By Mohammed Kilema

A Response to “The House and the Horizon: Factionalism and Structural Fragility of Nasarawa’s ADC”

The attempt by Chief Ibrahim Nasiru to portray the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Nasarawa State as a “formidable alternative coalition” ahead of the 2027 gubernatorial election is, with due respect, an exaggeration that the unfolding events within the party simply do not support.

If anything, the recent exchange between the camps associated with Maj. Gen. Nuhu Angbazo and Barrister Mohammed H. Abdullahi has exposed precisely the opposite: a political platform struggling to establish internal cohesion, strategic discipline and institutional maturity even before the real electoral contest begins.

A political organisation cannot become formidable merely because prominent individuals assemble under one platform. Numbers, political pedigrees, defections, campaign structures and media visibility do not automatically translate into organisation. Organisation is demonstrated by discipline, coordination, respect for internal processes, conflict-resolution mechanisms and the capacity to manage disagreements without exposing the party’s weaknesses to the public.

That is precisely where the ADC’s current predicament becomes instructive.

The Problem Is Deeper Than Factionalism

Chief Nasiru correctly identifies the danger posed by public disagreements within a political party. However, he appears to stop at the symptom rather than confronting the underlying problem.

The more fundamental question is: how did a supposedly formidable political organisation arrive at a point where a disputed political contest could degenerate into competing public communiqués and personal exchanges?

The answer is not difficult to find.

The ADC’s current trajectory suggests that those who have gathered around the platform have yet to establish a coherent political command structure capable of accommodating competing ambitions.

It is therefore premature—even misleading—to describe the ADC as an already formidable alternative to the All Progressives Congress (APC). A coalition of prominent politicians is not necessarily a political machine. A crowd of ambitious individuals is not necessarily an organisation. And electoral excitement generated by defections is not the same thing as an established political structure.

The events now unfolding are evidence of this distinction.

The Timing of “A Call to Common Purpose”

There is also a particularly troubling aspect of the intervention by Hon. Jibril Sabo Keana (JSK), Director-General of the Angbazo Campaign Organisation.

Where there is an unresolved dispute concerning an electoral contest, particularly where an aggrieved party has resorted to the courts, every responsible political actor ought to exercise exceptional restraint.

Against that background, JSK’s decision to issue a public “strategic narrative” entitled A Call to Common Purpose was, at the very least, politically insensitive and strategically questionable.

The problem is not the call for unity itself. Unity is desirable.

The problem is the timing, the circumstances and the institutional context in which that appeal was made.

Where a matter is already the subject of judicial proceedings, public statements capable of appearing to prejudge the dispute, pressure the opposing camp or create an impression that the matter has already been politically settled are hardly examples of sophisticated political strategy.

Indeed, it is not entirely surprising that the MHA camp reacted through Alhaji Muhammad Lamino Shittu, popularly known as Shettiman Shabu.

One may disagree with the tone, language or substance of the response, but it would be intellectually dishonest to pretend that the reaction emerged in a vacuum.

When one side publicly declares its narrative, the other side is naturally entitled to defend its political position—particularly where its interests are perceived to be under threat.

The Real Test of Organisation

A truly organised political party does not resolve serious internal disagreements through competing press releases.

It has mechanisms.

It has party organs.

It has trusted elders.

It has negotiation channels.

It has procedures for reconciliation.

It has leaders capable of bringing disputing camps into the same room and keeping them there until a workable political settlement emerges.

That is what political organisation means.

The present situation instead creates an impression of competing centres of authority, competing narratives and competing political interests.

That is not strength.

It is structural vulnerability.

And this is precisely why the ADC should not be described as formidable merely because some influential politicians have gathered under its banner.

Nasarawa Voters Are Not Looking for Political Drama

The people of Nasarawa State are confronted by real challenges: infrastructure, employment, agriculture, security, education, healthcare, rural development and the overall economic wellbeing of the state.

They are not looking for political theatre.

They want leadership that can demonstrate competence, stability, vision and the ability to manage competing interests without turning every disagreement into a public confrontation.

This is where the APC enters the conversation.

Nasarawa State has experienced different political administrations and has also witnessed periods when opposition forces controlled the political machinery of the state. Therefore, the electorate is entitled to ask a straightforward question:

What demonstrable achievements distinguish the proposed ADC alternative from what Nasarawa has already experienced under previous opposition administrations?

That question cannot be answered by campaign communiqués.

It cannot be answered by describing oneself as a coalition.

And it certainly cannot be answered by attacking political opponents on social media or through newspaper statements.

It must be answered through a credible record, a coherent manifesto and convincing evidence that the proposed alternative possesses the capacity to govern.

Wadada and the APC

For us, the 2027 contest is not merely about changing political labels.

It is about the future direction of Nasarawa State.

We therefore stand firmly with the APC and its candidate, Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada, because we believe the state requires continuity of developmental direction, stability and leadership capable of consolidating the gains already made.

For many of us, Wadada represents a political bridge between aspiration and responsibility—a candidate whom we believe can provide the leadership required to move Nasarawa forward.

The metaphor may be unconventional, but it is appropriate: if Nasarawa is confronted by a political river, the electorate needs a leader capable of building the bridge and safely taking the people across—not one who merely promises a new destination while those within his own political household are still quarrelling over who controls the boat.

Development Must Come First

We should therefore not allow the political excitement surrounding the ADC to distract from the more important issue: the development of Nasarawa State.

Political parties will come and go. Candidates will emerge and disappear. Coalitions will be formed and dissolved. But Nasarawa will remain.

Its people will remain.

Its developmental challenges will remain.

Our responsibility is therefore to judge every political platform by its capacity to provide credible, competent and sustainable governance.

The ADC has every constitutional right to contest the 2027 election. Its supporters have every right to mobilise. Its candidates have every right to campaign.

But political rhetoric should not be confused with political organisation, and ambition should not be mistaken for preparedness.

The current internal disagreements have offered the public an early glimpse into the ADC’s organisational challenges. Rather than dismissing those signs, its leaders should take them seriously.

The Choice Before Nasarawa

At the end of the day, the people of Nasarawa State—not campaign organisations, political analysts or social-media warriors—will make the final decision.

They will examine records.

They will compare administrations.

They will assess candidates.

They will consider development.

And they will decide who deserves their mandate.

For me, the choice is clear.

We stand with Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada and the APC in 2027.

We stand for continuity where continuity serves development, stability where stability promotes progress, and leadership that puts the interests of Nasarawa above political theatrics.

The ADC may have a house.

It may even have many occupants.

But before anyone begins to speak confidently about the horizon, the party must first prove that its house has a foundation strong enough to withstand the political storm ahead.

Nasarawa deserves more than political excitement. Nasarawa deserves responsible leadership, sustainable development and a government that puts the people first.

We fully stand with Wadada. Come 2027.