Student Leadership and Campus Politics: Are Nigerian Student Leaders a Prototype of Past and Contemporary National Leadership?

 Funmilola Adediji

One recurrent pattern in Nigeria since the post-colonial era is the striking similarity among national leaders. Ever since independence, the people have longed for better leadership; a government that cares for and represents its citizens, one that unites rather than divides, a government that respects the rights of its people and does not make life unnecessarily difficult. This has been the hope of the dead, the living, and the yet unborn. Yet one poignant question remains: why do leaders forget the people once they gain power?

Envisage a child growing up in an environment where corruption brings power, where politics becomes the fastest route to amassing wealth, where silver and gold are considered more valuable than a good name, and where the national cake resides among the one per cent at the top. One is then compelled to ask: does the child not become a reflection of such an environment?

Can it be said that student leaders are a microcosm of the past and present leaders? An anonymous commenter once said “Your student leaders are the ones that end up as National Leaders, they have played the politics games in school and they are now involved in the system.” Is this statement far from the truth or simply the truth?

Indeed, if we observe the student leaders across tertiary institutions in the country, their conduct does not seem very different from that of the national leaders. For instance, many of them project a favourable image for electoral support, some create the most attractive and elaborate manifesto, often filled with promises that may or may not be achieved. For some candidates that stand unopposed, the situation is even more unpleasant, they present mediocre manifestos, they promise little and achieve little to nothing. Some leaders even wait for a by-election, which allows them to avoid manifesto night, press night, and the rigours of a competitive electoral process.

It is rather unpleasant that the student election process mirrors that of the Nigerian government. In many tertiary institutions, little attention is paid to the competence of candidates. Instead, votes are often determined by faculties, halls of residence, religion, and other affiliations. Most students do not even check the manifestoes of the candidates they support or vote for. Some justify their choices with statements like, “He was the one who reached out to me first,” or “She is from my hostel/faculty.” Do these affiliations truly determine the choice of leaders? Clearly, students often reflect the broader political environment of the country, as their actions resemble patterns seen in national politics.

In Nigeria, tribalism, personal interest, and other affiliations heavily influence voters’ choices. Many people vote for candidates from their tribe, state, or religion, while some select candidates who they believe will favour only them when elected. Politics in Nigeria, therefore, is rarely about competence; rather, it is shaped by affiliations just as it is in student politics.

The election process is not only what makes the student leaders and national leaders similar, but factors like embezzlement, failure to represent the people, lack of transparency and prioritising personal interest over collective welfare contributes to the similarities.

One might envisage a student government in which a faculty or department president, along with members of the executive, embezzles student funds. This is, unfortunately, the reality of many student governments or associations. Multiple reports are available online documenting the misappropriation of funds by student leaders. Such behaviour mirrors that of the Nigerian government, where many politicians embezzle public funds without facing consequences. Because corruption goes largely unpunished, it has become a tool for amassing wealth both in student politics and at the national level.

During student election campaigns, transparency is often one of the most frequently promised values. Many student representatives pledge to operate openly, yet, once elected, they fail to keep the student populace informed, withholding information and decisions. When the press attempts to investigate or question them, they often refuse interviews, treating the media as an enemy rather than fulfilling their promise of transparency.

Apart from lack of transparency, many student representatives prioritize their personal interests over the collective welfare of the students. This is feasible in how many who are aware of their inability to lead still push to get to leadership positions. Many student representatives contest for positions not because of passion to lead or effect a change, most occupy these positions for one reason which is to build their portfolio, and to network. They occupy these positions because it gives them access to people and places not because they actually want to represent. The disadvantages of this is seen in how many student representatives fail to properly represent the students. Most representatives will rather stay quiet than fight for the welfare of those they represent.

When this is the sad reality of politics at both the student and national levels, what then is the hope for Nigeria? If student leaders are indeed a microcosm of past and present national leaders, can the country ever experience good governance, or is it doomed to a cycle of recycled bad governance?