Politics

By Isyaka Laminu Badamasi

As the gratuity payments commence, as approved and directed by His Excellency, Governor Bala Abdulkadir Mohammed, some critics of his administration find it difficult to appreciate what they have long asked the governor to do. This is especially true since the beneficiaries have spent their lives serving the state and are in dire need of their hard-earned entitlements.

As much as criticism remains the beauty of democracy, they should be happy that their loud voices were heard, the governor acted, and the retired civil servants will now get paid. Instead, they have resorted to cheap blackmail, arguing that the payment is delayed and that the governor deserves no applause because it’s long overdue, even though he inherited these huge burdens from previous administrations dating back to 2013.

While they have an inalienable right to hold an opinion and express it, anyone who does something worthy of applause deserves commendation and a standing ovation. They should also raise other important aspects of governance that they feel require His Excellency’s attention. By doing so, they will turn into partners in progress rather than mere critics.

This is how criticism works in sane democracies: critics and opposition figures matter, playing a key role in providing checks and balances so government stays on track while earning applause from its supporters. His Excellency’s response to the voices of wisdom suggests our democracy has matured and begun embracing constructive feedback, as shown by the payment of gratuities.

While congratulating our retired civil servants, I also commend His Excellency for making this important day a reality.

Isyaka Laminu Badamasi writes from no 555 Ajiya Adamu Road, Bauchi, Bauchi State.

By Muhammad Umar Shehu

I have always believed one of the oldest tricks in politics is convincing people that temporary relief is evidence of good governance. It is a carefully managed performance. First, create uncertainty. Allow fear and anxiety to spread. Watch public frustration build. Then step in with what appears to be compassion. The same government that created the tension suddenly presents itself as the rescuer. Many applaud, forgetting who created the problem in the first place.

This is how propaganda works.

Propaganda is not always about telling outright lies. Sometimes it is about controlling public emotions. It is about deciding what people focus on and, more importantly, what they forget. It shifts attention from the real problems to carefully staged moments that create the illusion of responsive leadership.

One technique often seen in politics is card stacking, where only information that benefits those in power is highlighted while inconvenient facts are pushed aside. Another is glittering generalities, where attractive slogans and emotionally appealing catchphrases are repeated so often that they begin to replace serious conversations about policy. 

There is also transfer, where every government action is wrapped in patriotic language, encouraging citizens to equate support for those in power with love for the country. Add to that bandwagon, which creates the impression that everyone supports a particular government or policy, making dissent appear unreasonable or even unpatriotic. When these techniques are combined with carefully timed announcements and an aggressive media campaign, public attention shifts from measurable results to carefully managed political narratives.

Nigerians should understand this strategy because it has become increasingly common. Instead of addressing the structural problems affecting millions of citizens, government communication often focuses on managing public perception. The objective is not necessarily to improve people’s lives but to improve the government’s image.

While citizens celebrate temporary gestures or reassuring announcements, inflation continues to erode purchasing power. Food prices remain beyond the reach of many families. Businesses struggle to survive. Young people face unemployment and uncertainty. Public institutions continue to weaken while public confidence in government steadily declines.

This is why every Nigerian should ask a simple question whenever government suddenly presents itself as the people’s defender. What created the hardship in the first place? What lasting solution has been provided? Has anything fundamentally changed, or has public attention simply been redirected?

A government that genuinely puts citizens first does not depend on carefully timed public relations campaigns to maintain popularity. It develops policies that reduce hardship before people are pushed to the edge. It strengthens institutions instead of relying on media narratives to defend every controversial decision.

Unfortunately, propaganda has become a substitute for performance. Press statements are becoming more frequent than measurable achievements. Political branding is taking precedence over policy outcomes. The goal appears to be shaping perception rather than changing reality.

History teaches us that governments often become more confident when they believe public opinion can be managed rather than earned. Once citizens accept political theatre as leadership, accountability weakens. Leaders no longer feel compelled to deliver meaningful reforms because they discover that effective messaging can sometimes produce the same political reward as effective governance.

From my perspective, it is part of the trick. Once they secure a second term, they may feel less restrained and more willing to pursue policies that place even greater burdens on ordinary Nigerians. Nigerians should carefully examine the APC administration’s record before deciding its future. Those advocating another Tinubu term should also explain why they believe the country’s present direction deserves another mandate.

Tinubu has not demonstrated a convincing plan to rebuild Nigeria or strengthen the country’s institutions. My concern is that a second term could further weaken democratic accountability and concentrate even more power in the presidency. Whether Nigerians agree or disagree with that assessment, they should examine facts, policies and outcomes rather than political slogans and carefully managed publicity.

Democracy survives when citizens question narratives instead of accepting them at face value. Governments should be judged by the condition of the people, not by the quality of their communication strategy. A well-written press release cannot reduce inflation. A polished speech cannot put food on people’s tables. A sophisticated propaganda campaign cannot substitute for sound governance.

The greatest propaganda is not convincing people that everything is fine. It is convincing them that carefully managed political gestures are proof of good leadership.

Nigeria deserves more than slogans.

Nigeria deserves more than political theatre.

Nigeria deserves leaders who solve problems instead of managing perceptions.

Muhammad Umar Shehu wrote from Gombe and can be reached via umarmuhammadshehu2@gmail.com.

By Isyaka Laminu Badamasi

During the build-up to the 2019 general elections, former President Muhammadu Buhari’s campaign slogan was “Next Level”—a misleading slogan intended to make people believe that the 2015–2019 administration had anything to write home about.

 Public affairs commentators throughout most of the campaign period cautioned Nigerians not to accept this slogan and to vote the system out. Those who survived Buhari’s second coming have many stories to tell the next generation.

This administration’s re-election campaign slogan, “Renewed Hope,” relies on similar gimmicks. What kind of hope is the Tinubu administration renewing? Is it the hope of addressing lingering insecurity, such as banditry and kidnapping, or the hope of reversing poor economic policies and programmes that have plunged the common man into avoidable hardship?

This administration, deceitfully designed, introduced several palliative programs to cushion the negative effects of subsidy removal, such as promoting compressed natural gas (CNG) and electric vehicles, as well as establishing social safety nets. Tinubu administration halted the N-Power scheme, the National Home-Grown School Feeding Programme, and other social security initiatives without offering any convincing reasons.

The Tinubu administration also established a dedicated agency, the National Credit Guarantee Company Limited (NCGC), as a financial institution designed to expand financial inclusion and drive economic growth across Nigeria and appointed the former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Yakubu Dogara, as its chairman, backed by a 100 billion Naira budget allocation. 

Three years into this administration, the agency has not yet secured an office building; it is squatting within the Bank of Industries building, and no official records of beneficiaries are available for verification. 

The same administration is currently prosecuting an individual who, according to reports, established a fake agency, received funding, and spent huge amounts of money. This is Nigeria for you.

Dear Nigerians, vote wisely to avoid experiencing a situation similar to, or worse than, Buhari’s second term.

Isyaka Laminu Badamasi writes from no 555 Ajiya Adamu Road, Bauchi, Bauchi State.

I write this as a concerned citizen of Kano who genuinely wants your administration and our state to succeed.

First, I must acknowledge the progress your administration has made. The visible investment in road construction, rehabilitation and urban infrastructure across Kano deserves recognition. Your government has also intervened in education, healthcare, agriculture, and other sectors. These efforts should be sustained regardless of political differences.

However, Your Excellency, I believe Kano can do even more.

The recently concluded mass wedding involving 1,500 couples, reportedly gulping the state more than ₦1.5 billion, has made me reflect on our priorities. 

I am a Muslim, and I respect marriage and the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAW). I therefore do not oppose helping genuinely vulnerable people to marry.

My concern is sustainability and priority.

Marriage does not end at the wedding. After the ceremony come food, rent, healthcare, children’s education and other responsibilities. If someone lacks the economic capacity to establish a household, helping him marry does not necessarily solve the problem that made marriage difficult.

We should not only help people get married; we should help them build families that can stand on their own.

This is why I respectfully urge your administration to place greater emphasis on the following:

Education: Kano’s children are our greatest investment. We need stronger public schools, better teacher development, learning materials, technical education, girls’ education and serious programmes to return out-of-school children to classrooms. Questions have already been raised about the relatively small allocation to some out-of-school-girl programmes compared with the mass-wedding expenditure.

Youth employment and skills: Our young people need sustainable opportunities, not only temporary grants. Vocational training, agriculture, ICT, manufacturing, apprenticeships, and affordable business financing can help young people earn and eventually support their own families.

Healthcare and water: Functional primary healthcare, maternal care, essential medicines, clean water and sanitation must reach ordinary citizens, particularly in rural communities.

Agriculture: Kano has enormous agricultural potential. The government should strengthen irrigation, storage, processing and market access so that farming becomes a profitable industry and a source of employment.

There is also the important issue of monitoring government assistance.

I recently saw a large number of mattresses being distributed under the mass-wedding programme, which raised questions for me about what happens to them after distribution. I cannot confirm whether what I observed involved legitimate transfer, resale or something else, and I do not wish to accuse anyone without evidence.

But it highlights an important question:

What mechanism monitors government assistance after it reaches beneficiaries?

I respectfully suggest post-distribution verification, proper documentation and follow-up assessments. The government should know who received assistance, whether they received the full allocation, and whether the intervention actually improved their lives.

Public money deserves public accountability.

Your Excellency, you have shown that your government can build roads.

Please build people too.

You have shown that government can support marriages.

Please build the economic foundation upon which those marriages can stand.

Let us measure Kano’s progress not only by kilometres of roads constructed, but by how many children are in school, how many young people have sustainable jobs, how many families escape poverty, and how many empowerment beneficiaries remain economically active years later.

I do not want a Kano where people continually wait for government assistance.

I want a prosperous Kano where the government creates the opportunities that allow people to become self-reliant.

That is the Kano many of us want.

Umar Abdullahi Huguma writes from Kano State and can be reached at umarhuguma2023@gmail.com.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Felix Morka, has said President Bola Tinubu has performed better than every democratically elected president in Nigeria.

Morka made the claim during an interview with Channels Television on Monday, where he also said Tinubu inherited an economy that was “completely in a mess”.

Asked to identify the indicators that informed his assessment of Tinubu’s performance, the APC spokesperson said the available economic indicators were enough to support the claim.

“President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has outperformed any president in his first term. He has outperformed any democratically elected president in this country in their terms,” he said.

“The indicators are res ipsa loquitur as we say in law; they speak for themselves. This president inherited an economy that was completely in a mess.”

Morka attributed the country’s economic difficulties to what he described as the failures of successive administrations.

He said former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration came after 16 years of what he described as poor governance under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

“Buhari was a stopgap president that really came to keep the country from tipping over the precipice — from 16 years of horrific maladministration of the PDP government,” he added.

“President Buhari served his term, did his job to hold the country still for President Tinubu to enter.”

The APC spokesman also claimed that Tinubu’s administration had introduced changes that had led some of its previous critics to acknowledge its progress.

According to him, Nigeria has “come out of the woods” at the macroeconomic level as a result of policies introduced by the Tinubu administration.

However, Morka did not provide specific details or comparative figures to demonstrate how Tinubu had outperformed previous democratically elected presidents.

The APC controlled the federal government under Buhari from 2015 to 2023 before Tinubu succeeded him as president in 2023 under the same political party.

By Lawan Bukar Maigana

There are people who go on leave to escape books, and there are people who go on leave only to escape the office. Then there is Kashim Shettima, for whom a leave without books may be like a library without shelves: technically possible, but fundamentally incomplete.

The two-week leave has awakened the bookism in him. After years of governance, meetings, memos, policy conversations and the endless grammar of public administration, one would imagine that a man might simply surrender himself to sleep, travel with his family to some Shangri-La den in Dubai, or disappear into the soft luxury of doing absolutely nothing. But Shettima has never appeared to be a man who considers idleness a convincing definition of rest. For him, perhaps, rest is simply another opportunity to read.

This is not a new discovery. I wrote in 2022 about Shettima as Nigeria’s Modern Day Philosopher-King, drawing from Plato’s idea that leadership and philosophy ought to meet in the same person. Looking back now, I realise that perhaps I was only describing one half of the equation. The philosopher needs a kingdom, yes, but the philosopher also needs books. And Shettima seems to understand that the quickest way to empty a philosopher is to deprive him of reading.

His relationship with books is almost personal. He does not merely read them; he appears to court them. There have been accounts of him browsing bookstores while travelling, moving from one section to another and recommending books to people around him. He has also been described as someone who would choose books over material prizes.

I once had a conversation about this unusual book obsession with Rukaiya el-Rufai, the National Coordinator of Nigeria’s Human Capital Development Programme. She told me something that stayed with me: when it comes to gifts, what impresses her boss the most is a good book. Her advice was simple: when you travel, buy him high-value books. According to her, such a gift can make him happier than a designer perfume.

That, in itself, is a fascinating portrait of a man. While some people measure affection by the price tag on a gift, the intellectual measures it by the depth of thought behind it. A perfume evaporates. A book lingers. A designer bottle may occupy a shelf, but a good book can occupy the mind. This may explain why Shettima’s leave does not seem to be a vacation from intellectual activity. It is more like an intellectual retreat. The office may have been left behind, but the books followed him. The files may have been closed, but the pages remained open.

And when he finally returns to work, we should perhaps prepare ourselves. The post-leave effect in governance may not simply be a refreshed Vice President. It may be a more heavily footnoted one. Every conversation may come with a reference. Every decision may acquire a historical context. Every policy discussion may suddenly develop a philosophical foundation. A simple question could receive an answer, a counterargument, a historical example and, if one is not careful, a brief literature review.

That is the bookism. But beneath the humour lies something serious. Leaders do not govern only with budgets, files and official briefings. They govern with ideas. And ideas, when properly cultivated, are often born from the discipline of reading.

Shettima’s book habit therefore tells us something beyond the man himself. It reminds us that governance should not be an intellectual desert. Public office should not terminate curiosity. Power should not become an excuse to stop learning. A leader who reads is constantly exposed to worlds beyond his immediate environment. He encounters ideas that challenge him, histories that humble him, failures that warn him and possibilities that expand his imagination.

Perhaps that is why, for Shettima, a two-week leave can still become a classroom. He may have left the office, but he never really left learning. And when he returns, the books will return with him, quietly packed into the vocabulary and ideas that will eventually find their way back into governance.

So, Nigerians, prepare yourselves. The Vice President is coming back from leave. And judging by his relationship with books, he cannot leave without reading. Therefore, he is returning not only refreshed but also armed with refined administrative and policy ideas that can help make Nigeria better.

Lawan Bukar Maigana is a media and communications specialist, development advocate, storyteller, and social change driver from Borno State, Nigeria. He can be reached via email at lawanbukarmaigana@gmail.com.

By Sulaiman Maijama’a

He served a single tenure and was chased out of the corridors of power, and later had the fortune of being smuggled by a cabal after waiting for a good 8 years. When he was announced as the flagbearer of their party, he doubted himself, woke up in the middle of the night and sat on a sofa, talking to himself. Let us peer into his mind and bring out what he is saying to the world.

What is the motive behind bringing me back? When I served my first tenure as a governor, these people ganged up against my reelection and chased me away and ever since I left, I distanced myself from anything to do with the state. I jettisoned party affairs, didn’t honour wedding invitations, didn’t pay homage or send goodwill messages during festivities,  refused to ever pay condolences, refused to make donations for public and private projects. I created both social and physical distancing by relocating to Abuja and abandoning all my people in Bakesu State. Why would these people nominate me? Do they really mean well?

But I am said to be the luckiest politician this country ever produced. I was born in Alfawa State, attended primary school in Babaldu State, and did my secondary school in Dadin Kowa State. When my father was posted to Bakeso State, we lived comfortably enough that I claimed indigene status, rose through the ranks in the civil service, ventured into politics, and miraculously became the state governor. But what did I do when I had the chance?

According to what people are saying on social media, I did not execute physical projects which I can now show to convince people to elect me. But when I was rounding up my first term, I gathered a lot of money, which I intended to use to execute the projects in my second tenure, but they unfortunately elected me out. I left the state treasury with billions of naira, and I suspect it is the money this governor has used to achieve all this development people applaud him for in the state. Why don’t I say I’m the one who gathered the money for him and claim a share of the credit?

My social media handles keep popping up with posts from haters of my return, reminding people of the verification exercises we did when we were in power. I even saw one post saying that in the cemetery there is a section of pensioners who died of hunger during our verifications. But we did that in good faith, and who will die before their appointed time? I think this can be a question of faith!

But wait, how many people did I fight with when I was in power whom I am still at loggerheads with? Traditional title holders accused me of not giving them the respect and resources they deserve. Now, this wicked governor fueled our estranged relationship with them because he built them beautiful palaces and pooled resources they never requested. But why would a lawyer of my standing, who knows very well that these people don’t have any constitutional role, deviate from due process?

My relationship with clergymen of both faiths was—and still is—not cordial. I thought their duty was only to preach to people to be righteous and serve God in order to go to paradise. But when I was in power, they asked to see me during every religious festivity, sent requests or proposals for donations or sponsorship of every religious activity. During fasting period, Sallah, Christmas and Maulud, they requested thousands of textiles, thousands of rams and cows and trailers of foodstuff to distribute to orphans. Whenever I turned down their request, they would quote me a verse in the Qur’an and the Bible, and accuse me of not helping religion. But I’m fasting every Monday and Thursday. Can this not take me to paradise?

Now, the poor say I have zero projects to show; traditional institutions throw questions of disrespect, and clergymen challenge my disregard for their institution. Despite all this, I want to return to this seat. 

What should I do?

Maijama’a wrote via sulaimanmaija@gmail.com.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has raised concerns over an unauthorised payment made into one of his private bank accounts by an unidentified person.

Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), said the transaction was described as a “Contribution Electioneering Campaign” but was neither requested nor approved by him or his campaign organisation.

His Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, disclosed this in a statement issued on Friday.

The statement described the circumstances surrounding the transaction as “deeply troubling” and questioned how an unknown person obtained details of an account whose information is not publicly available.

“The transfer originated from a person totally unknown to His Excellency,” the statement reads.

“Neither His Excellency nor his campaign solicited, authorised or has any knowledge of the individual or entity behind the unauthorised payment.”

Atiku questioned the source of the information used to make the payment, particularly because the affected account is a private one.

“The account is a strictly private one whose details are not in the public domain. This raises a fundamental question: How did unknown persons obtain the confidential banking details of a private citizen?” he asked.

‘NO NIGERIAN’S FINANCIAL PRIVACY IS SAFE’

The former vice-president said the incident raised concerns that could extend beyond his personal circumstances.

He argued that unauthorised access to the banking information of a former vice-president and presidential candidate could indicate a broader threat to the financial privacy of Nigerians.

“If the private banking information of a former Vice President and a leading presidential candidate can be accessed and deployed for reasons yet unknown, then no Nigerian’s financial privacy is safe,” he said.

Atiku also warned about the potential consequences if the information had been obtained through people with privileged access to banking records.

“If established, this would amount to a grave abuse of power capable of exposing the account holder to kidnappers, terrorists, bandits, fraudsters and other criminal elements,” the statement added.

The ADC presidential candidate linked the development to what he described as a series of “suspicious activities” ahead of the 2027 general election.

Despite the incident, Atiku said he would remain focused on his political objectives and would not allow the development to distract him.

“As political activities gather momentum, Nigerians should not be distracted by these tired tactics that smack of character assassination,” he added.

“Such desperate antics have failed before and will fail again. The Waziri Adamawa remains focused on offering Nigerians credible leadership and practical solutions to the nation’s challenges.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has criticised the Tinubu administration’s defence of its economic policies, insisting that government statements cannot hide the hardship many Nigerians continue to face.

Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), made the remarks in a statement issued on Monday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu. The statement followed recent exchanges between the Presidency and the former vice president over the government’s economic reforms, borrowing, tax policies and the impact of the removal of petrol subsidy.

The Presidency, through Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, had defended the administration’s policies. Onanuga argued that one of the major gains of fuel subsidy removal was the significant increase in allocations to states and local governments through the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC).

Responding, Atiku accused the administration of focusing on what he described as public relations and “statistical manipulation” instead of addressing the country’s economic challenges.

He questioned the government’s positive assessment of the economy.

“If the economy is doing so well, why are Nigerians getting poorer?” he asked.

According to him, the government’s emphasis on favourable economic indicators does not reflect the realities facing ordinary citizens.

“The State House celebrates macroeconomic indicators while ordinary Nigerians struggle with microeconomic realities,” he said.

“It speaks glowingly about GDP growth while families skip meals. It boasts of debt ratios while businesses shut their doors. It trumpets reforms while millions of citizens slide deeper into poverty.”

Atiku maintained that the true measure of any government should be the welfare of its people rather than economic figures.

“Governments are not elected to improve spreadsheets. They are elected to improve the lives of their people,” he said.

“Nigerians cannot eat GDP. They cannot cook with debt-to-GDP ratios. They cannot pay school fees with statistical projections.”

The former vice president also rejected the Presidency’s position that critics rely on outdated information. He argued that the effects of the administration’s policies remain evident across the country.

“The Tinubu administration is asking Nigerians to forget the very policies whose consequences they continue to endure every day,” he said.

“Economic policy is not a light switch. The consequences of reckless decisions linger long after the announcements have faded.”

Atiku further questioned why the government continues to borrow despite its claims of improved revenue generation and stronger tax collections.

“If revenue has improved so dramatically, if subsidy has been removed, if tax collection has increased, and if debt servicing has supposedly become more manageable, why does this administration continue to borrow at record levels?” he asked.

He also argued that Nigerians have yet to enjoy the promised benefits of fuel subsidy removal.

“Three years later, Nigerians are entitled to ask: where are those dividends?” he said.

“Instead of relief, they have experienced the highest fuel prices in history, unprecedented transport costs, soaring food inflation, collapsing purchasing power and an economy where millions now struggle to afford even one decent meal a day.”

The ADC presidential candidate criticised the administration’s tax reforms. He said businesses are under pressure because of rising production and operating costs. He added that the government’s performance should be judged by improvements in education, healthcare and living standards.

Citing figures from the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Atiku said 767 manufacturing firms have shut down, while another 335 are operating under distress. He also said manufacturers are holding about ₦2.14 trillion worth of unsold finished goods. He noted that multinational firms such as Procter & Gamble, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi and Kimberly-Clark have exited local manufacturing operations.

According to him, those developments provide a clearer picture of the economy than official government claims.

“The true verdict on this administration’s economic policies is not written by government spokespersons,” he said.

“It is written in the silent factories, the abandoned production lines, the shuttered warehouses, the unemployed workers and the empty pockets of millions of Nigerians. No amount of propaganda can erase that reality.”

He urged the Presidency to focus on improving the living conditions of Nigerians instead of defending its economic record through public statements.

“Governments are not judged by the elegance of their press statements or the sophistication of their economic theories,” he said.

“They are judged by whether families can afford food, whether businesses can survive, whether young people can find jobs, whether communities are secure, and whether citizens have hope for tomorrow.”

By Muhammad Abubakar

Since I came to France for work, I have been extremely cautious about criticising Israel or Benjamin Netanyahu. Often, though wrongly, people conflate criticism of an entity or a person with criticism of an idea or of an entire ethnic or religious group.

Soon after Hamas’s attack on Israel on October 7, I felt driven to write about the unresolved conflict. It was difficult to ignore the subject. Yet I was also concerned that expressing my views might affect my employment or even my residency status in France. To be certain, I reached out to our Human Resources department for guidance.

We essentially agreed on an important distinction. Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu are not the same as the Jewish people or Judaism. One can criticise the policies of the Israeli government or the actions of its prime minister without expressing hostility towards Jews or the Jewish faith. The same principle applies elsewhere. A person may criticise Saudi Arabia or Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman without being an Islamophobe or an enemy of Islam.

This distinction is fundamental in any society that values free expression and intellectual honesty. Democracies depend on the ability of citizens to question governments, leaders and public figures. If every criticism of a political leader is interpreted as an attack on an entire religion or ethnic group, meaningful public debate becomes impossible.

I was reminded of this principle after listening to new songs released yesterday by the Nigerian political singer, Dauda Kahutu, popularly known as Rarara. The songs appear to criticise an opposition politician in Gombe State, Sheikh Ali Isa Ibrahim Pantami, who is also a respected Islamic scholar.

Unfortunately, I have seen some people make the same mistake that often appears in discussions about international politics. They have framed criticism of Pantami as though it were criticism of Islam itself.

Pantami does not represent Islam. He is a Muslim and an influential public figure, but he remains an individual whose political choices, public statements and actions are open to public scrutiny, just like those of any other politician. Defending him is entirely legitimate, but such a defence should be based on facts, evidence and reason rather than on the assumption that any criticism directed at him is an attack on the religion he professes.

By any definition, both the singer and the governorship candidate he appears to criticise in his songs are Muslims. Neither of them represents Islam. Their political disagreements should therefore remain political disagreements. Turning them into religious disputes serves neither truth nor the public interest.

This tendency to wrap political figures in the cloak of religion is dangerous. It discourages accountability and deepens unnecessary divisions within society. Once religion becomes a shield against legitimate criticism, it becomes difficult to separate public responsibility from personal belief.

Nigeria’s diversity demands greater care in the language we use. Political competition should not be transformed into religious confrontation. Citizens should be able to disagree with politicians, governors, ministers or scholars without being accused of attacking an entire faith.

The lesson is simple. We must distinguish between people and the principles they claim to represent, between governments and the nations they govern, and between political leaders and the religions they practise. Failing to make these distinctions only fuels misunderstanding and polarisation.

Criticise ideas. Debate policies. Defend people if you wish. But let us avoid presenting political disagreements as battles for religion. In the long run, both politics and religion are better served when we keep that distinction clear.