Connect with us

Opinion

Restoring the Glory That Was Always There: Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf and the Historical Vision Behind Kano First

Published

on

 

 

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

Advert

Kano does not need to be invented. That is a truth so fundamental, so historically self-evident, that it should not need to be stated at all, and yet the circumstances of recent decades have made its restatement not merely appropriate but urgent. There is a tendency, in the discourse of Nigerian development, to treat every governance initiative as a beginning, as though the society being governed had no prior history of achievement, no accumulated wisdom, no tested traditions of institutional excellence on which new efforts might be built. This tendency is not merely intellectually lazy, but it is, in the specific context of Kano, a form of historical injustice, a failure to reckon honestly with the civilizational inheritance that this state carries and that its people have never entirely abandoned, even through the long and painful decades in which their institutions were hollowed out, their values eroded, and their confidence systematically undermined by the combined weight of misgovernance, corruption, and the slow cultural dislocation that follows when a society loses trust in the institutions that are supposed to embody its highest aspirations.
Kano was, long before Nigeria existed as a political entity, one of the most sophisticated and enduring centers of civilization in West Africa. Its greatness was not the greatness of conquest or of externally imposed order. It was the greatness of organic development, of a society that built, over centuries, a coherent and self-sustaining civilization on foundations that were simultaneously material and moral. The trans-Saharan trade networks that made Kano a commercial hub of continental significance were sustained not merely by geography or by the availability of goods, but by a culture of commercial integrity, of trust between trading partners, of contractual reliability, and of the kind of reputational accountability that makes markets function across distances and between strangers. The Islamic scholarship that gave Kano its intellectual authority was not merely a religious tradition. It was a governance philosophy, one that placed knowledge, justice, accountability, and the subordination of personal interest to public duty at the center of what it meant to hold power. The traditional political institutions that maintained Kano’s social order were not instruments of oppression but, at their best, mechanisms of consultation, legitimacy, and the managed resolution of social conflict.
These were not accidental achievements. They were the products of deliberate cultivation, of generations of Kano’s people choosing, consciously and consistently, to organize their collective life around values that made both individual flourishing and communal solidarity possible. That is what a civilization is: not a collection of buildings or a record of territorial expansion, but a living tradition of values, practices, and institutions that enables a human community to achieve, across time, more than any individual generation could accomplish alone. Kano built such a civilization. And the question that every serious governor of Kano must eventually confront, whether they frame it in these terms or not, is whether they are adding to that civilization or subtracting from it.
It is against this civilizational backdrop that the Kano First Initiative under Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf must be understood, not as a new idea imported into Kano from outside, not as a political slogan invented to win elections and abandoned when the votes are counted, but as a deliberate act of historical retrieval, an attempt to reach back through the debris of recent decades and recover the foundations on which Kano’s genuine greatness was built. The initiative’s framework document states this explicitly and without embarrassment: Kano’s most persistent challenges are not solely infrastructural or economic in nature. They are fundamentally behavioral, normative, and narrative failures, accumulated over time and reinforced by weak value transmission, fragmented authority, and uncoordinated messaging. This is a diagnosis of remarkable historical honesty, and it is one that only a governor with a genuine understanding of what Kano has been and what it has lost could have authorized.
Governor Yusuf’s historical vision is not nostalgic in the sentimental sense of the word. He is not proposing a return to a romanticized past that never existed in the uncomplicated form that nostalgia requires. He is proposing something simultaneously more modest and more ambitious: the recovery of specific values, specific institutional principles, and specific civic traditions that demonstrably worked, that demonstrably sustained Kano’s coherence and productivity over centuries, and that demonstrably began to break down when they were displaced by the governing logic of extraction, patronage, and the systematic subordination of public interest to private accumulation. Islamic ethical governance, communal responsibility, the dignity of productive labor, respect for legitimate authority, the centrality of knowledge in public life, these are not abstract ideals. They are the operational principles of a civilization that actually functioned, and their recovery is not a romantic aspiration but a practical governance imperative.
The intellectual architecture through which this recovery is being pursued bears the clear fingerprints of the Honourable Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya, whose contribution to the Kano First Initiative has been, in every meaningful sense, the contribution of a man who understands both what Kano is and what it needs. The framework he has championed integrates three traditions that, taken together, give the initiative both its cultural legitimacy and its analytical credibility: the Islamic ethical governance tradition that historically underpinned Kano’s stability and justice, Kano’s own sociocultural heritage of communal solidarity and institutional accountability, and the modern behavioral change communication science that provides the methodological tools for translating values into measurable social outcomes. This integration is not accidental. It reflects a deep conviction, shared by both the governor and his commissioner, that genuine renewal cannot be achieved by importing foreign solutions but only by excavating and rebuilding on Kano’s own foundations.
The scale of what has been lost must be honestly acknowledged if the scale of what is being attempted is to be properly appreciated. Kano today carries wounds that decades of misgovernance have inflicted on its social fabric with a thoroughness that cannot be undone quickly or easily. Youth disaffection has reached levels that express themselves in drug abuse, street violence, and the nihilistic political thuggery that represents, at its core, the rage of young people who were promised a future and received instead a void. Institutional trust, once the bedrock of Kano’s civic life, has been so systematically eroded that the default posture of many citizens toward their government is not engagement but cynicism, not participation but withdrawal. The digital media ecosystem, which should be a tool of civic enlightenment, has in too many instances become a vehicle for the amplification of the very misinformation, polarization, and moral dislocation that the Kano First Initiative is designed to address. These are not small problems, and they will not yield to small solutions.
What gives the Kano First Initiative its historical seriousness is precisely that it does not pretend otherwise. The four-phase implementation framework, stretching from 2026 through 2030, is built on the recognition that the restoration of a civilization’s normative foundations is a generational project, not a political campaign. Phase One builds the empirical foundation, the baseline surveys, perception mapping, and narrative architecture that genuine social intervention requires. Phase Two deploys coordinated, multi-channel behavioral activation across youth networks, religious institutions, traditional authorities, and community organizations. Phase Three scales what works and deepens digital engagement. Phase Four embeds the initiative permanently into Kano’s governance architecture through a dedicated directorate and the annual Kano Values Index. This is not the timeline of an administration managing its image. It is the timeline of a government that has looked honestly at the depth of the challenge and committed itself to the depth of response that the challenge demands.
There is an emotional dimension to this story that deserves to be named directly, because it is one that the purely analytical framing of policy discourse tends to obscure. Kano’s people love their state with an intensity and a pride that is, even in a country of fierce regional loyalties, remarkable. They carry within them the memory of a greatness that their grandparents knew and that they themselves have glimpsed, in fragments and in moments, even through the long decades of disappointment. When Governor Yusuf speaks of restoring Kano’s glory, he is not merely making a political argument. He is speaking to something that lives in the hearts of ordinary Kano citizens, something that has survived misgovernance, political manipulation, and cultural erosion with a resilience that is itself a testament to the depth of Kano’s civilizational roots. That emotional resonance is not a weakness in the Kano First philosophy. It is one of its greatest strategic assets, because renewal that connects with people’s deepest sense of identity and pride generates the kind of civic energy that no top-down programme can manufacture.
The work of restoring that glory belongs, ultimately, not to government alone but to every institution, every community leader, every journalist, every religious scholar, every teacher, every trader, and every young person in Kano who chooses, in their daily conduct, to live by the values that made this civilization great. Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has provided the vision, the institutional framework, and the personal example of a leader who is willing to pay the political costs that genuine commitment to the public good always exacts. Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya has provided the intellectual architecture and the communication infrastructure through which that vision can be translated into civic reality. The rest, as it must always be when a society is serious about its own renewal, belongs to the people.
Kano’s glory was never lost. It was covered over, layer by layer, by the accumulated debris of decades of bad governance, institutional betrayal, and the slow erosion of the values that once made it shine. The Kano First Initiative is not building something new on empty ground. It is clearing the ground of debris so that what was always there can breathe again, grow again, and reclaim the space in Nigeria’s national life and in West Africa’s historical memory that Kano has always, by right of civilization, deserved to occupy. That is the historical vision behind Kano First. And it is a vision worth every effort, every sacrifice, and every ounce of collective will that Kano’s people can bring to its realization.

 

Saminu Umar Ph.D is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano. surijyarzaki@gmail.com

Opinion

INEC, David Mark, And Coming Abachaian Coronation

Published

on

 

By Farooq Kperogi

With INEC’s overtly partisan, intentionally illegal, and possibly remote-controlled withdrawal of recognition for the David Mark-led ADC, Nigeria has officially reverted to full-on Abacha-era suffocation of even the wispiest pretence to competitive electoral politics.

Lawyers have said that the judgment of the appeal court, which INEC invoked as a convenient crutch to carry out a predetermined action, said the status quo should be maintained. In other words, the judgment says David Mark should remain the chairman of the ADC until the merit of the appeal has been determined.

However, it appears that INEC is in the know of what the final judgment will be and decided to jump the gun. Yet the INEC chairman is a professor of law and a SAN! He can’t even pretend to be neutral.

Advert

It seems obvious that the ADC faction INEC will ultimately recognize, as I predicted in my column of two weeks ago, will be the faction that will merely be an extension of the APC, much like the PDP now is. They will either present dummy candidates or adopt Tinubu as their candidate, which is a distinction without a difference.

It is obvious that Tinubu wants a coronation, not a competitive election, in 2027. He is scared to death about a real electoral contest. We all know why.

Well, according to public records, it cost around ₦300–₦355 billion to conduct the 2023 presidential election. It is projected that it will cost almost ₦870 billion to conduct the 2027 election.

Why should Nigeria spend close to a trillion naira on a preset, make-believe, Abachaian coronation exercise? Let’s kuku cancel democracy and make Tinubu the supreme leader. At least we would save a trillion naira.

Continue Reading

Opinion

El-Rufai/Uba Sani And Pantami’s Perceived Peace Of The Graveyard

Published

on

 

By Bala Ibrahim.

Yesterday was Sunday, a day recognized as the first day of the week, which in the Bible, holds supreme significance as the day of Jesus Christ’s resurrection. Some Christians call it the Lord’s Day. There are many interpretations given to show the significance of Sunday. But for the purpose of this article, attention would be given to the significance of yesterday’s Sunday, (29/03/2026), with special bias to the role it played in promoting reconciliation between parties and friends, as well as how, at the National Mosque, Abuja, the wall of religious divide was unconsciously demolished, as followers of different faiths scrambled over each other, in the competition for space to participate in the funeral rites of late Hajiya Umma El-Rufai, the deceased mother of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai.

By the Islamic tradition, when a Muslim dies, before he or she is taken to the grave yard, special prayers are offered on the deceased person’s body, at any convenient place, before proceeding to the cemetery. For late Hajiya Umma El-Rufai, the National Mosque Abuja, was the venue. And what happened there, is the prelude to this article.

If I say everyone that is anything in Nigeria was there, I think I am making an understatement. But that is not surprising, given the personal and political profile of the bereaved, who is Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. It may interest the reader to know that, among the early callers at the Mosque, were reputable Christians, with people like Peter Obi and Rotimi Amaechi, rubbing shoulders with Muslims, in the stampede to partake in the Islamic ceremonial practice. They know they don’t belong to the Islamic faith, but they want to share with Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, as an honour of solidarity, in the last rites given to his beloved mother. The duo of NSA Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and Governor Uba Sani were there face to face with El-Rufai. The atmosphere was solemn, sombre and clearly sorrowful.

Also present at the Mosque was Prof. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami, former Minister and renowned Islamic cleric, who seized the opportunity to advance the imperative of reconciliation in Islam. He started in the Mosque and continued at the graveyard, to the extent of persuading El-Rufai to shake hands with Uba Sani, with a soft but casual commitment from both sides, on the pleaded forgiveness. It was difficult, very difficult, especially when perused through the prism of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai’s position.

Advert

Undoubtedly peace is fundamental to Islam, because it serves as a source of inner tranquillity and social harmony. The Quran has laid emphasis on reconciliation and kindness. So every Muslim is enjoined to embrace reconciliation. However, in advancing the course of reconciliation, timing is important, I think. We must not only perceive peace as merely the absence of conflict. No, it also has something to do with our state of mind. A man standing before the lifeless body of his beloved mother, at the graveyard, under intense pressure, is not in the appropriate state of mind to commit to any peace deal. Unless we are referring to the probabial peace of the graveyard.

The ambition of any reconciliation is to arrive at unity. And unity can only come after conflict, if there is healing. By definition, healing is the process of becoming healthy or whole again, encompassing the restoration of physical tissue, mental, or emotional well-being. A man under emotional pressure is not fit for commitment to any peace deal, I think. Unless we are referring to the probabial peace of the graveyard.

Peace of the graveyard is not genuine, because it could be deceptive, by resulting in forced calm, beneath which lies a deep tension. As a friend of the trio of El-Rufai, Nuhu Ribadu and Uba Sani, Sheik Pantami must go for a genuine, organic and sustainable peace agreement between the parties. More so, because they were genuine friends before.

All hands must be put on deck, to compel President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to come into the agreement. Because, he was the one who compelled Mallam Nasir El-Rufai to come into the Tinubu project in 2023. Indeed a lot of water had passed under the bridge. We should forget past misunderstandings or issues that are now irrelevant, and forgivable. Let’s move on from past disagreements and let go of grudges.That’s the only way to arrive at genuine reconciliation.

It may be recalled that the Muslim Rights Concern, MURIC, had long been appealing to the President, to come out clearly and reciprocate the gesture given to him in his time of need by Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. MURIC said they were the ones who persuaded El-Rufai to support Tinubu in 2023, as a result of which, he confronted the so called Buhari cabal, the then CBN Governor and other forces that were putting spanners in the work of the Tinubu project. The result of which is now President Tinubu. MURIC said El-Rufai does not deserve to be humiliated and went further to support their argument with the quote below:

“Noteworthy is a video clip showing how President Tinubu openly asked El-Rufai to join his government and this did not happen at a private meeting. It happened at a campaign ground, in the presence of thousands of party enthusiasts.”

Continue Reading

Opinion

Defection: Kwankwaso’s Legacy Under Scrutiny; A Critical Look at his Political Journey Since 1999

Published

on

Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso

 

When Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999, the people of Kano embraced the moment with hope and expectation after years of military governance. Among the prominent figures who emerged at the time was Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, whose leadership inspired confidence among many citizens eager for progress and representation.

More than two decades later, however, Kwankwaso’s political legacy continues to generate debate, with supporters highlighting his achievements and critics questioning the long-term impact of his leadership on Kano’s development.

Kwankwaso’s first tenure as governor (1999–2003) was marked by visible infrastructure projects, including roads and public buildings, which were widely welcomed by residents. At a time when tangible government presence was limited, these developments symbolised a new beginning. Yet, some analysts argue that while these projects addressed immediate needs, they did not sufficiently tackle deeper structural challenges, particularly the decline of Kano’s once-thriving industrial economy.

Historically a major commercial hub, Kano’s economy had been weakening due to years of policy neglect and infrastructural decay. Critics maintain that a more comprehensive economic strategy might have helped revive industries and reduce dependence on federal allocations.

Kwankwaso’s defeat in 2003 by Malam Ibrahim Shekarau marked a turning point. Observers note that while the loss strengthened his political network and grassroots appeal, it also raised questions about the sustainability of the systems established during his administration. Many of the projects, though impactful, were seen as lacking the institutional depth needed for long-term continuity.

Advert

Returning to office in 2011, Kwankwaso expanded his development agenda with increased infrastructure and an ambitious foreign scholarship programme that benefited thousands of Kano youths. The initiative is widely regarded as one of his most significant contributions, opening educational opportunities for many.

However, critics argue that despite these efforts, broader economic transformation remained limited. Rising population growth, unemployment, and declining industrial capacity continued to challenge the state’s development trajectory.

Beyond governance, Kwankwaso’s political influence has also shaped Kano’s power dynamics. His role in building a strong political movement—popularly known as the Kwankwasiyya—has been praised for mobilising grassroots support but criticised by some for reinforcing a personality-driven political structure.

Political analysts further point to the tensions surrounding the Kano Emirate as a significant episode in the state’s recent history. The controversial removal of Muhammadu Sanusi II highlighted deep divisions within the state’s political and traditional institutions, with varying opinions on the factors that led to the crisis.

In recent years, Kwankwaso’s shifting political alliances—from the PDP to the APC and later to the NNPP—have also drawn mixed reactions. While such moves are common in Nigeria’s political landscape, critics argue that they have contributed to instability and uncertainty within Kano’s political structure.

The 2023 elections brought another dimension to the discourse, with the emergence of Abba Kabir Yusuf as governor under the NNPP platform. Subsequent political developments, including evolving relationships between state and federal actors, have further shaped public debate about governance priorities and political strategy.

Today, Kwankwaso remains one of Kano’s most influential political figures, with a legacy that reflects both notable achievements and enduring controversies. While many credit him with expanding access to education and improving infrastructure, others believe that the state’s long-term economic and institutional challenges require deeper reflection.

As Kano continues to navigate its future, the assessment of past leadership—including Kwankwaso’s role—remains central to ongoing conversations about development, governance, and political direction.

Continue Reading

Trending