Political Shamelessness on Display

Words such as embarrassment, shame, and kunya are often used to describe the feelings of many Nigerians following Daniel Bwala's recent appearance on Aljazeera’s Head to Head, which aired on March 6, 2026.

Kunya, a term from the Hausa language, translates to shame and encapsulates a painful emotion that arises when one is aware of having done something wrong or unwise—akin to realizing one has food stuck in their teeth hours after finishing a meal.

However, such examples fall short of conveying the profound personal embarrassment I felt while watching that episode. In just a few minutes, I oscillated between cold sweats and hot flashes, responding to the audience's laughter with an overwhelming sensation of shame that engulfed me. In my life, I have never encountered a moment that stirred such deep-seated feelings of guilt; perhaps I have led a relatively sheltered life, for which I am thankful. This experience, nonetheless, reaffirmed my enduring connection to Nigeria, no matter the frustrations I express in public or private. It is this affection that explains the distress I felt witnessing the antics and statements of Bwala, who serves as the Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication.

As Nigerians digest the 40-minute video clip, create memes, and share their thoughts, I feel compelled to voice my reflections.

The issue is not merely about how Bwala dismissed the ongoing insecurity that has led to countless deaths, nor is it about downplaying the brutality faced by Nigerians, such as the massacre of 120 to 160 individuals in Kaiama, Kwara State, which occurred shortly before the interview was filmed. It’s not just his inability to provide clear answers or his evasive responses that have been criticized—friends have remarked, 'This guy embodies buffoonery.' It is also about how he has made a mockery of the government he represents, revealing what the Tinubu administration truly thinks about Nigerians and our collective pursuit of accountability.

Listening to Bwala's attempts at deflection and denial regarding the reality of Nigerians and his previous comments regarding Tinubu, I couldn’t help but wonder: what sort of leader is Tinubu to appoint someone like this as his spokesperson? That question raced through my mind, and the potential answers added to my anxiety. With all the public criticisms Bwala has delivered about Tinubu's character, why did Tinubu choose him to represent and speak for the Federal Republic of Nigeria, when over 200 million alternatives exist?

During a moment in the interview when Hasan pressed Bwala with repeated questions, Bwala's reply was that 'Y' has a long tail and two branches.' It felt as if the ground should open up and swallow me. An audience that had been laughing moments earlier fell into an uncomfortable silence. Though this particular exchange didn’t make the final edit, I share it to illustrate the depth of shame we often feel for others. This kind of foolish exclamation has no place in the serious conversation regarding the widespread insecurity affecting lives in Nigeria.

So, what positions Bwala in this role?

The first explanation lies in Tinubu's evident enjoyment of exercising power over individuals and their conduct. It’s also apparent that he can incorporate into his government those who have previously spoken negatively about him, compelling them to retract their words publicly. This situation elucidates the presence of individuals like Femi Fani-Kayode and Olabode George in this administration. Many of us perceive such public retractions as ultimate humiliation; however, it appears we might be mistaken. Bwala seemingly does not view his participation on Head to Head as disgraceful, as he continues to share links to the segment with his substantial social media following. For him, the ordinary Nigerian is not the target audience, but rather, he is performing for his appointing authority: 'Look at how I dance with abandon. Oh, what wouldn’t I do for you?'

This leads to the second point regarding what Tinubu truly rewards. Rumors suggest significant financial incentives are involved. Our daily lives often feel like a game to Tinubu and his associates. He places a premium on loyalty over capability or integrity, prioritizing these attributes above the rampant corruption and misuse of power exhibited by his appointees. It may be the case that individuals of high moral standing cannot remain loyal in the manner he demands. This dynamic explains the assortment of questionable characters surrounding him.

Finally, a third crucial consideration is that Tinubu, too, exhibits a lack of shame. If he possessed any, he would avoid appointing individuals with publicly documented statements declaring him unfit for office into influential positions. He remains unfazed by the harsh criticism directed at him by his appointees, reinforcing their words and maintaining such insults within the public discourse. Bwala's declaration that 'even if you give Tinubu 30 years, nothing will improve' is precisely the type of comment that should not be disregarded.

Ultimately, these individuals view everything as political, regardless of the cost to lives, well-being, or societal progress. In this political landscape, shame becomes the first casualty.

Let us conclude by considering Bwala’s situation—whether we should laugh or lament, accept or refute his lack of shame. However, the more pressing inquiries concerning Nigeria’s future ought to be focused on Tinubu himself.