Why Buhari Refused to Name a Successor — Ex-DSS DG Yusuf Bichi

Fresh insights have emerged into why former President Muhammadu Buhari chose not to publicly endorse or name a preferred successor during the buildup to the 2023 presidential election. According to former Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS), Yusuf Bichi, the decision was a deliberate security and political strategy rather than reluctance or indecision. This revelation was shared in a newly released book titled From Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari, which was unveiled in Abuja before a high-profile audience including President Bola Tinubu and other dignitaries.

Bichi explained that intelligence assessments at the time indicated that publicly backing a particular candidate could expose that individual to security risks and heighten tensions within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). He said Buhari believed that naming a successor might intensify rivalries, generate hostility, and possibly even endanger the person backed should political opponents see them as a target. The former DSS boss underscored that the political landscape was extremely competitive and potentially volatile, making neutrality a safer and more stabilizing posture.

The former president’s silence was often misinterpreted as hesitance or lack of interest, but Bichi insisted that it was a calculated choice to maintain internal cohesion within the APC and avoid undermining party unity ahead of the primaries. Buhari’s approach, as portrayed in the book, was to allow the primary process to distribute political risk among the aspirants rather than concentrate it on a single individual, as open endorsement might have done. This helped create an environment where the primary could proceed without seeming undue influence from the incumbent.

Buhari’s eventual absence of a named successor did not prevent the primary that brought President Tinubu to power in 2023. The decision has since become a subject of reflection and debate among political analysts, with some viewing it as an example of cautious leadership during a sensitive electoral period. What do you think about the implications of a sitting president choosing not to endorse a successor publicly? Comment below and share your thoughts.

Share to: