Former Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda, has pushed back against claims that Goodluck Jonathan lacked experience while in office, describing such assertions as “inaccurate” and unsupported by evidence.
Yuguda’s remarks follow comments attributed to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who reportedly suggested that some challenges during Jonathan’s presidency stemmed from inexperience, despite acknowledging his personal integrity.
Speaking in Abuja, Yuguda argued that Jonathan’s political journey from deputy governor to president demonstrates deep institutional knowledge and leadership exposure.
“Having worked closely with President Jonathan across critical sectors of government, I find the label of ‘inexperience’ difficult to reconcile with the facts,” he said.
He described Jonathan’s leadership as deliberate and consultative, prioritising institutional processes over political showmanship.
Yuguda highlighted economic gains during the administration, noting that Nigeria emerged as Africa’s largest economy, with improved investor confidence and relative macroeconomic stability. He also pointed to declining poverty indices and reforms in agriculture that repositioned the sector and gained global recognition.
On infrastructure, he cited the revival of rail transport, including the rehabilitation of the Zaria–Gusau–Kaura Namoda line. In education, he referenced the establishment of 12 federal universities and almajiri schools aimed at expanding access, particularly in northern Nigeria.
In foreign policy, Yuguda said Nigeria maintained strong global standing, securing two terms on the UN Security Council and strengthening diplomatic ties.
He also praised the calibre of technocrats in Jonathan’s cabinet, including Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and Akinwumi Adesina, among others who later rose to global prominence.
Yuguda described Jonathan’s calm temperament and respect for public office as defining traits, adding that his decision to concede defeat in the 2015 election marked a turning point for Nigeria’s democracy.
According to him, reducing Jonathan’s presidency to inexperience ignores both his preparation and his contributions to governance and democratic stability.
