By Rayyanu Bala

I have read with keen interest the article titled “A. A. Sule and the Danger of Choosing Wadada as Your Political Successor,” attributed to one Zubairu Sani Keffi. While every citizen has the right to express political opinions and raise questions about those seeking public office, it is equally important that political commentary be guided by fairness, evidence, and a proper understanding of the character of the individual being discussed.
The attempt to portray Senator Ahmed Wadada Aliyu as a potential threat to Governor Abdullahi A. Sule, former Governor Umaru Tanko Al-Makura, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, traditional institutions, and the people of Nasarawa State is, in my view, an unfair and unnecessarily speculative interpretation of his personality and political record.
Senator Ahmed Wadada Aliyu is known by all as a disciplined politician who understands the responsibilities that come with public office. He is not a politician who believes that power gives anyone the right to humiliate others or disregard established institutions. His political journey has demonstrated that he is someone who fully understands the importance of patience, consultation, and respect.
Most importantly, Wadada is a man who values his word. Senator Wadada has consistently demonstrated the principle that when he gives his word, he takes that commitment seriously. In an environment where political promises are sometimes treated as temporary instruments for winning elections, keeping one’s word is a quality for which Wadada should be celebrated rather than questioned.
The suggestion that Senator Wadada would automatically turn against those who are older or politically more experienced than him does not adequately reflect the man known to many people in Nasarawa State. Wadada understands the place of elders in our society. Political disagreements do not necessarily translate into personal hatred. In fact, a mature politician can disagree with an elder on political matters while continuing to respect that elder as a person.
Senator Wadada’s respect for elders is not something that begins and ends during election. It is part of his values, which he has demonstrated throughout his political career.
Another important aspect that should not be ignored when discussing Senator Wadada is his faith and fear of God. A man who genuinely fears God understands that political office is temporary and that every person in authority will ultimately be accountable for how that authority was used.
The governorship of Nasarawa State is not a personal inheritance. It is a trust from God and the people. For that reason, it is unfair to assume, without evidence, that Wadada would use the government to settle personal scores, persecute political opponents, or misuse the state’s natural resources. If anything, his fear of God is one of the qualities that will guide his conduct in public office.
Zubairu Sani Keffi’s article repeatedly raises the possibility that past political disagreements could become future persecution. That argument is based largely on speculation. Nasarawa politics has witnessed disagreements among political actors for many years. People have supported different candidates, disagreed over political strategies, and competed for political offices. That is the nature of democratic politics.
But disagreement should not automatically be interpreted as hatred. Senator Wadada has demonstrated that he understands the difference between political competition and personal hostility. A politician can compete fiercely during an election and still extend respect to his opponent after the contest. That is Wadada’s kind of politics.
The attempt to use the crisis between Uba Sani and El-Rufai in Kaduna State as a prediction of what will happen in Nasarawa is also problematic. Every state has its own political history, personalities and circumstances. The relationship between two politicians in another state cannot be used as conclusive evidence of what Senator Wadada will do if elected Governor of Nasarawa State.
Wadada should be judged by his own character, his own record, his own statements, and his own actions. If there are genuine concerns about his conduct, those concerns should be supported with verifiable facts rather than assumptions about what he might do in the future.
There is nothing wrong with demanding transparency in the management of Nasarawa’s mineral resources. Indeed, every responsible citizen should demand it. But such demands should apply equally to every political actor.
Senator Wadada should not be presumed guilty of future wrongdoing simply because he is contesting for governor. If elected, Wadada will operate within the law, protect the state’s resources, strengthen institutions, and ensure that the people of Nasarawa benefit from the state’s enormous economic potential. That is a reasonable expectation on him.
However, allegations about secret arrangements, financiers, and future economic returns should not be presented as facts unless credible evidence exists to establish them.
The suggestion that traditional rulers should fear the emergence of Senator Wadada is particularly unnecessary. Nasarawa’s traditional institutions have survived different administrations and political transitions. A responsible government should respect them, consult them, and recognize their important role in maintaining peace, culture, and social cohesion.
Senator Wadada, being a product of traditional institution and a man who respects elders and institutions, understands this responsibility. There is no reason therefore to assume that his election would mean hostility toward traditional rulers.
Politics should be about choices, not character assassination. Senator Wadada has presented his qualifications, scorecard and vision as contained in his HEART Agenda, Let his opponents present their own and tell the people what they intend to do differently.
But predicting that Wadada will persecute former governors, fight elders, destroy political opponents, or mortgage Nasarawa’s mineral resources without credible evidence is not constructive political debate. It is fear-based politics.
Governor Abdullahi A. Sule, former Governor Umaru Tanko Al-Makura, and Senator Abdullahi Adamu are experienced politicians who understand that political power changes hands. They also understand that political disagreements are part of democratic life. They should therefore judge Senator Wadada based on the person they know, not merely on the narrative being constructed around him by political opponents.
Wadada has shown respect; that respect should be acknowledged. He has kept his promises; let that record speak for itself. He has demonstrated discipline; let that discipline be recognized. Wadada is a man who fears God; let that also be considered when assessing his character.
There is no wisdom in creating enemies where none exist.
Ultimately, the people of Nasarawa State should not be encouraged to vote out of fear of what a candidate might do. They should vote based on competence, integrity, experience, vision, and the candidate’s commitment to the development of the state.
Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada is not claiming to be perfect. No politician is. But he deserves to be judged fairly. He is a disciplined politician. He respects elders. He values his commitments. He is conscious of his responsibilities before God. And he understands that political power is temporary, while one’s character and reputation remain.
If given the opportunity to serve, the appropriate standard should be simple: let Wadada be judged by his actions in office, not convicted in advance for actions he has not committed.
Nasarawa does not need the politics of fear. Wadada will provide a leadership that respects elders, protects institutions, fears God and keeps its promises, and places the interests of the people above personal political differences.
Let the 2027 contest be based on facts, ideas, character, and vision.
Therefore the attempt to discredit Senator Wadada will not change the reality of the situation.