As Nigeria moves towards another election cycle, political leaders will have another opportunity to explain their records, defend their decisions and ask citizens for continued support.

The federal government will point to policies, reforms, infrastructure projects, economic figures and official achievements. Opposition politicians will question those claims and present their own arguments about what should have been done differently.

But Nigerians should not have to choose between competing political speeches without knowing what the evidence says.

The most important question is not how many achievements the government can list. It is whether those achievements can be independently verified and whether they have improved people’s lives.

As for President Bola Tinubu’s administration, the coming election period provides an opportunity for Nigerians to examine its record on the economy, security, education, healthcare, employment and public spending.

The standard should be simple: show the evidence, explain the results and account for what remains unfinished.

1. The economy: what has actually improved?

Economic reform is one of the central issues Nigerians should examine before the next election.

The government should explain what its policies have achieved, what the transition has cost households and businesses, and which problems remain unresolved.

Citizens should demand evidence on inflation, food prices, purchasing power, employment, economic growth and the cost of doing business.

A fall in the inflation rate, for example, does not automatically mean that prices have returned to previous levels. It generally means prices are rising more slowly. Families may still be struggling if food, transport, rent and other essentials remain expensive relative to their incomes.

The government should therefore present economic figures alongside information that helps people understand their practical consequences.

Have real wages improved? Can households afford more essential goods than before? Are small businesses expanding or closing? Are more Nigerians finding stable employment?

These questions require data covering comparable periods, not isolated figures selected to make the government’s performance look favourable.

Nigerians should also ask the administration to explain which economic difficulties it inherited, which have been affected by its policies and which results it can reasonably demonstrate.

An honest economic assessment must consider both the conditions that existed before the reforms and the outcomes recorded afterwards.

2. Public spending: where is taxpayers’ money going?

Government spending deserves close scrutiny because budget announcements do not automatically translate into completed projects or better services.

The federal government publishes budget documents and implementation reports through the Budget Office of the Federation. These records provide a starting point for checking how approved expenditure compares with actual implementation.

But many citizens need clearer explanations of what those figures mean.

How much money was budgeted for major projects? How much was released? How much was actually spent? What was delivered, and when was it completed?

Where projects exceeded their original costs, what explanation was provided? Where projects remain unfinished, what happened to the funds already committed?

These questions should apply to roads, railways, hospitals, schools, electricity projects and other publicly funded investments.

The government should publish accessible project-level information that allows journalists, civil society organisations and residents to compare official spending claims with physical results.

It should also explain significant differences between budgeted and actual expenditure.

A budget is a public financial plan. It is not, by itself, proof of achievement.

3. Security: are Nigerians safer than before?

Security should be judged through evidence of what is happening to communities, not simply through statements announcing arrests or successful military operations.

Nigerians continue to demand protection from terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, communal violence and other forms of criminal activity.

Before the next election, the government should provide clear information on security trends, including fatalities, kidnappings, displaced communities, attacks on vulnerable areas and the recovery of territory previously affected by armed groups.

Those figures should be properly defined, compared over consistent periods and supported by credible data.

The government should also explain how it measures success beyond the number of suspects arrested or weapons recovered.

Are communities returning to their homes? Can farmers reach their land safely? Are schools reopening in areas previously affected by attacks? Are families receiving meaningful support after displacement?

Security outcomes can vary considerably between states and regions. National averages should not hide the experiences of communities where violence remains a serious concern.

The government should explain where the situation has improved, where it has deteriorated and what it plans to do about persistent threats.

4. Jobs: how many Nigerians have found meaningful employment?

Employment announcements often attract attention, but the figures need context.

A government may announce recruitment, training programmes, grants or business support schemes. Citizens should be able to establish how many people actually benefited and whether those opportunities lasted.

The administration should publish verifiable information about jobs created or supported by its programmes, including the sectors involved, the geographical distribution of opportunities and the methods used to measure employment.

It should distinguish permanent jobs from temporary work, training placements and short-term programme participation.

For young Nigerians, the important questions include whether qualifications lead to employment, whether new businesses can survive and whether workers can earn enough to meet basic needs.

For small businesses, access to electricity, financing, infrastructure and predictable regulations can determine whether they expand or shut down.

Government programmes should be assessed against their stated objectives, not just the number of people photographed receiving certificates, equipment or financial assistance.

Where a programme promises thousands of jobs, the government should explain how those jobs were counted and provide evidence that the opportunities materialised.

5. Education: what has changed for students?

Education should be assessed through school access, teaching quality, learning outcomes, infrastructure and the cost families face to keep children in school.

The federal government should provide clear information about its spending on education, the condition of institutions under its responsibility, teacher development, student support and progress against stated targets.

Where government programmes promise financial assistance or other benefits to students, citizens should be able to verify eligibility requirements, implementation dates and the number of beneficiaries.

Announcements alone are not enough.

Parents need to know whether children are receiving a better education. Students need to know whether promised support is available. Employers and communities need evidence that graduates are developing useful skills.

The assessment should also distinguish between responsibilities held by the federal government, state governments and local authorities.

That distinction matters because many primary and secondary schools fall under state or local government responsibility, while the federal government has direct responsibilities in areas including federal universities and other federal institutions.

A fair evaluation should hold each level of government accountable for the responsibilities it actually controls.

6. Healthcare: can Nigerians access affordable treatment?

Healthcare is another area where official expenditure should be compared with practical outcomes.

The government should provide evidence of progress in health insurance coverage, maternal and child health, immunisation, disease prevention, staffing and the availability of essential services.

Citizens should also be able to examine how federal funding supports public hospitals and primary healthcare initiatives, while recognising that state governments play major roles in delivering healthcare.

The questions are practical.

Are patients receiving timely treatment? Are essential medicines available? Are health facilities adequately staffed? Are families facing financial hardship because of medical bills?

Where the government announces new facilities or rehabilitation projects, it should publish information on completion, staffing, equipment and whether services are operational.

A building that has been commissioned but cannot provide the intended service should not be treated as equivalent to a fully functioning healthcare facility.

The government should also explain how it measures whether its interventions have improved access to treatment for poorer households.

7. Electricity: what progress can businesses and households verify?

Electricity remains important to household welfare, business productivity and industrial development.

The federal government should explain what its policies and investments have achieved, while acknowledging the responsibilities shared across the electricity sector and the roles of other institutions.

Citizens should demand evidence on electricity generation, transmission, distribution, supply reliability and the implementation of projects intended to improve service.

However, national generation figures alone cannot tell households whether their electricity supply has improved. Power generated must still be transmitted and distributed effectively.

The experience of a factory, a small shop and a household may differ considerably.

The government should therefore publish results that show not only the electricity available to the system but also how service reliability has changed for consumers.

Where projects are delayed or expected improvements have not materialised, officials should explain the obstacles and the measures being taken to address them.

8. Borrowing and debt: what are Nigerians getting in return?

Government borrowing is not automatically evidence of failure. Governments may borrow to finance infrastructure, respond to emergencies or meet other public needs.

The important questions concern the terms of borrowing, the intended use of the funds and the results achieved.

Before the next election, Nigerians should demand clear information about the country’s debt stock, debt-servicing obligations, new borrowing and the projects or programmes financed through those loans.

The government should explain how it evaluates whether borrowing produces sufficient public value and how it intends to manage repayment obligations.

Where loans are tied to specific projects, citizens should be able to identify those projects and track their implementation.

It is also important to distinguish between the amount borrowed, the amount disbursed and the amount actually spent on the intended purpose.

Debt figures can be difficult to interpret without context. They should be presented alongside government revenue, economic conditions, repayment schedules and the assets or services financed.

The public deserves to understand both the benefits expected from borrowing and the obligations future taxpayers may inherit.

9. Corruption: what happened after the investigations?

Announcements of arrests, investigations and prosecutions can create the impression that action is being taken against corruption.

But the public should also be able to follow what happens afterwards.

Was the investigation completed? Was a case filed in court? Did the court reach a decision? Were funds recovered, where applicable? Were the recovery and subsequent use of public money properly documented?

These questions must be asked without assuming that every person accused of wrongdoing is guilty.

An arrest is not a conviction, and an investigation is not proof of criminal conduct.

The government should publish accurate information about the progress and outcomes of cases, subject to legal restrictions and the rights of those involved.

Where public officials are accused of misconduct, the same legal standards should apply regardless of political party, office or personal connections.

The public should not have to rely entirely on dramatic announcements at the beginning of a case without access to reliable updates about its outcome.

10. Infrastructure: what was completed, and what remains unfinished?

Roads, bridges, railways and other infrastructure projects are often presented as evidence of government performance.

But the value of infrastructure depends on more than the announcement of a contract or the inauguration of a project.

Nigerians should demand a comprehensive record of major federal projects, including their original costs, revised costs where applicable, construction timelines, completion status and maintenance arrangements.

Where the government says a project has been completed, independent verification should establish whether it is operational and meets the intended purpose.

Where construction remains incomplete, officials should explain the reason for the delay, the amount already spent and the expected completion date.

The assessment should also consider whether projects address genuine public needs and whether their benefits are accessible to the people they were intended to serve.

Government should not receive full credit for a promised project simply because funds were allocated or construction began.

The relevant evidence is what has been delivered and what the public can use.

11. Tax reforms: what benefits should citizens expect?

Changes to the tax system can affect businesses, workers, investors and households.

The federal government should explain the objectives of its tax policies, how implementation is progressing and what evidence shows that the reforms are achieving their intended purposes.

Citizens should demand clear information about revenue collection, compliance, administrative costs, the treatment of different categories of taxpayers and the effects on businesses.

The government should also explain how increased revenue is being used to support public services and development priorities.

Tax policy should not be assessed solely by the amount collected. Its wider effects matter, including whether it improves compliance, reduces unnecessary complexity and supports a sustainable business environment.

Where concerns arise about the burden on particular groups, officials should provide evidence and explain what safeguards or adjustments are available.

The public deserves an understandable account of both the obligations created by tax reforms and the public benefits expected in return.

12. Transparency: can Nigerians verify the government’s claims?

A government cannot expect citizens to assess its performance fairly if the information needed for that assessment is difficult to obtain.

The federal government should make key records accessible, including budget implementation reports, procurement information, project updates, audit findings and performance data.

Information should be published in formats that journalists, researchers and ordinary citizens can understand and examine.

Where records are incomplete, delayed or difficult to reconcile, the relevant agencies should explain why and provide a timetable for addressing the gaps.

Transparency also requires consistency. Figures released by different government agencies should be clearly defined so that the public can understand apparent differences.

Independent journalists and civil society organisations should be able to scrutinise official claims without being treated as opponents simply because they ask difficult questions.

Public information is not a favour granted by political leaders. It is a necessary part of democratic accountability.

What Nigerians should demand before deciding how to judge the government

Before the next election, the federal government should be prepared to provide a documented performance report covering its major promises and responsibilities.

That report should contain:

• The promises made and the targets originally set.
• The amount budgeted and actually spent on major programmes.
• Evidence of completed projects and services delivered.
• Independent or independently verifiable measures of outcomes.
• Explanations for missed targets, delays and significant cost changes.
• Updated information on investigations, audit findings and corrective action, where legally appropriate.
• A clear distinction between completed achievements, ongoing projects and future proposals.

The same questions should be put to opposition politicians who seek to replace the current administration. Criticising the government is not a substitute for presenting credible policies, realistic funding plans and measurable commitments.

Voters should also be able to distinguish between responsibilities held by the federal government and those belonging to state or local authorities.

Accountability becomes less useful when political actors are blamed for matters outside their control or credited for results they cannot substantiate.

The government should show its record, not just defend its image

An election campaign will produce arguments about who deserves credit, who should accept blame and which policies should continue.

Those arguments are part of democratic politics. But they should not replace the evidence.

The federal government should be able to show what it promised, what it funded, what it delivered and what changed as a result.

Where the evidence demonstrates progress, that progress should be acknowledged. Where targets were missed, the public deserves a clear explanation. Where allegations remain unproven, they should be treated as allegations rather than established facts.

The opposition should face the same demand for evidence when it presents alternative claims.

Nigerians should not be expected to evaluate a government’s performance using slogans, isolated statistics or campaign speeches alone.

Before another mandate is sought, the public deserves answers that can be checked against records and lived experience.

The central question is not which political side tells the most convincing story. It is which claims stand up when the evidence is examined.

Also read: Bala Mohammed’s legacy: what will Bauchi residents remember after his tenure?