RIGHT OF REPLY: WHEN POLITICAL RHETORIC REPLACES ANSWERS, THE PEOPLE DESERVE BETTER
By Dawakin Kudu, public commentator.
September 14, 2026
We have read with considerable interest the article titled “The Accounting Miscalculations of a Wobbling Opposition as the Kebbi ADC Writes a Political Novel with Missing Chapters,” By BalaSalihuDawakinKudu .
Ordinarily, political criticism is a legitimate component of democratic discourse, and we have no objection to robust debate concerning the management of public resources in Kebbi State. However, when an article devotes several paragraphs to criticising an opposition party without directly addressing the substantive questions it has raised, Nigerians are entitled to ask a straightforward question: Where are the facts?
- Advertisement -
The writer repeatedly accuses the African Democratic Congress (ADC) of making unsubstantiated allegations, yet fails to provide concrete documentary evidence capable of disproving the specific issues raised by the ADC.
That is the central weakness of the article.
THE ₦627 BILLION QUESTION HAS NOT BEEN ANSWERED
The writer dismisses the ADC’s reference to approximately ₦627 billion as “the now-famous ₦627 billion question,” while arguing that the figure requires greater fiscal context.
We agree that public finance requires context.
However, context cannot substitute for accountability.
If the figure is inaccurate, the appropriate response is not sarcasm, political name-calling or literary characterisation. The government should publish the relevant financial records and demonstrate, line by line, the actual revenues received by the state, their sources, statutory deductions, debt obligations, recurrent expenditure and capital expenditure.
Let the figures speak for themselves.
The ADC has consistently maintained that public resources belong to the people and that citizens have the right to know how those resources are generated and expended.
Therefore, rather than asserting that the ADC has written a “political novel,” the writer should have assisted the public by providing the government’s audited accounts, budget implementation reports, revenue receipts and expenditure records necessary to resolve the matter.
That would have been a more substantive response.
QUESTIONS DO NOT BECOME FALSE BECAUSE THEY ARE POLITICALLY INCONVENIENT
The article suggests that because the ADC promised to provide further evidence, its questions should be dismissed.
That argument is unpersuasive.
Political parties, civil society organisations, journalists and citizens routinely raise issues requiring further investigation. The responsible response is to address the substance of those questions and provide contrary evidence where necessary.
The ADC has never claimed that a press statement is a substitute for a forensic audit.
Indeed, our position is precisely the opposite: where public funds are involved, independent scrutiny and documentary verification should be encouraged.
If the Kebbi State Government is satisfied with its financial stewardship, it should welcome such scrutiny rather than treating every question as an act of political desperation.
ACCOUNTABILITY IS NOT AN ATTACK ON GOVERNMENT
The writer correctly acknowledges that opposition parties have a legitimate role in scrutinising government.
We agree.
However, the appropriate response should not be to dismiss every criticism as campaign propaganda.
A functioning democracy requires an administration capable of answering difficult questions without becoming defensive.
The citizens of Kebbi State do not need political rhetoric from either side. They need facts.
They need to know:
How much money has the state received within the period under review?
How much has been spent?
On what projects?
Which projects have been completed?
What was their original contract value?
What variations were approved?
Who were the contractors?
What percentage of budgeted capital projects has actually been implemented?
How much has been spent on recurrent obligations?
What is the state’s current debt position?
What independent audits have been conducted?
Where can citizens examine the relevant financial records?
These are legitimate public-interest questions.
They cannot be dismissed by describing those who raise them as “desperate.”
THE IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT MUST BE MEASURED, NOT MERELY ASSERTED
The writer describes Governor Nasir Idris as “the architect of modern Kebbi State” and lists roads, schools, hospitals, agricultural interventions and empowerment programmes.
We do not object to any genuine development undertaken by government.
Indeed, if these projects exist and have been properly executed, they should be documented, quantified and subjected to independent verification.
The question is not whether the government has constructed roads or renovated schools.
The question is whether the scale, quality, cost and distribution of those projects correspond with the substantial resources available to the government.
A government cannot answer questions about billions of naira simply by pointing to a road project.
Show the contract. Show the appropriation. Show the payment record. Show the completion certificate. Show the value for money.
That is how serious accountability is demonstrated.
ON THE KOKO-MAHUTA-DABAI ROAD
The article makes a political point about the Koko-Mahuta-Dabai road and attempts to associate its condition with the previous administration at the federal level.
This is another attempt to divert attention from the substantive issue.
The issue before the people is not a competition over which administration should receive political blame for every road in Kebbi.
The relevant question is what governments at the federal and state levels have done, what resources were available to them, and what measurable results they delivered.
If the road has now been improved, the people should be told precisely when the project commenced, the total cost, the source of funding, the contractor, the scope of work and the extent of completion.
Again, facts—not political rhetoric—will settle the matter.
MALAMI’S RECORD SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR ANSWERS
The article devotes considerable attention to the record of Abubakar Chika Malami and asks what was achieved during his years in federal office.
That is a legitimate subject for political debate.
However, it does not answer the ADC’s questions about the present administration of Kebbi State.
If the writer believes Mr. Malami’s record is inadequate, the appropriate approach is to present documented evidence and allow the public to judge.
Similarly, if the government believes the ADC’s allegations are false, it should provide documentary evidence to disprove them.
Two wrongs do not make a right.
The alleged shortcomings of a former office holder cannot provide immunity from scrutiny for the government currently responsible for the state’s finances.
THE PEOPLE ARE THE FINAL JUDGES
The writer repeatedly predicts the defeat of the ADC and portrays the party as irrelevant and frightened.
That is political speculation, not evidence.
Elections are decided by voters.
The ADC is not afraid of an electoral contest. We believe the people of Kebbi State are capable of examining the records of all political actors and making their own decisions.
We will therefore continue to ask questions.
We will continue to demand transparency.
We will continue to challenge policies we consider harmful.
And where we make allegations, we accept the responsibility to substantiate them with verifiable evidence.
We also expect the government and its supporters to meet the same standard.
LET THE RECORDS BE PUBLISHED
The most effective way to resolve this matter is not through another newspaper article.
It is through transparency.
Let the Kebbi State Government publish the relevant audited financial statements, budget implementation reports, revenue inflows, expenditure records and details of major contracts and projects covering the period under discussion.
Let independent experts examine them.
Let journalists investigate them.
Let civil society scrutinise them.
Let the people of Kebbi State see them.
If the figures vindicate the government, the ADC will have no choice but to accept the facts.
But if the figures raise further questions, those questions must be answered.
That is democracy.
The ADC did not ask for applause. It asked for accountability.
We therefore urge those defending the government to resist the temptation to turn every legitimate question into a political insult. A government that is confident in its record should have no fear of evidence.
The people of Kebbi State deserve neither political fiction nor political propaganda.
They deserve facts, figures, transparency and accountability.
Ultimately, they—not political commentators—will decide which political narrative deserves their confidence in 2027.
DemocracyNewslineNewspaper, September 14, 2026
