Tinubu’s Cabal “More Powerful and Dangerous” Than Buhari’s, Claims Former Minister Dalung

By DAYO ADESULU

Former Youth and Sports Minister Solomon Dalung alleges that President Bola Tinubu’s administration is influenced by a highly educated and strategic cabal, more sophisticated than that of former President Muhammadu Buhari.

Dalung’s Key Statements on Channels TV

1. Sophistication and Influence of Tinubu’s Cabal:
   • Tinubu’s inner circle comprises “highly educated, ambitious, and refined individuals” with a deep understanding of power dynamics.
   • They are adept at manipulating governance, isolating the president, and controlling information flow.
   • Dalung described them as more dangerous than previous cabals due to their strategic depth and influence.
2. Comparison with Buhari’s Cabal:
   • Buhari’s cabal was less refined, with members possessing limited political and administrative experience.
   • Their influence was driven by narrow, parochial motives, which reduced their overall effectiveness.
3. Impact on Governance:
   • Dalung criticized the denial of cabals’ existence, asserting it would be unjust to posterity.
   • He warned that Tinubu’s cabal could hinder governance, isolate the president, and exacerbate challenges for ordinary Nigerians.

Assessment of Tinubu’s Administration

• Dalung cited Chapter 2 of the Nigerian Constitution, emphasizing that the government’s primary aim should be ensuring citizens’ well-being.
• He questioned whether Tinubu’s policies reflect this mandate, stating:“Are Nigerians rejoicing over the policies of this government? Certainly not. The common people are frustrated and not speaking well of the government or the country itself.”

Dalung’s Call to Acknowledge Political Realities

• Dalung criticized the refusal to acknowledge cabals in Nigerian governance, describing it as a betrayal of history.
• He urged transparency and accountability to ensure future generations understand the dynamics of power and governance.

Implications for Tinubu’s Leadership

Dalung’s statements raise concerns about the impact of influential inner circles on governance and the isolation of leadership. His critique calls for scrutiny of the administration’s policies and their alignment with constitutional principles.