By Mati Ali
The recent commentary authored by Mr. Lawan A. Kazaure on the African Democratic Congress (ADC) gubernatorial primary election in Jigawa State appears to be driven more by sentiment than substance, and more by conjecture than verifiable facts.
While every stakeholder within a democratic institution possesses the inalienable right to express dissenting views and pursue legitimate avenues of redress, public discourse must remain anchored on objectivity, empirical evidence, and unwavering respect for democratic norms and constitutional procedures.
At the core of Mr. Kazaure’s intervention lies an apparent reluctance to acknowledge a fundamental political reality: the delegates of the ADC, acting within the framework of the party’s constitution and electoral guidelines, freely exercised their franchise and overwhelmingly elected Senator Sabo Muhammad Nakudu as the party’s gubernatorial standard-bearer.
The article is replete with allegations of intimidation, manipulation, and procedural infractions. However, it conspicuously fails to provide any credible evidence linking Senator Nakudu to the purported irregularities. In any democratic setting governed by the rule of law, allegations cannot supersede facts, and insinuations cannot substitute for proof. Political disagreements must be adjudicated on the basis of evidence rather than emotion-driven narratives.
Even more disturbing is the recurring attempt to advance the notion that individuals who contributed to the formation or financing of a political party should enjoy preferential political privileges or possess proprietary rights over the party’s affairs. Such a proposition is antithetical to the very essence of democratic governance.
Political parties are not personal estates, family inheritances, or private enterprises. They are collective democratic institutions governed by constitutions, internal regulations, and the sovereign will of their members. No individual, irrespective of financial contributions, political investments, or historical involvement, can legitimately claim perpetual ownership of a political platform or exclusive authority over its decision-making processes.
The outcome of the ADC gubernatorial primary election further underscores an enduring political truth: influence alone does not guarantee victory. Delegates critically assessed the credentials, capacity, acceptability, and electoral viability of all aspirants before arriving at a decision. While the outcome may have fallen short of certain expectations, democracy is not defined by personal satisfaction. Rather, it is defined by the willingness of participants to respect and accept the outcome of a credible electoral process.
Equally significant is the political reality that critics of Senator Nakudu’s emergence continue to overlook. Senator Sabo Muhammad Nakudu did not emerge from political obscurity. He entered the ADC with decades of political experience, an expansive grassroots machinery, and an extensive support base strategically spread across the twenty-seven local government areas of Jigawa State. Through sustained stakeholder engagement, strategic consultations, and effective political mobilization, he succeeded in earning the confidence and trust of party delegates.
His victory was therefore neither accidental nor charitable. It was the product of meticulous planning, organizational sophistication, strategic networking, persuasive engagement, and relentless political investment.
Furthermore, those who persist in framing the primary election as a struggle between so-called party founders and newcomers fundamentally misread the dynamics of contemporary democratic politics. Electoral victories are secured through coalition-building, consensus generation, grassroots mobilization, and the ability to inspire confidence among stakeholders—not through claims of ownership over party structures or perceived political entitlement.
Where legitimate grievances exist, the party’s constitution provides established mechanisms for dispute resolution and internal reconciliation. However, resorting to sustained media offensives, inflammatory rhetoric, and unsubstantiated attacks against the party’s duly elected candidate serves no constructive purpose. Such actions only weaken party cohesion, deepen internal divisions, and inadvertently strengthen political opponents.
At this critical juncture in the political evolution of the ADC in Jigawa State, members must decide whether to embrace unity over bitterness, progress over division, and collective aspirations over personal disappointments.
The future of the party is far too important to be sacrificed on the altar of individual ambition, political ego, or entitlement mentality.
The primary election has been concluded. The delegates have spoken. The democratic process has run its course. The task before all committed party members is no longer to relitigate the outcome of the primary election in the court of public opinion, but to consolidate party unity and prepare for the strategic challenge of providing Jigawa State with purposeful, credible, and transformative leadership in 2027.
Ultimately, history does not celebrate those who complain the loudest after an election. Rather, it honors those who demonstrate political maturity, place institutional interests above personal ambitions, and subordinate individual desires to the collective aspirations of the people.
E-SIGNED
MATI ALI
matiali94@gmail.com