Connect with us

Opinion

The Governor Who Chose His People Over His Politics: Abba Yusuf and the Moral Courage Behind Kano First

Published

4 months ago

on

 

 

By Saminu Umar Ph.D | Senior Lecturer, Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano surijyarzaki@gmail.com

Advert

There is a particular loneliness that attaches itself to leaders who choose the harder path. It is not the loneliness of isolation, of having no one around them, because such leaders are almost always surrounded by people, by aides and advisers, by supporters and well-wishers, by the constant human traffic of political life. It is a deeper and more demanding loneliness, the loneliness of the person who must make decisions that others will not fully understand until long after the moment has passed, who must absorb criticism that cuts personally while continuing to serve publicly, and who must find, in the space between the weight of expectation and the limits of human capacity, the daily resolve to keep going. It is the loneliness, in short, of genuine leadership. And it is a loneliness that Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State has come to know with an intimacy that his most vocal critics, comfortable in the uncomplicated freedom of opposition, will perhaps never fully appreciate.
To understand the moral courage that underlies the Kano First Initiative, one must first understand the political inheritance that Governor Yusuf carried into office. He did not arrive at Government House, Kano, as a political outsider unburdened by prior obligations and free to govern purely on the basis of his own convictions. He arrived as a product of a political movement, as a leader whose rise had been enabled by a coalition of forces, interests, and personalities whose expectations did not always align with the needs of the twenty-two million citizens whose welfare his oath of office placed in his hands. The tension between those expectations and those needs, between the claims of political loyalty and the demands of public service, is one that every Nigerian governor faces to some degree. What distinguishes Governor Yusuf’s story is not that he faced this tension, but what he chose to do when it became impossible to navigate it without choosing a side.
He chose his people. And that choice, made at considerable personal and political cost, is the foundation on which the entire moral architecture of the Kano First philosophy rests.
The financial scandals that emerged in the early period of his administration, the billion-naira deductions imposed on local governments, the Novamed controversy that drained hundreds of millions from the state’s healthcare resources, were not merely governance crises. They were personal trials of a particularly painful kind. Here was a governor, widely regarded even by his critics as genuinely humble, intellectually serious, and personally committed to the welfare of Kano’s people, discovering that the machinery beneath him had been partially rewired to serve interests other than the ones he had been elected to serve. His public acknowledgement that he had not been fully aware of the transactions in question was seized upon by political opponents as evidence of weakness or incompetence. It was, in fact, something considerably rarer in Nigerian public life: an honest man’s honest admission that he had been deceived by those he trusted.
Consider for a moment what that moment must have felt like. A governor who came to office with genuine idealism, with a sincere desire to honor the trust that millions of Kano citizens placed in him, confronted with the reality that the very people positioned closest to the levers of power were using those levers for purposes that betrayed everything he stood for. The temptation in such a moment, particularly for a leader whose political survival depended on maintaining the unity of a broad and sometimes fractious coalition, would have been to minimize, to manage, to find a quiet accommodation that preserved the alliance without confronting the rot. That is, after all, what Nigerian political culture most frequently rewards. Confrontation is costly. Accommodation is comfortable. And the short-term arithmetic of political survival almost always favors the comfortable choice.
Governor Yusuf did not make the comfortable choice. He made the courageous one. The decision to break decisively from the suffocating grip of godfatherism, to place the interests of Kano above the expectations of political patrons, and to govern on the basis of his own convictions and his own accountability to the people who elected him, was not a carefully calculated political maneuver. It was a moral act, born of the recognition that the alternative was a betrayal too profound to live with. And moral acts of that magnitude always carry a price. The price, in his case, was the loss of alliances, the intensification of opposition, and the kind of sustained political hostility that now defines Kano’s pre-election landscape. He paid that price willingly. The people of Kano should understand what that willingness cost him.
It is within this context of demonstrated moral courage that the Kano First Initiative must be understood, not as a political programme designed by a communications department, but as the governing expression of a personal conviction that has been tested under genuine pressure and has held. When Governor Yusuf says that Kano must come first, that the interests of its citizens must take precedence over every political calculation and every personal consideration, he is not reciting a slogan. He is articulating, in the language of policy, the same principle that guided his most difficult personal decisions. The Kano First philosophy and the Kano First governor are not separate things. They are the same thing, the same commitment, expressed in two different registers, one personal and one institutional.
The Kano First Initiative, developed with remarkable intellectual seriousness under the stewardship of the Honourable Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya, gives this personal commitment its institutional architecture. The comprehensive policy framework for social and institutional reorientation that the ministry has produced is not merely a communication strategy or a governance programme in the conventional sense. It is an attempt to translate a governor’s moral convictions into a durable, evidence-based, culturally grounded framework for societal renewal, one that addresses not just the material needs of Kano’s citizens but the deeper normative and behavioral foundations on which sustainable development depends. It is, in the most meaningful sense, a document that reflects the character of the man whose administration produced it.
What strikes the honest observer about Governor Yusuf, and what his critics most consistently fail to account for in their assessments, is the combination of intellectual humility and moral steadfastness that defines his leadership style. He does not govern with the theatrical confidence of the politician who has never doubted himself. He governs with the quieter and more durable resolve of the person who has examined his own convictions carefully, found them worth defending, and committed himself to defending them regardless of the political weather. That quality is not weakness. In the context of Nigerian governance, where the pressures to compromise, to accommodate, and to prioritize political survival above all else are relentless and overwhelming, it is an exceptional strength.
His supporters understand this, and their loyalty is of a kind that is not easily manufactured by political machinery. It is the loyalty of people who have watched a leader face genuine difficulty and choose principle over convenience, who have seen him absorb attacks without losing his dignity or abandoning his purpose, and who believe, on the basis of observable evidence rather than mere political faith, that the man at the head of Kano’s government is genuinely trying to do right by the people he serves. That belief is a political asset of incalculable value, and it is one that no amount of opposition noise or digital hostility can easily erode, because it is rooted not in perception management but in the accumulated testimony of lived experience.
To the people of Kano who are watching the intensifying political contest that the approach of 2027 has already set in motion, this writer offers a simple appeal: look past the noise. Look past the slogans and the counter-slogans, the social media battles and the political calculations, the claims and the counter-claims that will multiply in volume and intensity as the election approaches. Look at the man. Look at the decisions he has made when making the right decision was costly. Look at the initiative his administration has championed, not in its press releases and communication campaigns, but in its intellectual substance and its institutional seriousness. Ask yourself whether Kano has recently had a governor who brought this combination of personal integrity, moral courage, and genuine policy seriousness to the task of governing a state whose people have waited too long for a leader worthy of their loyalty.
Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf is not a perfect man, and he has never claimed to be. He governs in conditions of extraordinary difficulty, navigating resource constraints, political pressures, institutional weaknesses, and social challenges that would test the most experienced and best-resourced administration in the world. He has made mistakes, as every leader does, and he will make more. But what he has also done, and what the Kano First Initiative represents most fundamentally, is to make the choice that defines a leader’s legacy more than any project or programme ever can: the choice, when it truly mattered, to put his people before his politics. Kano has not always been fortunate enough to be able to say that about its governors. At this moment in its history, it can. And that, in the judgment of this writer, is worth far more than the political noise that currently surrounds it.
Saminu Umar Ph.D is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano. surijyarzaki@gmail.com

Related Topics:

Opinion

Kashim Shettima and the Question of Continuity in 2027

Published

5 hours ago

on

July 18, 2026

By

Kashim S

By Baba Dantiye, MON, mni, FNGE

As Nigeria gradually approaches another election cycle, political discussions are naturally beginning to focus on the choices that will shape the 2027 general elections. Among the issues attracting attention is the question of presidential tickets and, particularly, the role of Vice President Kashim Shettima within the current administration.

The choice of a running mate is one of the most significant decisions in any presidential contest. It involves considerations that go beyond electoral calculations. Factors such as competence, experience, political balance, governance record, public perception and the ability to complement the President’s vision all play important roles.

Against this background, the performance, public service record and leadership contributions of Vice President Kashim Shettima have become central to discussions about continuity and the future direction of the Tinubu administration.

Since assuming office in May 2023, Shettima has occupied an important position within the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. As Vice President, his responsibilities have included representing the President at official engagements, chairing strategic meetings, coordinating government initiatives and engaging with national and international stakeholders.

One of the notable features of the Tinubu-Shettima partnership has been the public display of cooperation between the President and his deputy. Nigeria’s political history has witnessed instances where relationships between presidents and vice presidents became strained, creating distractions that affected governance. The relatively smooth working relationship between the two leaders has been viewed by observers as an important factor in maintaining stability within the administration.

Shettima has consistently presented himself as a supportive deputy, focusing on responsibilities assigned to him and contributing to the implementation and communication of government policies.

In political leadership, loyalty is often considered alongside competence and capacity. A Vice President is expected not only to support the President but also to bring experience, judgment and independent value to governance. Supporters of Shettima point to his ability to maintain this balance by remaining committed to the administration while drawing from his extensive background in public service.

His leadership of the National Economic Council (NEC) is one of the key areas in which his role has attracted attention. The Council provides a platform for collaboration between the Federal Government and state governments on issues affecting economic development, infrastructure, agriculture, energy and other national priorities.

Chairing such a body requires political maturity, patience and the ability to manage diverse interests. Nigeria’s governors represent different political parties, regions and perspectives. Effective coordination therefore depends on consultation, dialogue and consensus-building.

As a former Governor of Borno State, Shettima brings practical experience of state administration and an understanding of the challenges faced by sub-national governments. This background has been useful in facilitating discussions between the Federal Government and State leaders on issues requiring collective action.

The Vice President has also been involved in government efforts relating to economic coordination, food security and other national development priorities. While the long-term impact of many policies will continue to be assessed, his role demonstrates the importance of coordination and collaboration in a complex federal system.

Advert

Another area frequently discussed is his role in communicating government policies. The current administration has introduced significant economic reforms that have generated extensive public debate. In such circumstances, communication and public engagement become important elements of governance.

Shettima has consistently used public platforms to explain government positions, engage stakeholders and present the administration’s perspective on national issues. His approach has generally emphasised patience, understanding and the long-term objectives of government programmes.

Beyond his current office, Shettima’s experience as Governor of Borno State remains an important part of his public record. He governed during one of the most challenging periods in Nigeria’s recent history, when the Boko Haram insurgency created serious security and humanitarian difficulties.

Leading Borno State during that period required resilience, crisis management skills and the ability to work with security agencies, traditional institutions, humanitarian organisations and development partners. His administration operated under extraordinary circumstances while attempting to sustain government services and support affected communities.

That experience contributed to his understanding of security management, humanitarian challenges and the relationship between peace, stability and development.

His political journey also reflects experience across different levels of governance. Before becoming Vice President, he served in the Senate, where he participated in national legislative processes and gained further exposure to federal governance. His experience as a former governor, legislator and Vice President has shaped his understanding of Nigeria’s political and administrative environment.

Observers have also highlighted his relationship with his successor in Borno State as an example of political transition without public disagreement. In Nigeria’s political environment, where transitions between elected officials can sometimes lead to conflicts, peaceful succession and institutional continuity are often regarded as positive developments.

The Vice President’s relationship with Northern stakeholders has also formed part of discussions around his political relevance. Through engagements with traditional institutions, business communities, professional groups and other stakeholders, he has remained one of the administration’s prominent voices in explaining government policies and national priorities.

The North remains an important component of Nigeria’s political landscape, and leaders from the region have historically played significant roles in national affairs. Shettima’s experience and political network have contributed to his visibility in national conversations.

However, the question of a presidential ticket involves broader considerations beyond the performance of an individual office holder. Political parties must consider issues such as national spread, electoral strategy, changing alliances, public sentiment and the overall objectives of the party.

Different perspectives will naturally emerge as Nigeria moves closer to 2027. Some may emphasise continuity and the value of retaining an established partnership, while others may advocate different approaches based on evolving political circumstances. Such debates are part of the democratic process.

Ultimately, the decision on the composition of the presidential ticket will rest with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the leadership of the All Progressives Congress. Their decision will reflect political consultations, strategic considerations and their assessment of what best serves their objectives and the country.

Nevertheless, public discussion remains important because democracy is strengthened when citizens assess leaders based on performance, responsibility and contributions to national development.

A successful administration depends not only on policies but also on teamwork among those entrusted with implementing them. Stability, trust and institutional experience are valuable assets in governance, particularly in a country as complex and diverse as Nigeria.

Whether continuity is ultimately preferred or a different path is chosen, the debate underscores an enduring principle: democratic leadership is strengthened when decisions are informed by performance, experience, constitutional responsibility and the public interest. As Nigeria looks ahead to 2027, the experience, service and contributions of Kashim Shettima will remain central to any serious assessment of the choices before the nation.

About the Writer

Baba Dantiye, MON, mni, FNGE, is a former Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Kano State and former President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (2003–2008)

Continue Reading

Opinion

History Matters:Development Should Not Be Rebranded-Tijjani Sarki

Published

2 days ago

on

July 16, 2026

By

Kano Map

 

 

Tijjani Sarki

I have always believed that governments should be applauded for genuine achievements. But I am equally convinced that no administration earns public trust by taking credit for projects it did not initiate.

The historical record on the Kano Northern Bypass and the Bagwai (Watari) Irrigation Scheme is clear. The Northern Bypass was initiated in 2007 under President Olusegun Obasanjo, while the Bagwai Irrigation Scheme has existed for decades as part of the Kano River irrigation programme. If the Tinubu administration has accelerated work on the bypass, it deserves commendation. However, advancing an inherited project is not the same as conceiving it.

I was particularly amazed by a recent post from a political aide to the President, which portrayed the Kano Northern Bypass and the Bagwai Irrigation Scheme as achievements of the Tinubu administration without clearly distinguishing between inherited projects and the administration’s specific interventions. My brother, what the people of Kano expect from you is not the rebranding of long-standing projects, but your influence in attracting new, tangible federal projects to our state. That, more than anything else, would be a legacy worthy of recognition.

Advert

I am often skeptical whenever political communication attempts to replace facts with convenient narratives. Governments earn greater credibility when they acknowledge the foundations laid by their predecessors while demonstrating the value they have added.

To be fair, the Renewed Hope Housing Programme deserves recognition. However, many working Nigerians and low-income families, the overwhelming majority of our population, still question whether such houses are genuinely within their reach.

As a Kano indigene, my greater concern is not who claims inherited projects but what our numerous presidential appointees are attracting to the state. Kano is proud of their appointments, yet their developmental footprint remains far less visible than many expected.

Rather than engaging in avoidable historical revision, I expect our presidential appointees, individually or collectively, to leverage their positions to attract fresh federal investments in irrigation, water resources, healthcare, education, roads, power, agriculture, and industrial development. Kano needs new projects that address its pressing developmental challenges, not borrowed glory wrapped in political narratives.

History remembers those who create lasting legacies, not those who merely claim inherited ones.

Tijjani Sarki
Good Governance Advocate and Public Policy Analyst
From the Ancient City of Kano
17th July,2026

Continue Reading

Opinion

Christian Genocide Debate in Nigeria: Examining the Facts, Statistics, and Different Perspectives.

Published

2 days ago

on

July 16, 2026

By

 

By Ayoola Esther Ifeoluwa

Introduction

Few security issues in Nigeria generate as much debate as claims that Christians are facing genocide. International politicians, religious organizations, journalists, and scholars have expressed different opinions. Understanding this issue requires examining the available statistics alongside the broader context of Nigeria’s security challenges.

Arguments Supporting the Genocide Claim

The Sun Nigeria reports that several Christian organizations argue that many attacks deliberately target Christian villages, churches, and clergy. They point to repeated attacks in Benue, Plateau, Kaduna, and Borno, where churches have been destroyed and worshippers killed. Some advocacy groups estimate that tens of thousands of Christians have died since 2009 and describe the violence as systematic persecution.

Arguments Against the Genocide Label

Other researchers disagree with using the term genocide. Data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) indicate that although Christians have suffered serious attacks, Muslims have also been victims of terrorism, banditry, and communal violence. Many experts therefore describe Nigeria’s insecurity as a combination of terrorism, farmer-herder conflict, organized crime, weak governance, and competition over natural resources rather than a coordinated campaign to eliminate Christians nationwide.

Advert

Key Statistics

According to ACLED, more than 20,400 civilians were killed in nearly 12,000 attacks across Nigeria between January 2020 and September 2025.

According to ThisDay, various organisations have reported that many Christians have been killed or kidnapped in recent years, although exact figures remain disputed.

Recent Reuters reports indicate that violence has continued in Benue and Plateau States, resulting in repeated loss of lives, displacement, and destruction of property. In Plateau State, attacks in communities such as Bokkos, Barkin Ladi, Mangu, Jos North, and surrounding areas have claimed many lives. In Benue State, attacks have also been reported in Katsina-Ala, Kwande, Agatu, and Otukpo, while security agencies have intensified patrols following the killing of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) State Chairman. These incidents highlight the continuing humanitarian and security challenges facing both states.

A Balanced View

Evidence suggests that some attacks have clear religious dimensions, particularly those carried out by extremist groups such as Boko Haram and ISWAP. In other cases, especially farmer-herder conflicts, religious identity overlaps with ethnic and economic disputes, making it difficult to attribute every incident solely to religion.

Overall, the available evidence suggests that Christians have experienced serious persecution and violence in several regions of Nigeria. However, legal experts remain divided on whether the situation satisfies the international legal definition of genocide.

Conclusion

The debate over Christian genocide in Nigeria is unlikely to end soon because of the different interpretations of the evidence. What is beyond dispute is that thousands of Nigerians, both Christians and Muslims, have lost their lives due to insecurity. The priority should be to strengthen security, prosecute perpetrators, support victims, and address the root causes of violence, including poverty, weak institutions, environmental pressures, and political failures.

Sources
Reuters
ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project)
ThisDay
The Sun Nigeria

By Ayoola Esther Ifeoluwa
200 Level Student
Department of Development and Strategic Communication
University of Abuja.

Continue Reading

Trending