By Rayyanu Bala

The history of party primary elections in Nasarawa State is one that has always generated debate. Over the years, virtually every major primary election in Nasarawa State has produced its share of controversy, allegations, and counter-allegations. But if we are to be honest with ourselves, we must acknowledge that the phrase “free and fair election,” whether primary or general, is a relative term in Nigerian politics.
Consider the political history of Nasarawa State.
When Abdullahi Adamu completed his second term as governor, the battle to determine his successor was a tough one between Late Aliyu Akwe Doma and Late Solomon Ewuga. That 2007 primary remains contentious to some people to this day, with different political actors holding firmly to different interpretations of what happened. Some alleged that Abdullahi Adamu rigged the primary in favour of Aliyu Akwe Doma.
Years later, when Tanko Al-Makura completed his second term, the primary election conducted to choose his successor also generated controversy. Again, there were complaints, accusations, and disagreements over the process, with some aspirants alleging that the primary was rigged in favour of Engineer Abdullahi Sule.
Therefore, the controversy surrounding party primaries in Nasarawa State is not a new phenomenon, nor is it peculiar to one political party or one particular election.
This is why the current debate over the APC primary that produced Senator Ahmed Wadada Aliyu as its candidate deserves a more balanced conversation.
Some people have described the primary that produced him as flawed and marred by irregularities. Of course, anyone who believes that the process was unfair has the right to express that opinion. However, the arguments presented by some of those who lost the primary do not, in my view, hold water.
There is a pattern in Nigerian politics that we should be courageous enough to confront. When a politician wins a primary or an election, he sees the process as transparent, credible, free, and fair. But when he loses, he see the same process as manipulated, compromised, and riddled with irregularities.
The reality is that the perception of whether an election is free and fair is influenced by its outcome. The winner sees a legitimate process, while the loser see a process that denied him victory.
Of course, losing a primary is painful, particularly when a candidate has invested time, resources, and political capital in the contest. But disappointment with the outcome should not be presented as evidence that the entire process was flawed.
To declare May 2026 Nasarawa APC primary “flawed” simply because your preferred candidate did not win does not augur well for our democracy.
You cannot demand that we accept every election you win as free and fair while rejecting every election you lose as fraudulent. That is not democracy.
Perhaps it is time to change the conversation in Nasarawa State.
Rather than judging the credibility of a primary solely by who emerges victorious, we should develop a political culture in which both winners and losers are willing to accept the outcome of elections. The attitude of “free and fair when I win, but fraudulent when I lose” is not the best approach to democratic politics.
Nasarawa’s political history gives us enough examples to know that a winner’s celebration does not prove that an election was perfect, just as a loser’s complaint does not, by itself, prove that an election was fraudulent.
Our politicians must learn how to accept defeat and respect democratic processes. Dismissing every unfavourable outcome as fraudulent wasn’t the best approach.