REJOINDER: BARAU’S RECORD DESERVES FACTS, NOT SELECTIVE CRITICISM
Abba Anwar’s Sudden Change of Tone Raises Questions About Consistency and Objectivity.
By Ibrahim Bala
October 28, 2026.
Abba Anwar’s recent article, “Reassessment of DSP Barau’s Projects in Kano North: One Building, Three Names,” raises questions about Senator Barau I. Jibrin, Deputy President of the Senate. While every public officeholder must be accountable, criticism must be guided by facts, fairness and a comprehensive understanding of government responsibilities—not selective judgments or political sentiments.
Anwar is entitled to scrutinise Senator Barau’s projects, but his own record of political commentary also deserves scrutiny. As a former Press Secretary to Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, he understands the importance of consistency and responsible public communication. His previous favourable commentaries about Senator Barau, followed by his current harsh criticism, naturally invite questions about what has changed.
- Advertisement -
Has new evidence emerged, or has his political assessment simply shifted? These are legitimate questions, although any allegation of personal financial disagreements or political inducements must be supported by credible evidence rather than speculation.
On the Kano–Gwarzo–Dayi road, the central issue should be the project’s actual progress, funds released, work completed and responsibilities of the supervising authorities and contractor. Budgetary allocations do not automatically mean that the entire amount has been released or spent. If the reported figures of N19 billion and N37 billion are accurate, the relevant authorities should publish verifiable records explaining the project’s status.
Senator Barau should use his influence to demand accountability and accelerate completion, but he cannot single-handedly perform every function assigned to federal ministries, contractors and supervising agencies.
Facilitating a project is not the same as executing it. Every responsible institution must answer for its own obligations.
The proposed Nigeria Immigration Service training institution in Bichi and the NSCDC training institution in Gwarzo equally deserve objective assessment. If construction or operationalisation has been delayed, the public deserves clear timelines and explanations. However, their shortcomings should be established through verifiable evidence rather than assumptions.
Similarly, the conversion of the former Federal Polytechnic, Kabo, into a federal university is a significant legislative development, although the institution must still demonstrate progress in infrastructure, staffing, academic programmes and facilities. Acknowledging outstanding needs does not automatically invalidate the achievement; equally, legal establishment alone cannot substitute for a fully functional university.
Anwar’s allegation that certain educational and ICT facilities are being presented under different institutional names is particularly serious and requires documentary verification. If facilities are shared, their ownership, funding and functions should be transparently explained. If projects have been duplicated or misrepresented, the responsible authorities must provide answers. Allegations of duplication, however, should not be confused with proven financial misconduct without supporting evidence.
A fair assessment of Senator Barau must consider his legislative contributions, constituency interventions, project facilitation and measurable achievements alongside legitimate shortcomings. His high office does not exempt him from criticism, but neither should his record be judged through a selective presentation of unfinished projects.
Anwar should therefore provide documentary evidence for his allegations, while Senator Barau and the relevant federal agencies should respond with facts, implementation records and measurable results. That is the proper standard of public accountability.
Ultimately, the people of Kano North are more concerned about completed roads, functional educational institutions, employment opportunities and improved security than political exchanges between commentators. They deserve transparency, not propaganda; evidence, not insinuations; and development, not endless controversy.
Senator Barau is not above criticism, and Abba Anwar is not above scrutiny. Both should be judged by the evidence they present, the consistency of their positions and their commitment to the public interest. Kano North deserves facts, accountability and results—not selective criticism driven by political sentiment.
Tone down personal insinuations
Replace unsupported allegations with placeholders
Clarify Barau’s specific responsibilities
Ibrahim write from Kano.
DemocracyNewslineNewspaper October 28th, 2026
