The recent assessment exercise conducted by the Nigerian government has raised significant concerns regarding the performance of various ministers. The assessment, overseen by the Central Delivery Coordination Unit, aimed to gather feedback from citizens through the Citizens’ Delivery Tracker Apps. However, the results have shown widespread dissatisfaction, particularly towards the Minister of Power, Minister of Defence, Minister of Education, and Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development.
The Nigerian Constitution establishes the responsibilities and duties of ministers under Section 148(1). Ministers are responsible for advising the President on the affairs of their respective ministries and for executing the administration’s priorities. Therefore, the performance of the ministers is a reflection of the government’s effectiveness in serving its citizens.
The low ratings received by the ministers suggest a gap between the government’s actions and the citizens’ expectations. For instance, the Minister of Power’s low rating might be indicative of the ongoing power sector challenges, while the low rating of the Minister of Defence could signify dissatisfaction with the state of national security.
The Nigerian government’s commitment to assessing ministerial performance using measurable outcomes, as evident in this exercise, aligns with the principles of accountability and transparency. However, the dissatisfaction expressed by the citizens suggests that the government might need to revisit its strategies and improve performance in the identified areas.
The feedback from the assessment exercise has elicited diverse reactions. The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) argues that the President should be held accountable for the ministers’ performance, aligning with the constitutional requirement in Section 148(1) that ministers implement the President’s policies. On the other hand, a former minister of information insists that only the President can adequately assess the ministers, given his comprehensive access to their performance data.
The Labour Party’s criticism reflects a broader concern about the government’s performance, particularly in addressing economic challenges, reducing inflation, and improving citizens’ well-being. These issues are addressed under the Nigerian Constitution’s Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, suggesting that the government needs to re-strategize to better meet these objectives.
The federal government’s assessment initiative has provided a revealing insight into the public perception of ministerial performance. The poor ratings highlight areas in need of urgent improvement. As the government continues to gather and respond to citizen feedback, it would be interesting to see how these insights would influence future policy decisions and ministerial appointments. The government must ensure that its actions align with the citizens’ expectations to effectively execute its mandate as outlined in the constitution.
