Critical Analysis of President Tinubu’s Frequent Foreign Trips Amid National Collapse - Ola Olateju

                                                                     Political Panorama Watch Desk No 1 April 18, 2025

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu's excessive foreign travels and habitual absences from Nigeria —often shrouded in ambiguous language like "working visit"—have become a lightning rod for growing public frustration over a presidency increasingly viewed as aloof, unaccountable, and detached from Nigeria’s deepening crisis. The trips have come to symbolize more than just poor optics. They represent a deeper failure of governance, one rooted in elite detachment, administrative negligence, and a galling disregard for the suffering of the Nigerian people.   With the country in the grip of economic paralysis, widespread insecurity, and institutional decay, the optics of these trips—particularly the repeated visits to France—are not just tone-deaf but emblematic of a presidency adrift from the basic tenets of responsible governance. With the country gripped by mass killings, economic hemorrhage, and democratic backsliding, Tinubu’s escapades abroad read not like leadership in motion, but like an executive fleeing his duty.

A Presidency in Transit

As of April 2025, President Tinubu has spent 59 days in France since assuming office in May 2023. According to travel logs compiled by various media outlets and cross-checked with flight tracking data and government press statements, Tinubu has traveled to the United Nations General Assembly in New York (Sept 2023), Davos for the World Economic Forum (Jan 2024), the G20 Summit in India (Sept 2023), and multiple unaccounted stops in London and Paris. While the stated goals of these trips range from economic diplomacy to investment summits, there is scant evidence of any tangible dividends back home — no major new foreign direct investments, no significant debt relief deals, no security collaboration breakthroughs.

                                             

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu

Rather than result-oriented diplomacy, these trips increasingly resemble a tour of absentee leadership. The Centre for Democratic Accountability (2024) noted in a policy brief that “President Tinubu’s foreign engagements lack institutional follow-up and yield no structured gains for Nigeria's development imperatives.” Worse still, these excursions come at enormous cost. Let the facts — and the budgets — speak for themselves. In 2024, Nigeria’s budget allocated a staggering ₦15 billion for the President’s international travels and foreign events. That’s ₦15 billion in a year when citizens battled inflation, unpaid salaries, decaying infrastructure, and a collapsing healthcare system. One would expect some fiscal sobriety in 2025 — and while the allocation was reduced to ₦6.14 billion, the optics remain troubling. What exactly do these lavish foreign excursions deliver for a country whose economy is gasping for breath?

This is not just about fiscal waste — it is about the disconnect between governance and lived reality. A president who borrows billions and bleeds the national treasury for unproductive foreign trips is not just negligent — he is contemptuous of the people. For every “working visit” cloaked in vague diplomatic terms, there are millions of Nigerians asking: Where are the results? Where are the investments? Where is the relief?

Foreign Junkets, Local Misery

Since May 29, 2023, President Tinubu has embarked on over 15 foreign trips, covering destinations including the United States, India, Saudi Arabia, Germany, the United Arab Emirates, and notably France—where he has spent a cumulative 59 days, as compiled from media briefings and flight manifests (Sahara Reporters, 2025; Punch Newspapers, 2025).

These travels have been rationalized as “working visits,” “investment drives,” or attendance at summits. But as the Centre for Public Policy Monitoring (CPPM) noted in a March 2025 report, “There is no policy architecture to follow up on the President’s foreign engagements. They are disconnected from measurable national development priorities.”

“The official excuse? A so-called ‘working visit.’ But Nigerians aren’t buying the spin. The presidency scrambled to clarify that it wasn’t a medical trip — how noble. But even if it’s not medical tourism, what justification is there for gallivanting across Europe while Nigeria bleeds? What kind of leader borrows billions only to blow scarce funds on vanity trips abroad? This is very contemptuous.”

Indeed, the President is presiding over an economic and security emergency from the air—and occasionally, from hotel suites in Paris.

 Nigeria in Crisis: A Nation Leaderless at Home

In the week President Tinubu flew to France (April 2, 2025), over 100 Nigerians were slaughtered in coordinated attacks in Plateau State, according to reports by Amnesty International and SBM Intelligence. Meanwhile, Benue and Kaduna continue to face unchecked violence. Boko Haram has resurfaced with territorial ambition in Borno and parts of Yobe, defying the President’s campaign claims of “renewed hope.”

Economically, the naira has nosedived to ₦2,350/$1 on the black market as of April 15, 2025, with inflation soaring past 33.5%. Food insecurity now affects over 33 million Nigerians (UN OCHA, 2025), and youth unemployment sits at over 54%. In this context, the President’s frequent absence is not simply a logistical oversight but a fundamental governance failure.

Dereliction of Duty and Disdain for the Public

Under Section 14(2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” By this constitutional yardstick, President Tinubu’s leadership style—governing by delegation and disappearing during crises—constitutes dereliction of duty.

The press release by Atiku Media Office powerfully encapsulates the public mood:

“This isn’t just negligence. It’s dereliction of duty on a catastrophic scale... Let the facts speak for themselves.”

Indeed, they do. A presidency that chooses vanity optics over urgent presence in the face of national bloodshed and economic collapse is, by every rational measure, failing its people.

“When will Tinubu declare a state of emergency on his own disastrous Presidency?”

These rhetorical punches from the Atiku Media Office echo a growing national sentiment. When President Tinubu boarded another jet to France on April 2, 2025, many Nigerians reacted not with surprise, but with exhausted fury. The absurdity of the move led some to speculate—was it a prank, perhaps an April fool’s joke?

Tinubu’s presidency increasingly mirrors the “imperial presidency syndrome”—a term used by Nigerian political scholar Jideofor Adibe (2022) to describe leaders who wield power without accountability, often insulated by sycophantic entourages and uncritical state media.

Intelligence Insights: The Paris Syndrome

Information gathered by the Political Panorama Watch Desk from sources close to the Nigerian Foreign service indicated that the bulk of President Tinubu’s France visits have little to do with active diplomacy. One source noted that “aside from brief meetings with low-level envoys, most of the time is spent in private residences and undisclosed health consultations.” Though unconfirmed, the pattern suggests that these trips may in part serve private or health-related needs masked as official business, reinforcing public suspicion and resentment.

Conclusion: A Call for Accountability

If Nigeria is in a full-blown state of emergency, as rightly declared by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, then President Tinubu must first declare a state of emergency on his own presidency. The evidence is damning. President Tinubu’s foreign trips have yielded no discernible benefit to the common Nigerian. No security breakthroughs. No economic uplift. No new bilateral achievements. Instead, these travels mirror an administration increasingly removed from reality, governance, and constitutional responsibility. The legitimacy of a government lies in its responsiveness, not in its ability to craft press statements while its leader lounges abroad. Leadership is not a tourism project

It is not enough to condemn bandits and terrorists. Nigerians must also hold to account the leaders whose absence enables state collapse.