A former Secretary to the Ondo State Government and Head of Service, lawyer, politician and farmer, Chief Clement Fioye Bajowa, speaks with HAKEEM GBADAMOSI, on governance, politics, economy and the challenges facing the state and Nigeria. Excerpts:

How would you assess President Bola Tinubu’s economic policies and their impact on Nigeria since he assumed office?

To assess President Tinubu’s performance, you must first understand the state of the economy he inherited in 2023. At the time, Nigeria was facing a huge fiscal deficit caused by low government revenue, heavy fuel subsidy payments of over ₦1 trillion annually and multiple exchange rates that distorted the economy. Upon assuming office, he removed the fuel subsidy and unified the exchange rate. These reforms significantly increased government revenue, enabling the government to service public debt from internally generated revenue rather than borrowing to repay existing loans. Monthly allocations to states have also increased to nearly ₦2.5 trillion, almost three times what they received before. This has enabled states to pay workers’ salaries, implement the new minimum wage of over ₦70,000 and undertake major infrastructure projects. However, state Houses of Assembly must strengthen their oversight role to ensure the increased allocations are used for development and public services. The administration has also completed inherited projects, such as the Second Niger Bridge, and embarked on the construction of superhighways linking different parts of the country. These projects are expected to promote trade, improve connectivity, enhance security and attract more investment.

On public debt, I do not believe borrowing is the issue. What matters is the government’s ability to repay and ensure borrowed funds are used for productive projects. With Nigeria’s debt-to-GDP ratio still within acceptable limits, I believe the current administration has strengthened government finances and placed the economy on a better footing than the previous administration.

State allocations have increased under the current administration, yet many Nigerians say the impact has been limited. How can the Federal Government ensure the funds benefit the people?

The president cannot be everywhere, and Nigeria’s system is designed with checks and balances. That is why the State Houses of Assembly exist as representatives of the people. They are expected to use their oversight powers to hold governors accountable and ensure public funds are properly utilised. Unfortunately, in some states, the assemblies have become too weak to effectively challenge the governors. Nevertheless, the federal government still has mechanisms for monitoring how states use their allocations. Through forums such as the Council of State and meetings with governors, the president can demand explanations on the use of public funds. In addition, anti-corruption agencies such as the EFCC and the ICPC have the authority to investigate and prosecute cases of misuse of public resources. Ultimately, no public official should be allowed to misuse government funds without accountability.

The Supreme Court’s ruling on local government autonomy has sparked debate. What is your view, and what governance model do you think best suits Nigeria?

Nigeria’s local government system needs fundamental reform. Before the military intervention in 1966 and the introduction of the uniform local government system in 1976, local government administration was the responsibility of the regions. Today, Nigeria operates a single model for all 774 local governments, which, in my view, does not reflect the country’s diversity. Countries such as Britain and the United States operate different local government models, allowing each region or state to adopt what best suits its needs. Nigeria should consider a similar approach rather than imposing one structure nationwide. I do not believe local governments can be completely autonomous from the states. Since state governments create local governments, they cannot be entirely detached from them. In practice, when challenges arise at the local level, the first point of contact is still the state government. I also believe the current local government structure is expensive and inefficient. Many local governments contribute little to service delivery, while state governments continue to provide roads, infrastructure and other essential services. Maintaining the same bureaucratic structure for every local government, regardless of its size or capacity, is wasteful. Rather than constitutional autonomy for local governments, I support restructuring Nigeria along regional lines, with the six geopolitical zones evolving into regions. States should then be free to determine the level and model of decentralisation that best suits their circumstances. The current system of 774 local governments should be reviewed, including how public funds allocated to them are utilised.

So, you do not support local government autonomy?

No, I do not. In practical terms, I do not believe complete local government autonomy can work. Local governments cannot operate entirely independent of state governments because the state remains the closest and most effective level of authority. The Federal Government cannot directly supervise or control local governments from Abuja. Whenever issues arise at the local level, the state government is naturally the first point of intervention. That is why I do not support full local government autonomy.

How do you assess the Tinubu administration’s handling of insecurity, and what more should be done to address the challenge?

Insecurity in Nigeria is a complex problem with historical, political, environmental and international dimensions. It did not emerge overnight but has evolved over several administrations. In my view, weak leadership and delayed responses in the past allowed the crisis to worsen, while instability in the Sahel region and the proliferation of small arms have further aggravated the situation.

Compared to previous administrations, I believe the Tinubu administration has taken a more decisive approach by strengthening the security agencies, providing them with the resources they need and intensifying operations against insurgents. Although insecurity has not been completely eliminated, I believe the security situation has improved in some areas, with greater freedom of movement and reduced insurgent control in parts of the North. However, more needs to be done. The government should confront insecurity more aggressively by strengthening border security and reviewing international agreements that may no longer serve Nigeria’s security interests. In particular, I believe Nigeria should consider suspending the ECOWAS free movement protocol, within the limits permitted by international law, to better regulate cross-border movements while the security situation improves. The government should also strengthen immigration controls by ensuring visitors are properly registered, enforcing visa and residency regulations and deporting those who violate the law. Combined with sustained military operations and effective border management, these measures, in my view, would significantly improve Nigeria’s security.

The recently approved creation of state police by the FG has generated mixed reactions. Do you think it is the right solution to Nigeria’s security challenges?

I commend the Tinubu administration for initiating the debate on decentralising policing, but I do not support state police. Nigeria needs a security structure that relies on local intelligence, but I believe regional police is a better option. Under this model, policing would be state-based in operation, while recruitment, training, promotion and overall control would be handled at the regional level. Each geopolitical zone should have its own regional police, funded jointly by the states, with a regional police college and a Regional Police Council to coordinate security within the zone. The federal police should continue to exist but work in partnership with the regional police rather than exercising control over them. Such a complementary arrangement, based on true federalism, would improve intelligence gathering, reduce funding challenges and enable officers to police areas they know well.

So, to be clear, you do not support state police?

No. I support regional police, not state police. While policing should be carried out at the state level, recruitment, training and overall control should be regional rather than by individual states.

What is your advice to President Tinubu on governance and national development?

My advice is that he should remain focused and continue implementing policies he believes are in the country’s best interest. Leadership requires courage, and every leader will face criticism. Ultimately, people will judge his administration by its results. If his policies address Nigeria’s long-standing challenges and improve the lives of citizens, history will remember him positively. He should therefore remain committed to delivering good governance and sustainable development.

You served as both Secretary to the State Government (SSG) and Head of Service. Can you reflect on your experience in those roles?

I served under four military administrators, and our primary responsibility was to implement the policies of the military government. Decision-making was faster under the military, and the focus was on maintaining a stable government and building an efficient civil service to support government programmes.

As SSG, I served as the chief policy adviser and the link between the government and the people. Unlike commissioners, who were political appointees, I was a career civil servant with institutional knowledge. That made the office central to policy coordination and public engagement. However, because it was a military regime, there was limited grassroots participation in governance, and loyalty to the administration was essential.

You served under four military administrators over a long period. What helped you maintain your integrity throughout your service?

My upbringing played a major role. I was raised to value honesty and contentment, and I never saw public office as a means of personal enrichment. I regarded public service as a calling and remained committed to serving with integrity. I believe honesty is a personal value that should not change because of one’s position.

Which military administrators did you serve under?

I was appointed by the late Colonel Mark Torrey and subsequently served under Colonel Usman, the late Colonel Oyarugbule and Colonel Fasanya until we handed over to the civilian administration in 1999.

One unique aspect of my service was that each outgoing administrator personally introduced and recommended me to his successor, urging him to retain me. Despite pressure from some quarters to remove me whenever a new administrator assumed office, they all chose to keep me after assessing my work. That continuity reflected the confidence they had in my loyalty and professionalism.

How long did you serve as Secretary to the State Government and Head of Service?

I served for about five and a half years under four military administrators.