REJOINDER: IBRAHIM SHEKARAU’S IDEOLOGY IS ROOTED IN SERVICE, NOT POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM.
By Bala Salihu Dawakin Kudu
Political Analyst and Commentator.
October 18, 2026.
The recent criticisms of Malam Ibrahim Shekarau by Comrade Ibrahim Muhammad Sani and Hassan Husaini, mni, over his declaration of support for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s re-election in 2027 deserve a thoughtful response. While both writers are entitled to express their political opinions, their arguments appear to overlook the political philosophy, leadership record and ideological convictions of a man whose public life has been shaped by service, consultation, discipline and a commitment to democratic participation.
As someone who understands the political history of Northern Nigeria and appreciates the contributions of its respected leaders, I consider it necessary to defend Malam Shekarau against what I regard as a misinterpretation of his political position. Supporting his decision does not mean claiming that every policy of the present administration is perfect. Rather, it means recognising his constitutional right to make political choices based on his convictions, experience and assessment of the country’s political direction.
- Advertisement -
SHEKARAU HAS THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE HIS POLITICAL DIRECTION;
One fundamental weakness in the arguments against Malam Shekarau is the apparent assumption that a respected northern leader cannot support a sitting president without being accused of abandoning the interests of his people.
That argument is neither fair nor consistent with democratic principles.
Malam Shekarau’s declaration of support for President Tinubu through Arewa for Asiwaju (A4A) is a political decision that deserves to be evaluated on its merits, not dismissed through emotional language or allegations of political opportunism.
Democracy gives every citizen, including former governors, political veterans and community leaders, the right to support a candidate of their choice. It equally gives critics the right to disagree. However, disagreement should be guided by evidence, respect and an understanding of the issues involved.
The fact that Shekarau has chosen to support Tinubu does not automatically mean he has abandoned Northern Nigeria, betrayed the masses or surrendered his political convictions.
Political disagreement is not proof of ideological failure, just as political support is not proof of betrayal.
THE IDEOLOGY OF MALAM SHEKARAU MUST BE UNDERSTOOD;
Comrade Ibrahim Muhammad Sani and Hassan Husaini, mni, should endeavour to understand the political ideology and leadership philosophy of Malam Shekarau before concluding that his position is contrary to the interests of the North.
Shekarau’s political career has been associated with consultation, community engagement, education, moral responsibility and the belief that leadership should be exercised through institutions and organised participation.
His political approach cannot reasonably be reduced to one speech delivered at the national headquarters of a political party.
A leader may acknowledge the challenges confronting his people while believing that engagement with the government, rather than permanent confrontation, offers a practical route to addressing those challenges. Such an approach may be debated, but it should not automatically be interpreted as an endorsement of every government policy.
The establishment of A4A can therefore be understood as an attempt by its members to organise political participation and mobilise support for a candidate they believe deserves another opportunity to govern.
Whether that strategy will succeed is a matter for the electorate to determine in 2027.
What is unacceptable is the suggestion that Shekarau must adopt the political position preferred by his critics before he can be considered a genuine defender of Northern interests.
SUPPORTING TINUBU DOES NOT MEAN DENYING THE NORTH’S CHALLENGES
The North is undoubtedly facing serious challenges, including insecurity, unemployment, poverty, food inflation, educational deficits and inadequate access to essential services. These problems deserve urgent attention from governments at all levels.
However, acknowledging these difficulties does not require every northern political leader to oppose President Tinubu.
The real question is whether political leaders can use their relationships, influence and access to government to advocate policies that improve the lives of their people.
Malam Shekarau and his associates may believe that supporting Tinubu offers an opportunity to strengthen the North’s engagement with the Federal Government, attract development projects and advance regional interests. Their judgment may be challenged, but it should be assessed through its objectives, evidence and eventual outcomes.
Equally, those supporting the administration must be prepared to demand accountability, better security, affordable food, improved electricity, stronger educational institutions and greater economic opportunities.
The interests of Northern Nigeria should remain greater than the political interests of any party, candidate or individual.
Consequently, supporting Tinubu should not prevent A4A from raising legitimate concerns about policies affecting ordinary citizens. Neither should criticism of government policies be used to disqualify Shekarau from participating in a democratic coalition.
THE NORTH IS NOT A POLITICAL MONOLITH
The argument that no individual or group can speak for every northerner is correct in principle. Northern Nigeria is diverse, with different ethnic groups, religious communities, economic interests and political traditions.
However, that principle applies equally to the critics of Malam Shekarau.
If Shekarau cannot claim that every northerner supports Tinubu, his critics cannot legitimately suggest that every northerner rejects the president or considers A4A a betrayal.
No political commentator has the authority to monopolise the voice of the North.
A4A is entitled to mobilise supporters, just as opposition parties and other political organisations are entitled to mobilise against the administration. The final verdict belongs to the electorate through a free, fair and credible election.
Therefore, the proper response to Shekarau’s political position is to present alternative arguments, offer competing policy proposals and persuade voters—not to portray his supporters as people who are indifferent to the suffering of ordinary northerners.
SHEKARAU’S RECORD DESERVES A FAIR ASSESSMENT
Malam Ibrahim Shekarau is a former governor of Kano State, a former federal minister and a prominent figure in the political history of Northern Nigeria. His public record should be assessed fairly, with due consideration for both his achievements and the criticisms of his administration.
Those who disagree with his current political position should remember that political leaders are not required to remain permanently aligned with one party, coalition or presidential candidate.
Political circumstances change, alliances evolve and leaders make decisions based on their interpretation of national developments.
It is therefore unreasonable to suggest that Shekarau’s support for Tinubu automatically invalidates his previous contributions to Kano State or Northern Nigeria.
If the critics believe that his assessment of the president’s performance is inaccurate, they should provide verifiable evidence and demonstrate where his conclusions are mistaken. Personal attacks and sweeping accusations cannot replace rigorous political analysis.
A4A SHOULD BE JUDGED BY ITS PERFORMANCE
While defending Malam Shekarau’s right to support President Tinubu, I also believe that Arewa for Asiwaju must demonstrate that its activities will produce meaningful benefits for Northern Nigeria.
The organisation should go beyond political declarations and explain how it intends to encourage investment, promote security, improve educational opportunities, support agriculture and address youth unemployment.
It should also maintain an open channel of communication with ordinary citizens, including farmers, traders, students, women, traditional institutions and communities affected by insecurity.
If A4A claims that the Federal Government has delivered significant projects across the North, it should make reliable information about those projects available to the public.
Such transparency would strengthen the organisation’s credibility and enable citizens to distinguish between political claims and measurable achievements.
However, these expectations should be understood as constructive recommendations, not grounds for condemning the organisation before it has had the opportunity to demonstrate its impact.
WHY I SUPPORT MALAM SHEKARAU.
My support for Malam Shekarau is founded on my belief that political engagement should be guided by experience, dialogue, strategic thinking and the search for practical solutions to national challenges.
I do not believe that every political disagreement should become an occasion for questioning a leader’s loyalty to his people.
Nor do I believe that the North can advance by allowing political differences to degenerate into personal hostility among its leaders, intellectuals and commentators.
Malam Shekarau has made his political choice. Those who disagree with him should make their own choices and present their arguments to the public. Neither side should claim exclusive ownership of the region’s interests.
I also believe that political support must never become unconditional loyalty. Any government seeking another mandate must be prepared to answer legitimate questions about insecurity, economic hardship, infrastructure, education and the welfare of citizens.
In that respect, A4A should regard constructive criticism as an opportunity to strengthen its engagement with the people rather than a reason to dismiss opposing voices.
CONCLUSION: LET DEMOCRACY DECIDE.
The criticisms by Comrade Ibrahim Muhammad Sani and Hassan Husaini, mni, may reflect genuine concerns about the condition of Northern Nigeria. Those concerns should not be ignored. Nevertheless, their conclusions about Malam Shekarau’s motives and ideological convictions should not be accepted without sufficient evidence.
One can disagree with a leader’s political decision without questioning his sincerity, and one can support a presidential candidate without denying the problems confronting the country.
Malam Shekarau’s support for President Tinubu is a legitimate political position. Whether that position will ultimately benefit Northern Nigeria is a question that must be answered through policy outcomes, public engagement and the democratic process.
My position is clear: I stand with Malam Ibrahim Shekarau in defending his right to make an independent political choice and in supporting his decision to mobilise for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s re-election in 2027.
At the same time, I urge A4A to ensure that its political mobilisation is accompanied by a strong commitment to the welfare, security, education and economic advancement of the people it seeks to represent.
Northern Nigeria needs responsible leadership, honest debate and political engagement that puts the public interest above personal rivalry.
Let us therefore debate ideas rather than attack personalities, examine evidence rather than trade allegations, and allow the people to determine their political future.
Malam Shekarau has the right to his convictions, his critics have the right to their opinions, and the people of Northern Nigeria have the final right to decide.
By Bala Salihu Dawakin Kudu
Political Analyst and Commentator. Email balasalihudawakinkudu@gmail.com Tel 08060017934, WhatsApp 08097159568.
DemocracyNewslineNewspaper October 18th, 2026
