With the possible exception of Nigeria, Africa is really changing politically. The powers that were are on a losing streak, and the people they despise are clinching power despite the worst they try doing.

In Senegal, Bassirou Faye clinched the presidency, defeating the ruling party’s coalition. He came out of prison where former president, Macky Sall had confined him to win in the first round and was inaugurated as Senegal’s youngest president in April this year. For Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and Niger, Africa’s alternate ‘party’, the army, took power by force, overthrowing regimes that were beholden to France, the former colonial power which had been perceived as still ruling by proxy.

In Kenya, former President Uhuru Kenyatta had supported the candidacy of the opposition party’s candidate, Raila Odinga. In supporting Odinga, his erstwhile bitter opponent, against his own deputy president, William Ruto, Kenyatta apparently wanted to pacify the large supporters of Odinga who insisted that he, Uhuru, stole the votes. But the Kenyan electorates had other plans and were not in the mood for the dynasty play. Uhuru is the son of Kenya’s founding president, Jomo Kenyatta, while Raila is the son of Jomo’s deputy, Oginga Odinga. The electorates cast their votes for Ruto, the outsider.

For Bola Tinubu, it was the old African way where entrenched powers, not the electorates, determine electoral outcomes.

Between Ruto and Tinubu, one would think that Ruto would have an easy ride in government, given the wave of support that brought him to power, while Tinubu would have a rougher ride. But politics rarely follows such simplistic permutations.

Tinubu took what many think was a reckless gamble cancelling the subsidy on fuel, thus sending the price of the commodity up by over 250 percent right on inauguration grounds. But he has survived it this far. Few would have believed that such could be pulled off in a beleaguered economy like Nigeria. But it has worked for him.

Ruto, the favourite of Kenyan masses, however, almost got roasted by the same masses June ending, when he wanted to assent to Finance Bill 2024, which contained higher taxes. The streets burnt in riots, and the parliament was overrun. Ruto first talked tough, but seeing the rage of the rioters, he ate the humble pie and climbed down, announcing the withdrawal of his support for the bill.

Compare this with Tinubu’s aborted move to tax electronic transactions in banks. The Central Bank of Nigeria had in April instructed deposit money banks to start collecting a tax of 0.5 percent of the value of all electronic transactions, for cyber security purposes, whatever that meant.

The masses of Nigeria interpreted the move to mean depositors being tasked with securing the funds they keep with the banks. From all corners of the country, anger rose and organized labour girded its loins for battle. Tinubu read the signal well and cancelled the move.

But why should such a thought have crossed his mind? Those who have known Tinubu from his days as governor of Lagos State know that nothing thrills him like tax farming. Just show him where he can collect some money on behalf of the state and you have made his day.

Just don’t ask where the money so collected has gone, down the line. Those who posit that given the revenue Lagos has collected since 1999, the state should have become almost like London, don’t get the red carpet at Alausa. They can only stay at their lonely corners and rue the misfortune that such amounts didn’t pass through the hands of Jakande or his likes.

I don’t know the antecedents of Kenya’s Ruto. But Tinubu came from the streets and remains street-smart. He knows danger when he sees one, and will not put his finger in boiling water.

But does that give me comfort and hope? Tinubu is not one to chicken out. For as long as the object of his attraction remains, he would duck, restrategize and relaunch his bid – except if something juicier grabs his attention. Now, that’s my worry.

At the beginning of the year, the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms said that of the estimated $20 billion diaspora remittances for 2023, 90 percent of it was diverted and never physically touched Nigeria. These funds sent via Fintechs and the like land into the offshore accounts of these intermediaries which pay the beneficiaries in local banknotes.

The committee identified the diversion as a significant cause of foreign exchange crisis in Nigeria. Having been so identified, the government would want to tinker with it. Tinubu is very unlikely to allow this large amount of $18 billion fly through his space without his hands touching it. Taxation is looming in that direction. If we won’t allow the president to tax our electronic transactions, he will likely stick his finger into the juicy diaspora pie.

My worry is that with the near-total collapse of the economy, this diaspora remittance is the singular livewire for many families. The government may be pushing the masses right through the wall if it tries this.

It would amount to a chokehold if the government goes for this remaining air vent. President Tinubu’s street instincts should sound the alarms for him. But just in case he doesn’t hear, primordial considerations should.

The president’s home base has the greatest population of the Nigerian diaspora population. As a cub reporter in the 1980s, covering West Africa, I marvelled at meeting third generation Yorubas all the way to Abidjan. Most of them held dual citizenship. Indeed, there was thriving commerce between Ejigbo in Oyo State and Abidjan, with direct cargo and human traffic. At a time like this the CFA francs that they send to relations amounts to much.

Besides these, Yorubas populate the UK like no other ethnic group in Nigeria. Their people back home depend on their remittances.

For greater public good or for smaller considerations, Tinubu should not tamper with this window.