By:
Chukwudi George Ozalla
Today, I introduce what I call the Competitive Leadership Model, or what I also describe as the Peer Review Leadership Model. It is a simple philosophy of governance that came to me as I woke up this morning. The more I reflected on it, the more convinced I became that this is one ingredient missing in our democracy.
The Competitive Leadership Model is not about political parties exchanging insults or spending every waking day looking for faults in one another. It is not about pettiness or unnecessary antagonism. It is about political parties competing to deliver better governance. It is about who constructs better roads, provides better healthcare, improves public education, strengthens security, creates more jobs, attracts greater investment and leaves behind a better society than it inherited. Democracy should be a healthy competition in performance because that is the only competition that truly benefits the people.
That, in my view, is the real purpose of opposition in a democracy. Opposition should not exist simply to oppose. It should exist to present better ideas, better policies and a better record of what it intends to do differently. A government that performs well should naturally challenge the opposition to prepare itself even better. In the same way, a credible opposition should challenge every government to work harder because it knows the people are watching and comparing results.
Unfortunately, that is not the political culture we have built in Nigeria. Much of our politics revolves around accusations and counter-accusations. Every action by the government is condemned, while every criticism from the opposition is dismissed as politics. Lost in all these are the ordinary Nigerians who simply want a government that works. They are less interested in who wins the argument than in who improves their daily lives.
The unfortunate reality is that many of those who occupy the opposition front burner today have been in government before. Nigerians have watched politicians move from one political party to another without changing the way they govern. Instead, it is only the platform that changes. It is only the slogans that change. The faces remain the same and, in many cases, the style of governance hardly changes. We have seen those who criticised waste become extravagant when they assume office. We have equally seen those who condemned poor governance sometimes become defenders of the same system once power comes their way. That is why many Nigerians have become sceptical of political promises.
This is also why I have often maintained that many activists, labour leaders, journalists, social crusaders and public critics who eventually find their way into government do not always perform creditably. The expectation is usually very high because they spent years exposing the failures of those in authority. Many Nigerians expect them to bring fresh thinking and exemplary pragmatic leadership into governance. Sadly, that expectation is not always met. Some bend to the system they once fought. Others blend so completely with it that they become difficult to distinguish from the people they once criticised. In some cases, they leave office with records that compare unfavourably with those they spent years attacking.
This is one reason I believe Senator Adams Oshiomhole missed a rare opportunity. Having emerged from the labour movement to become governor of Edo State, many Nigerians expected him to use his national stature to nurture a stronger labour-based political movement. Even though he did not become governor on the platform of the Labour Party, he occupied a unique position from which he could have encouraged the growth of a credible labour-inspired opposition across Nigeria. He had the influence, the experience and the public goodwill to help build such a movement into a viable political alternative. That opportunity, in my opinion, was not fully explored.
On the other hand, Governor Alex Chioma Otti of Abia State demonstrates the kind of healthy competition I have in mind. His administration has attracted attention because of the pace of infrastructure renewal, reforms and the determination to change the narrative in Abia State. The point is not that every governor must govern exactly like Otti. The point is that his performance should challenge other governors to do better in their own states and, by extension, others in political leadership positions. That is the spirit of competitive leadership. When one governor raises the standard, others should feel compelled to raise theirs. The people become the beneficiaries of that healthy rivalry.
I also feel disappointed that the Labour Party has not developed into the strong national political force many Nigerians once hoped it would become. A country with millions of workers in the formal and informal sectors and millions of young people should be able to sustain a disciplined political party with a clear ideological identity and a long-term vision. Strong democracies thrive because governments know there is a credible opposition waiting in the wings, ready to present better alternatives whenever the electorate decides it is time for change.
Perhaps this was what the late Martin Luther King Jr. meant when he said, “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.” Leadership is at its best when those entrusted with public office rise above personal ambition and think first about the welfare of the people. Public office should never become an avenue for self-preservation or personal comfort. It is a trust that demands vision, sacrifice and the courage to make decisions that advance society, even when they come at a personal or political cost. It ought to be primarily about visibility, accessibility and responsibility.
As I reflected on all these, another thought came strongly to my mind. The danger of bad governance is much closer today than many politicians imagine. Those who occupy positions of authority may believe that official convoys, security details, influence and wealth have placed them beyond the ever-growing frustrations of ordinary Nigerians. That belief can be deceptive. A nation weighed down by unemployment, poverty and increasing hopelessness eventually becomes unsafe for everyone. The widening gap between the privileged few and the struggling majority is not something any society can sustain indefinitely. The danger is no longer somewhere in the future. It is gradually moving closer to our doorsteps.
Every political leader should understand that no amount of privilege can permanently shield anyone from the consequences of a society where millions of people have lost hope. Peace is sustained not by power alone but by justice, fairness, opportunity and good governance. The greatest security any government can provide for itself is to govern well and carry the people along.
This is why I believe governments should welcome a strong and responsible opposition. An opposition that offers practical alternatives compels those in power to work harder. In the same way, opposition parties should stop believing that their primary responsibility is to criticise every policy or project of the government even when such programmes or projects are laudable. Their greatest responsibility is to convince Nigerians that they possess better ideas, better programmes and greater capacity to govern.
That is the essence of the Competitive Leadership Model. It does not ask the opposition to abandon criticism. Constructive criticism is healthy in every democracy. It simply insists that criticism should be accompanied by superior alternatives. It challenges governments to see the success of another administration not as a threat, but as a benchmark to surpass. It encourages every governor or elected official to aspire to leave a better record than his or her colleagues. It encourages every president to raise the standard for those who will come after him or her. Leadership should be measured by visible performance because visible performance is the language every citizen understands.
Nigeria has reached a point where politics can no longer revolve around winning elections alone. Elections come and go, but governance continues long after campaign posters have gone. Citizens are no longer impressed by ceaseless speeches, political drama or daily exchanges between rival parties. They want better roads, functional hospitals, quality education, reliable electricity, security of lives and property, and an economy that offers opportunities to those willing to work while also retaining our best brains. Those are the issues that should define political competition.
My appeal is therefore simple. Let political parties compete through enviable service delivery. Let governments welcome fresh ideas, even when they come from their opponents. Let opposition parties prepare themselves for leadership instead of waiting for governments to fail. Let Nigerians judge every administration by what it delivers, not by the promises it makes.
If we embrace this culture, democracy will become more meaningful because political success will no longer be measured by the number of elections won but by the number of lives transformed. That is the Competitive Leadership Model. It is not an abstract theory. It is a simple conviction that leadership should herald healthy competition in governance. When political parties compete to serve the people better, the real winner will not be the ruling party or the opposition. The real winner will be Nigeria and the Nigerian people.
