A comparison of the foreign travel records of Presidents Bola Tinubu and Muhammadu Buhari reveals notable differences in their approaches to international diplomacy and governance.

Travel Frequency
– Tinubu’s Travels: Since taking office in May 2023, President Tinubu has undertaken at least 43 foreign trips as of September 2025. In 2025 alone, he made 15 international trips across 11 countries. Notably, in his first year in office (May 2023 to May 2024), Tinubu spent 86 days abroad, which translates to approximately one in every four days outside Nigeria.
– Buhari’s Travels: During his first year in office (May 2015 to May 2016), President Buhari spent 47 days abroad. Over his entire eight-year presidency (2015-2023), Buhari undertook 53 official foreign trips, excluding medical trips.

Comparative Analysis
– Travel Rate: Tinubu’s travel rate significantly exceeds Buhari’s, with 86 days abroad in his first year compared to Buhari’s 47 days. While Buhari’s travels were primarily for official assignments and medical reasons, Tinubu’s trips often include high-level summits, bilateral engagements, and vacations. Some Nigerians suspect that Tinubu’s trips are also mostly for medical reasons, similar to Buhari’s.
– *Governance Style:* The difference in travel frequency has sparked criticism, with some alleging that Tinubu’s frequent travels demonstrate insensitivity and wasteful spending of taxpayer money. In contrast, Buhari’s more measured approach to travel has been seen as more transparent, with the former president often informing the National Assembly in writing and declaring his whereabouts to Nigerians.¹

Implications
– Public Perception: The public perceives Tinubu’s travels as excessive, questioning the impact on governance and the economy. Buhari’s more restrained travel schedule, on the other hand, has been viewed as a sign of stability and continuity.
– Policy Impact: The frequency and nature of presidential travels can influence policy decisions and the overall direction of the country. As such, understanding the travel patterns of these two presidents provides valuable insights into their governance styles.