By Rayyanu Bala

Ordinary President of Brekete Family,  Ahmed Isah,  raised a question that many people in Nasarawa State have also been asking privately: Where is the money coming from?
During his programme in Abuja, the Ordinary President was reacting to the empowerment programmes and tractor distributions associated with former Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Abubakar Adamu, who is now seeking to become governor of Nasarawa State under the SDP.
His concern was straightforward: how can a retired Inspector-General of Police suddenly embark on large-scale empowerment programmes, including the distribution of tractors, simply as he enters the race for governor? He questioned what businesses or other legitimate sources of income could have generated the resources now being deployed in these political activities.
It is a simple question. But it is also an important one.
Let me be clear: asking where money comes from does not, by itself, mean accusing anyone of wrongdoing. In a democracy, particularly during an election season, citizens have the right to ask questions about the resources being deployed by political actors. Those questions should be answered with facts, not treated as an attack.
And this type of question is not new.
We should remember that Arise TV previously raised questions concerning empowerment activities associated with the wife of Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada, including the reported distribution of ₦50,000 to thousands of women across Nasarawa State.
If questions could be asked about that exercise, why should similar questions not be asked when another political actor undertakes large-scale empowerment programmes?
The standard should be the same for everybody.
In an article I wrote and which was published by Nasarawa Eye online on August 15, 2026, titled “Accountability Must Apply To Every Nasarawa Governorship Candidate,” I argued that the 2027 Nasarawa governorship election provides an opportunity for citizens and relevant institutions to demand transparency from all the candidates.
The issue should not be about Mohammed Adamu alone. It should not be about Senator Wadada alone. And it should certainly not be about who belongs to which political party.
If a candidate is spending substantial amounts of money on empowerment programmes, political mobilisation, rallies, logistics or other activities connected to a governorship ambition, the public has a legitimate interest in understanding the source of those funds.
That applies to everyone.
Former IGP Mohammed Adamu spent virtually his entire professional career in public service and rose to become Inspector-General of Police. He is now a major political actor and a governorship candidate. It is therefore understandable that citizens may want to know whether the resources being deployed in his political activities are consistent with his legitimately acquired income and assets.
The same principle should apply to Senator Ahmed Aliyu Wadada.
And it should also apply to every other candidate seeking to govern Nasarawa State.
Nobody should be singled out.
Nobody should be protected.
Nobody should be condemned merely because questions have been asked.
The responsible thing is to provide answers.
This is where our institutions also have a role to play. Where there are credible concerns about unexplained wealth, suspicious transactions or questionable sources of political funding, relevant authorities should examine the facts and, where appropriate, follow the money.
The responsibility of institutions such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission should not depend entirely on political camps trading accusations against one another.
If the money is legitimate, explain it.
If the assets were lawfully acquired, explain them.
If the empowerment programmes are being funded from legitimate personal resources, business interests or other lawful sources, there should be nothing embarrassing about providing an explanation.
Indeed, transparency can put an end to speculation.
But there is another important side to this conversation.
We must be careful not to turn public scrutiny into trial by media. Asking where money comes from is legitimate; declaring someone guilty without evidence is not. Allegations must be investigated, and conclusions should be based on facts.
That is why the same standard must be applied across the political divide.
If we demand accountability from one candidate, we must demand it from the others.
If we question the source of funds used for one person’s empowerment programme, we should be prepared to ask the same question about every other candidate’s programme.
If we scrutinise one person’s campaign spending, we should scrutinise the campaign spending of everyone else.
That is what fairness looks like.
As Nasarawa State moves towards the 2027 governorship election, citizens will inevitably pay closer attention to the money being spent by political actors. Tractors, empowerment materials, cash distributions, rallies, transportation, media campaigns and political mobilisation all cost money.
So, once again, the question raised by the Ordinary President of Brekete Family deserves an answer, not necessarily an accusation, but an explanation:
Where is the money coming from?
And perhaps the bigger question is this:
Are we prepared to ask the same question of everybody?
If the answer is yes, then Nasarawa State may have taken an important step towards a more serious conversation about accountability in politics.
In my article published on 15 August, I invited the EFCC to investigate the sources of campaign funding for all our gubernatorial candidates. Let every one of them explain the source of their funding. So, if an ordinary president is asking the same question, he is right to do so not as an indegene of Nasarawa state but as a Nigerian citizen.