What happens when the government stifles criticisms and freedom of expression? Oftentimes, bad decisions are made and tragic situations occur – sometimes on a breathtaking scale that can leave everyone wondering: how did this happen?

Naturally, governments hate to be criticised, and the Nigerian government is not an exception. Sometimes, criticism-hating governments come up with terms like “hate speech” to stifle commentary and to avoid being held accountable.

Also, sometimes when governments want to censure criticisms, they attack the messengers, classifying their messages as anti-patriotic, just to justify repressing legitimate difference of opinion.

In one of his works, Turkish writer, Mehmet İldan, writes that “the ugliest government is the one which is spreading fear to its own people” while “the finest government is the one which encourages its own people to criticise it harshly.”

İldan notes that in a country where people are afraid of criticising the government, many things must be going horrible!

“In such countries, people must know that a society of cowards will always be remembered as a society of honourless people!” he says.

Many an expert has urged that disagreements and criticisms of government action should never be seen as hate speech or anti-patriotism but rather as avenues for formulating better policies, inclusive societies, as well as paving ways for economic and social progress.

Sadly, the Nigerian government has proven time and time again that it abhors criticisms, even genuine concerns, by the citizens who seek better accountability and improvement on the country’s state of affairs.

Instances of the government’s abhorrence of feedback and criticism abound, and in many of such cases, rather than address and commit to fix the citizens’ concerns, the government comes down on the messenger, and visibly flushing the feedback down the drain.

One of such instances was last Friday when the Presidency evidently scorned the Spiritual Director of the Adoration Ministry, Enugu, Father Ejike Mbaka, for criticising the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), over the latter’s perceived failure to contain the security crisis in the country.

Mbaka, who openly supported the President during the 2015 and 2019 elections, made a U-turn last Wednesday, asking Buhari to resign or be impeached for not doing enough to tackle widespread insecurity.

The cleric told his congregation that no civilised leader would remain in power with the spate of violence across the country and regretted that Buhari maintained grave silence in the midst of widespread violence and deaths of Nigerians.

“How can people be dying and the chief security officer of the country would be sitting down without making any comment? Gunmen attacking people everywhere. Buhari should have resigned honourably following his (alleged) failure as a leader,” he said.

Mbaka also called on the National Assembly to impeach the President, stating that Nigerians were facing intense poverty and insecurity.

Some experts believed the government should have replied to Mbaka’s criticism with assurances that all efforts were in place to ensure the citizens’ security, and if necessary, provided updates on what was being done to address the cleric’s concerns.

However, the Presidency derailed from addressing Mbaka’s criticism and attributed it to a decision by Buhari to reject a contract request made by the cleric.

The Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, in a statement did not address the central message of the cleric’s concern, which was insecurity.

“Anyone familiar with President Buhari knows that he doesn’t break the laid-down rules in dealing with contracts or any other government business for that matter. He requested the appropriate authorities to deal with the matter in accordance with the laid-down rules.

“Inside the Villa, discretion prevailed, that if those pictures and requests were made public, the followers would turn against the religious leader. None of it was released. Now, this is what is eating Father Mbaka,” Shehu said.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Renewed Initiative for African Development in Abuja, Mr Martins Eke, said no nation could progress with such an attitude by the government.

He said, “Many Nigerians have observed this trend of attacking critics by the government. My take is that this attitude is characteristic of a retrogressive government. The government ought to be open to criticisms and feedback because these are the things that make a person or institution better.

“What is expected of the government is that each time someone gives them feedback, they should search for the sense and wisdom in such a message. If there is wisdom in the criticism or feedback, which there is usually, the government should take it and move on rather than trying to be antagonistic and attacking the messenger.”

Eke said before most people would choose to criticise, they would have spotted a lapse that needed to be fixed, and because they loved their country, they would voice out their minds.

“The government should make a U-turn and end the penchant for attacking people who offer criticisms. This attitude can prevent more people from providing useful advice to the government,” Eke told Saturday PUNCH.

Also, in April, Presidency attacked the Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese, Bishop Matthew Kukah, who said the Buhari regime was taking care of repentant Boko Haram insurgents but lacked empathy for their victims.

Kukah, in his message titled, ‘Nigeria: Before our glory departs,’ recalled that Buhari, on May 29, 2015, during his inauguration, said, “Boko Haram is a typical case of small fires causing large fires.”

The cleric, like many other Nigerians, expressed anger that the Buhari regime was pampering so-called repentant Boko Haram terrorists while the insurgents’ victims were living in untold hardship.

“Sadly, human life is haemorrhaging so badly in Nigeria, but the greatest tragedy is the death of empathy from those in power. Mysteriously, the government is investing billions of naira in rehabilitating the so-called Boko Haram repentant members and their other partners in crime in the belief that they want to turn a new leaf.

“These criminals have waged war against their country, murdered thousands of citizens, destroyed infrastructure and rendered entire families permanently displaced and dislocated. Why should rehabilitating the perpetrators be more important than bringing succour to the victims?” Kukah asked.

But the Presidency said the priest did not speak like a man of God.

“Some of the comments are no more than a sample of the unrestrained rhetoric Fr Kukah trades in, which he often does in the guise of a homily,” the Presidency said, among other things, in a statement.

Also, in September 2017, the Presidency lambasted a former Minister of Education, Oby Ezekwesili, who accused Buhari of being a sectional leader.

Ezekwesili, who supported Buhari during the 2015 presidential election, had urged the President to act as a true leader by showing love to all.

The former minister said this in a series of tweets while reacting to the alleged lopsidedness in the President’s cabinet, the deployment of soldiers in the South-East codenamed Operation Python Dance 2, among others.

But Buhari’s aide, Shehu, replied, “A President who has put the nation’s cash cows, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Ministry of Petroleum, in the hands of the Igbo; who has given four out of five states in the sub-region senior cabinet posts in his administration, including Foreign Affairs; and Industry, Trade and Investment, and is constructing the Second Niger Bridge after years of deceit and false starts, cannot be called a hater of the Igbo.”

Shehu, however, erred partly because at the time and even till date, the President was/is the Minister of Petroleum Resources.

Also, the CBN Governor, Godwin Emefiele, is from Delta State, the South-South region, and not from the South-East, where Ezekwesili hails from.

Similarly, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo criticised the government’s handling of the Boko Haram insurgency in 2019, the government did not like the ex-president’s expression and rather dismissed his comments as offensive and divisive.

Obasanjo, who supported Buhari in the 2015 presidential election, reportedly said the Boko Haram insurgency was no longer an issue of lack of education and lack of employment for the youth.

“It is now West African Fulanisation, Islamisation and global organised crimes of human trafficking, money laundering, drug trafficking, gun trafficking, illegal mining and regime change,” Obasanjo reportedly said.

Chastising the ex-president, the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, said,  “It is particularly tragic that a man who fought to keep Nigeria one is the same one seeking to exploit the country’s fault lines to divide it in the twilight of his life.”

Mohammed further told Obasanjo “not to allow personal animosity to override his love for a united Nigeria,” adding, “It will not be out of place if he withdraws his unfortunate statement and apologises to Nigerians.”

That would, however, not be the only instance when the government chastised the ex-president for expressing his views on national matters.

Obasanjo has often criticised Buhari for his handling of other national affairs like the economy and foreign policy, but his criticisms often get swabbed by the government.

A Lagos-based public affairs analyst, Pearl Ozulanba, said Nigeria wouldn’t make any progress with the government’s attitude of attacking its critics.

“As a country, we can’t make any progress with that particular attitude. The government should keep listening to people more and putting measures in place to ensure the people’s welfare, especially in terms of providing security for the citizens’ lives and property.

“If the government says it is listening to the people, it should listen more. When people come out to talk to the government, all they are saying is they want the government to listen more,” she said.

Also, a lecturer at the Department of Political Science, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ogun State, Dr Sunday Abang, said the government should stop being antagonistic when the citizens offered criticisms.

“We don’t need to politicise issues of national concern, particularly security. Criticisms should be evaluated objectively. So the government should not be against people who voice out their opinions to help the country,” he said.

However, Abang adjured people criticising the government to make such criticisms “constructive.”