By Abdullahi O Haruna
In many developing democracies, politicians have perfected a peculiar craft. Unable to build enough roads, create enough jobs or deliver enough public goods, they compensate by distributing illusions. A photograph here, a promise there, and occasionally, a stack of purported appointment letters waved before cheering supporters. The objective is simple: convert public institutions into private political trophies.
That is why the recent social media spectacle surrounding the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) recruitment exercise was both unsurprising and troubling.
The claim was grand enough for political consumption. A federal lawmaker was said to have secured 50 recruitment slots in the FRSC for constituents. The accompanying fanfare was designed to project influence, reinforce patronage networks and cultivate the familiar narrative that public employment is not earned through merit but dispensed through political benevolence.
Yet there was one problem. The story was not true.
In a swift and unequivocal rebuttal, the FRSC clarified that no appointment letter has been issued to any candidate in the ongoing 2026 recruitment exercise. Those who passed preliminary stages have merely been invited for further training and assessment. Recruitment remains subject to rigorous screening, regimentation and statutory procedures. No politician, regardless of title or proximity to power, possesses the authority to hand out appointments into the Corps.
The episode reveals a deeper pathology in Nigerian politics.
Far too many politicians continue to behave as though government agencies are extensions of constituency offices. Every recruitment exercise becomes an opportunity for political merchandising. Every federal institution becomes a potential billboard for influence-peddling. Merit is quietly pushed aside while patronage is advertised as empowerment.
The irony is that this culture diminishes both the politician and the citizen. It reduces public service to political favour. It teaches young Nigerians that competence matters less than connections. It transforms national institutions into theatres for partisan self-promotion.
The most unfortunate victims are often hopeful job seekers. In a country battling unemployment, thousands of young people desperately search for opportunities. When false claims of allocated recruitment slots emerge, they create confusion, raise false hopes and provide fertile ground for fraudsters who thrive on the perception that jobs can be bought, brokered or politically arranged.
This is why the FRSC’s response deserves commendation.
At a time when many institutions might have preferred silence or ambiguity, the Corps chose clarity. It drew a bright line between political theatre and administrative reality. More importantly, it defended the principle that recruitment into a national institution must be governed by established procedures rather than political influence.
Under Corps Marshal Shehu Mohammed, the FRSC has done something increasingly valuable in contemporary governance: it has protected the integrity of its processes. That should not be considered extraordinary. Yet in an environment where institutions are frequently pressured to bend to political expectations, such firmness deserves recognition.
The larger lesson extends beyond the FRSC.
Nigeria’s public institutions can only command respect when they refuse to become instruments of political vanity. Recruitment exercises should produce competent officers, not political headlines. Public agencies should serve citizens, not political egos. And politicians who genuinely wish to empower their constituents should focus less on claiming imaginary appointment slots and more on advocating policies that expand real opportunities.
The temptation to convert every government process into a campaign advertisement remains strong. So too is the urge among some political actors to claim ownership of outcomes they neither created nor controlled.
But institutions mature when they resist such temptations.
The FRSC’s rebuttal was therefore more than a denial. It was a reminder that public service belongs to the public, not to politicians seeking applause. And in a democracy hungry for stronger institutions, that is a message worth applauding.
