Akpabio’s Eulogy For Buhari: “He Never Looted Nigeria’s Treasury” — But What Legacy Did He Truly Leave Behind?

As the nation continues to mourn the passing of former President Muhammadu Buhari, tributes are pouring in from across the political spectrum. But one tribute stood out this past week—not just for its emotion, but for its bold assertions.

Speaking at an expanded Federal Executive Council (FEC) meeting in Abuja, Senate President Godswill Akpabio hailed Buhari as a patriot of rare discipline and integrity. Amid tears, memories, and formalities, Akpabio made a striking claim: Buhari did not loot Nigeria’s treasury.

For a nation battered by decades of endemic corruption, that’s no small praise. But does it hold up under the weight of Buhari’s complex legacy?

A Soldier’s Reputation, A Civilian’s Burden

Muhammadu Buhari’s life was the stuff of Nigerian political folklore. A soldier who seized power in a 1983 coup and then returned over three decades later as a democratically elected president in 2015, he embodied the story of redemption that many Nigerians were yearning for: a no-nonsense leader who would cleanse the system, rebuild institutions, and restore dignity.

Akpabio echoed this sentiment when he said:

“He was a soldier who did not flinch under fire, a leader who did not flee from responsibility… Even his fiercest critics will admit that he did not pilfer the nation’s purse.”

It’s a statement that resonates with many Nigerians who, despite dissatisfaction with his administration’s performance in some areas, still believe Buhari never sought personal enrichment. The image of a frugal, austere leader—one who wore the same wristwatch for decades and who reportedly turned down lavish privileges—helped burnish his reputation as a leader above greed.

A Legacy Defined by Integrity or Inertia?

Akpabio’s tribute paints Buhari as a man of duty over glory, someone who chose the harder path of national service over political convenience. But while his personal integrity may be largely undisputed, critics argue that his inability—or unwillingness—to hold his inner circle to the same standard severely undermined his presidency.

During his time in office (2015–2023), numerous scandals emerged involving top officials: the Maina pension scandal, the alleged billions missing from NNPC accounts, and accusations of selective anti-corruption prosecution. While Buhari himself was never directly implicated, he was often criticized for shielding key allies or failing to act decisively when allegations surfaced.

That paradox remains at the heart of his legacy: a leader of high personal ethics presiding over a system still steeped in corruption.

The Discipline Doctrine: A Strength or a Shortcoming?

Akpabio noted that Buhari “left his boots and imprints” in the corridors of power, suggesting that his leadership style was marked by military discipline and ideological commitment. Many Nigerians did admire his firm stance on fiscal prudence, agriculture-driven economic growth, and massive infrastructure projects.

However, that same discipline was sometimes seen as rigidity. His administration was often criticized for slow decision-making, centralized control, and weak communication. Many young Nigerians felt alienated from a government that seemed out of touch with their aspirations, particularly during moments like the #EndSARS protests, where Buhari’s tone-deaf response further widened the generational gap.

A Final Goodbye in Daura, But Debates Rage On

The late president died in London at the age of 82 and was buried in his hometown of Daura, Katsina State, on Sunday, in accordance with Islamic rites. The special FEC meeting in his honor was attended by top political figures, cabinet ministers, governors, and Buhari’s family, led by his son, Yusuf.

For his supporters, this was a solemn farewell to a true patriot. For his critics, it marked the end of an era that promised transformation but delivered something far more complicated.

Conclusion: Honoring the Man, Evaluating the Legacy

Senator Akpabio’s tribute may have captured the emotional weight of Buhari’s passing, but it also reignited an important national conversation: What does integrity mean in leadership?

If Buhari’s personal honesty was never in doubt, why did so many Nigerians still feel let down by his government? If he truly believed in discipline and accountability, why did systemic failures persist?

As Nigeria looks ahead to the 2027 elections and beyond, Buhari’s story will serve as both inspiration and caution. He reminded us that personal virtue matters—but also that virtue alone is not enough to dismantle deeply entrenched dysfunction.

In the end, history will judge Buhari not just for what he didn’t take from Nigeria, but for what he was able—or unable—to give.