By Rayyanu Bala

The conversations surrounding Senator Ahmad Aliyu Wadada’s ancestry have once again exposed an issue that deserves honest reflection. Senator Wadada has never denied being Bagobiri by tribe from Keffi Local Government Area. There is nothing hidden or controversial about that. The Gobirawa are one of the many ethnic communities that have lived in and contributed immensely to the growth of Nasarawa State, over several decades.
What many people conveniently ignore is that Nasarawa State itself is a beautiful mosaic of ethnic nationalities, each with a unique migration history. Mada, Eggon, Alago, Migili, Gobirawa, Hausa, Fulani, Kanuri, Tiv, Rindre, Jukun, Igbira, and many others all have ancestral roots that can be traced to different parts of present-day Nigeria and beyond. Yet, over generations, they have become bona fide indigenes of Nasarawa State, with equal rights, equal responsibilities, and equal stakes in the future of the state.
This obsession with “where your ancestors came from” seems to attract far more attention in Nasarawa state than in many other parts of Nigeria. It is an unfortunate distraction from the issues that truly matter, leadership, competence, integrity, and service.
Take Kano State as an example. Malam Ibrahim Shekarau governed Kano successfully for eight years. Despite his facial marks reflecting his ancestral heritage, no one seriously questioned his legitimacy as a Kano leader because his commitment to the people was what mattered. Leadership was judged by performance, not by attempts to disqualify someone based on distant ancestral origins.
Even within the North Central, Kwara State offers another example. The Saraki political family and the current governor Abdulaziz Abdulrazak have Fulani ancestry with roots outside the state. Yet Kwara has largely embraced a broader understanding of citizenship and belonging, focusing more on service than on genealogy.
Ironically, if those promoting rigid definitions of indigeneity were to apply the same standard consistently in Nasarawa State, they would arrive at an uncomfortable conclusion. Many of the state’s past governors also trace their ancestral origins to places outside present-day Nasarawa State. Former Governor Abdullahi Adamu is from the Afo ethnic group, whose historical origins are linked to the Borno area. Aliyu Akwe Doma, an Alago, traces ancestral roots to the Taraba axis. Senator Tanko Al-Makura is of the Kwandara ethnic group, whose historical origins are associated with Kano State. Governor Abdullahi Sule is Kanuri, an ethnic group with deep historical roots in Yobe.
Does any of this make them less qualified to lead Nasarawa? Certainly not. They were born, raised, lived among the people, and served the state. Their ancestral migration stories did not diminish their legitimacy or their contributions.
That is exactly why this debate should end. Every ethnic community in Nasarawa has a migration history. What binds us together today is not where our forefathers lived centuries ago, but our shared commitment to building a peaceful, united, and prosperous state.
Rather than reviving arguments about ancestry whenever politics comes around, we should judge leaders by their character, competence, vision, and commitment to the welfare of the people. That is the standard that strengthens democracy.
Nasarawa belongs to all its indigenous communities. No one should be made to feel like a stranger because of an ancestral story that is common to virtually every ethnic group in the state. It is time to move beyond these divisive narratives and focus on the real issues that affect the lives of our people.
Even in more advanced democracies, societies have learned that leadership should be determined by competence, vision, and the confidence of the electorate, not by distant ancestral origins. The United States of America, one of the world’s oldest constitutional democracies, elected Barack Obama as President for two consecutive terms. Americans voted Obama on his leadership and policies rather than on his family background. That is the kind of political maturity we should aspire to. Instead of allowing ancestral lineage to dominate our political conversations, we should focus on who has the capacity, integrity, and commitment to serve the people effectively.