By Rayyanu Bala.

The article titled “Why Is Wadada Clearly Being Forced On The People?” by Imran Usman Wakili raises a number of concerns about the political future of Nasarawa State. While every citizen has the right to express opinions and scrutinize political developments, it is important that public discourse remains anchored in facts rather than speculation, suspicion, and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
First, the assertion that Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada is being “forced” on the people of Nasarawa State is not supported by any credible evidence. Politics is fundamentally about consultations, negotiations, alliances, and popularity among stakeholders. If Senator Wadada is receiving support from influential figures within the APC or among sections of the electorate, that alone does not constitute imposition. Every aspirant is entitled to seek support, and every political party has established mechanisms for selecting its candidates.
Of more troubling in the article is the repeated characterization of Senator Wadada as a “puppet” of the Chagoury family. Such a serious allegation requires verifiable proof. Throughout the article, no evidence is presented to demonstrate that Wadada is acting on behalf of any business interest, let alone that he intends to surrender the resources of Nasarawa State to private actors. Political disagreements should not be reduced to attempts at guilt by association.
The article also attempts to connect federal infrastructure contracts awarded to companies linked to the Chagoury Group with the governorship ambitions of Senator Wadada in Nasarawa State. This connection is speculative at best. The award of contracts by the Federal Government and the internal politics of Nasarawa APC are entirely different matters. Suggesting a coordinated plan to “gift” an entire state to an individual or business interest without concrete evidence risks misleading the public and undermining serious political debate.
Furthermore, the discussion around Nasarawa’s lithium deposits should be approached with caution. The state’s mineral wealth belongs to the people of Nasarawa and is regulated under Nigerian laws and institutions. No governor, regardless of political affiliation, can single-handedly transfer ownership of strategic resources to private interests. The processes governing mining licenses, investments, and resource management involve multiple layers of oversight by federal agencies and regulatory bodies.
The attempt to link Senator Wadada’s possible candidacy to insecurity in states such as Zamfara, Kaduna, Plateau, and Borno is equally problematic. These states face complex security challenges driven by historical, social, economic, and criminal factors. To imply that the emergence of a particular governorship aspirant could automatically lead to similar outcomes in Nasarawa is both unfair and alarmist.
The fact that the author of the article, Imran Usman Wakil, has openly endorsed former IGP Mohammed Abubakar Adamu as his preferred candidate raises questions about the neutrality of the piece. As a result, the article cannot be regarded as an objective or impartial analysis.
Citizens are entitled to support any aspirant of their choice and to criticize opposing candidates. However, such expressions should not be presented as evidence-based analysis unless they are supported by verifiable facts and objective reasoning.
The people of Nasarawa State deserve a campaign focused on competence, vision, integrity, development plans, and the capacity to manage the state’s resources for the benefit of all. No doubt, Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada now is the APC governorship candidate, he should therefore be evaluated on his record, his ideas, and his ability to deliver results—not on theories that have not been substantiated by facts.
As 2027 approaches, political discussions in Nasarawa should be driven by clear evidence and verifiable facts, not by false narratives and misinformation.