By Rayyanu Bala

When I argued in my article published in this newspaper on 19 July 2026, titled “2027: Appointees Who Don’t Align with Sule’s Vision Should Go,” that political appointees cannot claim neutrality while enjoying the privileges and influence of political office and must come out to campaign for Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada, some people dismissed it as my personal opinion. However, recent remarks by the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Professor Nentawe Yilwatda, have reaffirmed that the position I took was neither unusual nor misplaced. Rather, my position reflects the very nature of partisan politics.
In a report published by The Guardian on 29 July 2026, Professor Nentawe reminded political appointees serving under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and indeed, every APC administrations across the country that occupying a political office comes with political responsibilities. He declared: “If you hold a political office, you cannot say you are not a politician. If you are unwilling to mobilise people and win votes, then you should not accept political appointments.”
That statement captures exactly what I argued in my earlier article.
Politics is built on trust, shared ideals, and collective responsibility. A political appointment is not simply another government job; it is an appointment based on the confidence that the person selected believes in the vision of the administration and is prepared to work towards achieving its political and developmental objectives.
The moment an individual voluntarily accepts an appointment as Minister, commissioner, special adviser, board chairman, senior special assistant, or any other political office, that individual automatically becomes a politician. He or she becomes part of the political family of the government that made the appointment.
This should not be mistaken for an attack on individual freedom. Political appointees remain citizens with constitutional rights, including the freedom to hold personal opinions. However, there is an important distinction between private convictions and public responsibility. Once someone accepts a political appointment, loyalty to the administration’s agenda becomes part of the obligations of that office.
If, for whatever reason, an appointee no longer believes in the policies or political direction of the administration, the honourable option is to resign. Remaining in office while actively working against the same government that appointed you is inconsistent with the ethics of political office.
Professor Nentawe’s position is therefore not just a party directive. It reflects a principle that applies across democratic systems. Political appointments are founded on confidence, trust, and shared objectives. Leaders appoint individuals because they expect them to defend government policies, promote government achievements, and mobilise political support for the administration.
As I also argued in my earlier article Nigeria’s political history confirms this reality. From the First Republic under Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa to the administrations of Shehu Shagari, Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari, governments have consistently relied on political appointees to mobilise support and deliver votes from their wards and constituencies.
Nasarawa State offers similar examples.
Senator Abdullahi Adamu used the political structure he built to support the emergence of the late Aliyu Akwe Doma as governor. Years later, Senator Umaru Tanko Al-Makura also supported the emergence of Engineer Abdullahi Sule through the political machinery established during his administration.
Every political leader naturally desires continuity. It is therefore understandable that Governor Abdullahi Sule would support a successor whom he believes can sustain his developmental vision and consolidate the achievements of his administration.
Since his preferred successor is Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada, all political appointees who are serving under his administration must work to ensure Senator Wadada’s victory in their respective wards and their respective constituencies.
One cannot continue to enjoy the benefits, influence, and privileges of political office while simultaneously undermining the interests of the leader who gave him the appointment. Such a stance is both morally difficult to defend and politically contradictory.
Professor Nentawe Yilwatda’s remarks therefore simply reinforce the above reality. As The Guardian reported on 29 July, he made it clear that those unwilling to mobilise political support for the party should reconsider occupying political offices. His message was straightforward: political office comes with political responsibility.
That is the same argument I made earlier.
If you choose to serve an elected government, you should be prepared to defend its policies, promote its achievements, and support its political direction. If that conviction no longer exists, then resignation is the most honourable course of action.
However, we should not see this as an APC position. It is a principle that underpins responsible partisan politics in every functioning democracy around the world.