During Buhari’s electioneering campaign activities last December, he said, point blank, in an interview with Weekly Trust, that he will scrap the office of the First Lady if elected President, on the grounds that there is no constitutional provisions to justify the existence of the office and insisted that constitutionally guaranteed ministries like the Women affairs Ministry will be strengthened to play key roles in government.
Most people situated Buhari’s stand within the context of his avowed commitment to fight corruption and reduce multiple avenues or conduit pipes for draining the resources of the nation. Although, he took some swipes from certain quarters as he was accused of having innate hatred for women and not gender-friendly in the least, he said during the interview, with visible signs of sincerity of intention that, ‘’I was raised by my grandmother as I lost my father when I was under six years, so I know what a woman can do if given the chance’’. One recollects with nostalgia, the seemingly drab nature of the office of the First Lady in the days of Flora Azikiwe.
The First Lady syndrome which came into being in the late 1960’s through the activities of Victoria, the wife of the then head of state, General Yakubu Gowon, was wrapped up and somewhat legitimatized and validated from the inception of the Murtala/Obasanjo era in 1975 up till the Ibrahim Babangida ‘Maradona’ years of the mid 1980’s to date. Since then, spouses of the Commander-in- Chief began to commandeer logistics, men and materials, while traversing the length and breadth of Nigeria, conceiving and commissioning paralegal projects and programmes for which statutory bodies were well in place, with concomitant budgetary provisions. Soon enough, wives of lesser mortals carved their own fiefdoms at the state and subsequently local government levels, with vast offices and retinue of aides all provided for from government coffers outside of the lawful budget process. There are two critical issues to address here. First, the constraints or difficulties inherent in curtailing the activities of the First Lady, considering the fact that there is no constitutional provision for the office. Nonetheless, the office has natural validity and legitimacy by virtue of marriage.
The problem, however, lies with the kind of leverage and impetus given to the activities of the past First Ladies by our past Presidents whose whimsical approach to the issue has seen most First Ladies acting outside the dictates of common sense and rationality. Just as the wife of the President rightly pointed out, ‘’Wives of Presidents have some traditional roles, like receiving guests, visiting orphanages, helping the less privileged people. They also lead in the fight for the rights of women and malnourished children, infant mortality rate, kidnapping and girl’ child trafficking’’. Now, how will the President put mechanisms in place to curtail what may be seen as undue excesses of his wife while trying to perform the above listed roles as the First Lady of the country? The issue is not a question of scrapping the office of the First Lady, which in itself is an obvious impossibility, unless in the event of absolute denial of the bonds of marriage between the president –elect and the wife.
In that unlikely event, the president-elect would have to declare that he does no longer have a wife, and therefore, no First Lady in the first instance. It is more a matter of disposition of the President towards the activities of the next First Lady and his ability to evaluate critically the positive or negative impact of such activities on the overall wellbeing of the nation. It has to do also with the countenance and disposition of the First Lady herself. In the past, the attention of the public was drawn to the activities of the First Ladies due to the perceived profligacy and wastefulness inherent in most of their activities.
The point, however, must be made that scrapping the office of the First Lady may not be entirely necessary. Once the activities of the First Lady genuinely address development imperatives that further the cause of women without constituting unnecessary drain on the resources of the nation, efforts should be made to encourage and support her with funds that commensurately justify her activities. The imminent point of departure is that Buhari is generally seen as a very resolute man, not given to frivolities and low on theatricals. He will likely deny the First Lady the characteristic glamorous outings of her predecessors.
The implications will be far reaching on the multitude of ‘’women for change’’ who are always waiting in the wings, at the dawn of a new administration, to swoop on the First Lady. However, there is no discountenancing the crucial and positive role women play in the evolution of democracy and in the development process of any nation. In this context and also within the thinking of the President-elect to scrap the office of the First Lady and promote the activities of the Women Affairs Ministry, it is imperative that, beyond strengthening existing government institutions that promote and advance the welfare of women, the incoming administration should appoint a reasonable number of women into key positions in government.
The current administration did well in this regard, and from all practical purposes, notwithstanding uncharitable criticisms from men with ulterior motives, the women have been able to acquit themselves creditably in the discharge of their duties. It is in the interest of the President- elect as well as the nation that his government exploits the gains of the Jonathan administration in the areas of advancing the rights of women for sustainable development to further place women in strategic positions of governance. Nigerians are interested in seeing how Buhari willconfront and successfully checkmate the likely undue promptings from his wife not to have a radical departure from the First Ladies’ ostentatious traditions of the past.