By Rayyanu Bala

The attempt by some opponents to disagree with Senator Ahmed Wadada Aliyu over his assertion that “it is my time to govern Nasarawa State” is, at best, a deliberate misunderstanding of the political reality in Nasarawa State and, at worst, an attempt to weaponise rhetoric against a legitimate demand for fairness, equity, and principle of rotation of governorship of Nasarawa state.
Wadada is right to say it is his time.
Not because Nasarawa State belongs to Ahmed Wadada Aliyu, Not because the governorship is his personal inheritance. And certainly not because any individual has a divine entitlement to occupy the Shendam Road Government House.
Wadada is right to say that it is his turn to govern because the other zones had their turn now it is the turn of Nasarawa West. Principle of fairness demands that western zone should have its turn.
If the argument of the opponents is that governance is not a birthright, we completely agree, then the same principle must apply consistently to every senatorial zone, every aspirant, and every political interest in the state.
The question, therefore is:
If this is not about entitlement, birthright or “whose turn” it is, why was it acceptable for Nasarawa South to produce a governor, followed by Nasarawa North, and why is there now resistance to the legitimate aspiration of Nasarawa West?
And more importantly,
isn’t it awkward for someone from Lafia, after eight years of Governor Tanko Al-Makura from the same Lafia, feel entitled to aspire to govern the state again?
Is that not also a question of entitlement?
Why is it suddenly offensive when someone from Nasarawa West says, “It is our turn,” but perfectly acceptable when political actors from Lafia seek to retain or reclaim the governorship?
Let us apply one standard.
If Nasarawa State is truly not a private estate, then no senatorial district should be allowed to behave as though the governorship is permanently available to it.
Tanko Al-Makura, who is from Lafia in Nasarawa South, governed Nasarawa State for eight years. After that period, the people of Nasarawa had every reason to expect a fair and equitable consideration of the other senatorial zones.
Therefore, when a candidate from Nasarawa West says that his zone deserves consideration, the appropriate response should not be about “personal entitlement.” The appropriate response should be to engage the substantive question:
Has Nasarawa West had its fair opportunity to produce a governor?
If the answer is no, then what exactly is wrong with demanding equity?
Those attacking Wadada’s statement should be careful not to confuse personal ambition with collective political aspiration.
Wadada may be the individual expressing the aspiration, but the argument transcends Wadada.
It is about Nasarawa West.
Nasarawa West is not asking for charity. It is not asking anybody to surrender power to it. It is demanding that the people of the zone be given a fair shot at the highest elective office in the state.
There is a profound difference between saying:
“Give me the governorship because I am entitled to it.”
and saying:
“Our senatorial zone has waited, and in the interest of equity and fairness, it is our turn to be considered.”
Indeed, every political arrangement in Nigeria is built around negotiation, balancing, zoning, rotation, inclusion and political understanding. Pretending otherwise will do no good to all of us.
Those arguing about Wadada’s statement that it is his turn need to answer this very important question.
After eight years of Tanko Al-Makura, why should another aspirant from the same Lafia should seek for the governorship?
If a Lafia candidate can say, “I am qualified and I am contesting” then a Nasarawa West candidate can equally say, “I am qualified and it is our zone’s turn.”
You cannot condemn one as “entitlement” while celebrating the other as “as he has the right”
That is a double standard.
However, it is preposterous to reject the principle of zoning at this time, simply because it is inconvenient to you.
Those supporting Wadada are not arguing that he should become governor without an election.
Far from it.
The ballot box remains supreme.
Saying it is Nasarawa West’s turn does not mean the people of Nasarawa West are not democratic, It means that, within the political understanding and balance of the state, the zone should be given a fair opportunity to produce the next governor.
what is indeed, fundamentally unfair is to deny the principle of zoning now that it favours the western zone.
Nobody is saying that the other zones are not important in this election.
What we are saying is that equity and understanding should matters.
The people of Nasarawa West should not be expected to apologise for demanding what they believe is their fair opportunity to lead the state.
So, Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada is right when he says, “It is my time.”
Because behind that statement is a broader political reality:
It is the time of Nasarawa West.
And if those who oppose that position believe otherwise, they should tell the people of Nasarawa State why, after eight years of Tanko Al-Makura from Lafia, another aspirant from the same Lafia is seeking the governorship does that not sounds
unreasonable.
The issue is not whether anyone owns Nasarawa State.
The issue is every senatorial zone deserves a fair opportunity to lead.
And on that question, the people of Nasarawa West have every right to say:
“WE HAVE WAITED. WE HAVE SERVED. WE ARE READY. IT IS OUR TURN.”
2027 should therefore not be a contest between those who claim ownership of Nasarawa State and those who claim entitlement to its Government House.
It should be a contest where equity opens the door, competence earns the mandate, and the people make the final decision.