for more than 70% of people from Equatorial Guinea with US student visas, there is no record of them leaving the US when their visa ended. In real numbers, that equals 233 people with student visas. The numbers are similarly small for other African countries. 'They're just throwing things at the wall,' said David Bier, an immigration expert at the libertarian-leaning Cato institute and a Trump immigration policy critic. 'There's not really a coherent philosophy behind any of this,' Bier added. The reinstated travel ban does include countries associated with terrorism, including Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen, all of which were also included in Trump's first-term travel ban. But it's worth noting that no immigrant or traveler from one of these countries has launched a terror attack on the US in recent years, according to a review by the Washington Post during Trump's first term. A man from Sudan killed one person at a Tennessee church in 2017. 'The president claims that there is no way to vet these nationals, yet that is exactly what his consular officers and border officials have successfully done for decades,' Bier said. The man responsible for the ISIS-inspired truck bomb in New Orleans in January, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, was a Texas-born Army veteran and US citizen. The new travel ban also includes Afghanistan, which could jeopardize many Afghans related to those who aided the US during its war there, as Shawn VanDiver, president of the aid organization #AfghanEvac, told CNN's Jim Sciutto on Thursday. 'There are 12,000 people who have been separated through the actions of our government, who have been waiting for more than three and a half years,' he said. The Trump administration recently paused the processing of student visas, interrupting the plans of thousands of people to study in the US. In the Oval Office, Trump said he was not interested in banning students from China. 'It's our honor to have them, frankly, we want to have foreign students, but we want them to be checked,' Trump said, suggesting there will be even more strenuous background checks in the future. The existence of the travel ban list could also factor into tariff negotiations the Trump administration has taken on with nations across the world, as well as its effort to countries nations to take back migrants it wants to deport. 'It's about power and control and manipulating both the US population to suppress dissent as well as trying to manipulate foreign relations with these countries by getting them to do whatever he wants in order to get off the disfavored nation list,' Bier said.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Progressives push anti-Israel activism, are surprised by antisemitic violence that follows
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is running for cover. After the horrific attack on Jews in Boulder, Colo., the Minnesota representative issued the kind of bland statement meant to deflect blame, posting this on X: 'I'm holding the victims and families in Boulder, Colorado in my heart. Violence against anyone is never acceptable. We must reject hatred and harm in all its forms.' As some noted, it took nearly 24 hours for Omar to issue even that statement, which notably failed to mention that the victims were Jews and the suspect is an Egyptian Muslim who attacked them while shouting 'Free Palestine.' A video has now surfaced in which the accused assailant ranted about his faith, saying 'Allahu Akbar.' After he firebombed a group of Jews, he told investigators he wanted to 'kill all Zionist people.' One of the victims, an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor, asked NBC News, 'What the hell is going on in our country?' It's a question everyone should be asking. Here's part of the answer: It is a very easy hop from college students intimidating Jewish students and chanting about Intifada and a Muslim man trying to murder Jews. It is similarly but a short leap from Omar, who applauded anti-Israel student protesters at Columbia University for being 'brave and patriotic,' voted against an antisemitism resolution in the U.S. House and suggested to aggrieved people acting out of anger that some Jewish students are just 'pro-genocide.' It is also easy to connect student demonstrations with terrorism. For the first time, a protester at Columbia University — an outsider arrested for hate crimes against Jews — has been linked to Hamas. He won't be the last. In recent months we have witnessed not only the hideous attempt to burn Jews alive in Boulder, but also the firebombing of Jewish Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro's home and the cold-blooded murder of two young Jewish people at the Jewish Capital Museum in Washington. All three suspects expressed anti-Israel sentiments, with the alleged perpetrator of the latter killings shouting 'free, free Palestine' after he shot the victims 21 times. The Anti-Defamation League reports that 2024 saw a record number of antisemitic attacks, up 344 percent over the past five years. This is intolerable. Radicalized students at some of our top schools are part of the problem. Recently, MIT's graduation was marred by a student speaker, Megha Vemuri, who donned the politically symbolic keffiyeh and told the commencement audience, 'We are watching Israel try to wipe out Palestine off the face of the earth, and it is a shame that MIT is a part of it.' She also accused MIT of complicity 'in the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people.' Writing in the Times of Israel, one alum panned the speech as a 'trite, TikTok-depth graduation speech on a tragic issue of devastating complexity'; she condemned the administration for not informing the audience of myriad programs funded by MIT that improves the lives and futures of Palestinians. MIT's president, Sally Kornbluth, did not defend the university or refute Vemuri's incendiary language; instead, she stepped to the podium and said, 'At MIT, we believe in freedom of expression. But today is about the graduates.' Not, apparently, about the Jewish graduates. A Jew graduating with a Ph.D in cryptography posted on X: 'I finally got my PhD from @MIT, with my 5-year-old twins, my 2-year-old and my parents (children of Holocaust survivors) traveling halfway around the world just to be there. Instead, MIT's student commencement speaker decided it was appropriate to use the moment for hate-filled rhetoric against Israelis and Jews … too many in the crowd erupted with cheers and anger. My kids might not have understood every word, but they felt the fear and hostility. … How could @MIT let this happen? How, indeed. It is not only schools that are allowing anti-Jewish and anti-Israel hatred to spiral out of control; because the fever is being staunchly condemned by the Trump White House, the media has gone mushy. After the Boulder incident, USA Today ran a sob-sister piece about the offspring of the Egyptian man who tried to burn Jews alive with the headline: 'Boulder suspect's daughter dreamed of studying medicine. Now she faces deportation.' After receiving massive blowback, USA Today quietly revised the offensive piece. Increasingly, it is progressives like Omar who are responsible for surging antisemitism. Apologists claim that supporting Palestine and opposing Israel do not constitute antisemitism. Perhaps they would not in in isolation, but the protesters have taken pains to muddy the waters as much as possible. As the New York Times recently noted, 'the sprawling protest movement against the war in Gaza has scrambled efforts to distinguish opposition to the actions of the Israeli government, or even to the state of Israel itself, from hostility to Jews. Critics of the protesters have argued that slogans like 'globalize the Intifada' are thinly veiled calls for violence in any Jewish space.' A rabbi in Boulder was quoted by the Times writing, 'Jews in America have mostly felt the threats of antisemitism from the far right in the form of White Supremacy, yet now many of us have experienced hatred, bigotry and intolerance from progressives, those who many of us have considered friends and allies.' In City Journal, Charles Fain Lehman writes, 'The American radical anti-Israel movement has built the intellectual scaffolding for—and in many cases all but invited—the violence now playing out in places like Boulder. When you call for 'Intifada,' you cannot feign surprise when someone takes that call literally. Whatever your legal right to speak, that is the outcome you invoked.' Lehman is correct: The Intifada is here and must be confronted. Our government must protect free speech criticizing Israel or supporting Palestine, but it must also deploy all resources to punish acts of violence — including on college campuses — before more people get hurt. If it were blacks or Asians under attack, we would not have to defend efforts to stave off hate crimes. Jews should be afforded the same protections. Liz Peek is a former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim and Company.