During the TurnUp Jigawa training in December 2023, I facilitated a discussion on policy-making and legislative advocacy. We had young people from across the state in the room, and the work was about participation that continues beyond campaign season. That matters to me. If our political energy disappears after the result is announced, we leave too much of public life to the people who already have access.
For young people interested in civic life, that quieter period matters. Participation becomes more useful when it includes understanding a particular issue and following what happens to it. A citizen does not need an answer to every national problem before asking a clear question about one public responsibility.
Begin with something specific
A broad demand for better leadership expresses a real concern, but it can be difficult to act on. A question about the status of a particular project gives a public office something more definite to answer. The citizen should first establish which institution is responsible, rather than assume that the most visible politician controls every decision.
This requires some patient reading and enquiry. What was announced? What document records it? Is the issue a proposal, an approved activity, or an ongoing service? Confusing these stages can lead to accusations that are easy to dismiss. Precision strengthens criticism because it makes the actual disagreement easier to identify.
Keep a record of the conversation
Written questions, acknowledgement dates, and replies create a useful trail. They help a citizen distinguish silence from delay and a general response from a substantive answer. They also reduce dependence on memory when several people are involved. Records should remain factual and avoid publishing personal details that have no relevance to the issue.
Imagine a group asking about repairs to a community facility. It could prepare a short account of the problem, attach appropriate evidence, and ask which office handles the work. If a response gives a timeframe, the group can follow up against that timeframe. A respectful approach does not prevent firm questions when commitments remain unexplained.
Working with others can make this effort more sustainable. One person may understand documents, another may communicate with residents, and another may organise records. The group should still agree on what it knows and who can speak for it. A shared concern is stronger when its public account remains consistent and accurate.
It helps to keep the request narrow enough for a response to be assessed. If ten unrelated grievances are combined, even a substantial reply may be difficult to evaluate. A focused enquiry can later connect to a larger pattern once the details are established. Building the record patiently gives public discussion a firmer basis than starting with the largest possible accusation.
Judge progress fairly
An answer may explain a genuine constraint without solving the problem. It may also avoid the question. Citizens should examine the content rather than treat every reply as success or every delay as proof of bad faith. Where further action is needed, the next request should identify what remains unanswered.
Participation between elections is sometimes unglamorous. It involves returning to an issue, checking a document, and asking for clarification again. That work can help make public discussion more serious. The question is not whether every citizen must become a full-time activist. It is whether we can reserve some attention for the decisions that continue to shape our communities after the campaign posters are gone.
0 Comments