SANI’S POLITICS OF CONVICTION

In a forceful expression of loyalty, Uba Sani is determined to stand by the President at all costs, writes KABIR MUHAMMED

There are political declarations, and there are declarations that reveal something deeper about a politician’s convictions, relationships and understanding of the moment. Kaduna State Governor, Uba Sani’s assertion that he can “take a bullet” for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu belongs to the latter category.

Speaking on Trust TV’s Daily Politics programme on Tuesday, Governor Sani delivered an unmistakably firm defence of his support for the president, making it clear that neither public criticism nor the political consequences of his position would persuade him to retreat. “I have no apology for supporting President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and I will continue to support him till the last minute,” he declared.

It was a statement delivered with the confidence of a man who appeared fully conscious of the political implications of his position. More importantly, it was not presented as a casual expression of partisan allegiance. Sani sought to establish that his support was rooted in a relationship stretching back decades, shared political struggles, an assessment of Tinubu’s leadership and what he considers tangible benefits to Kaduna State.

When pressed on whether he was prepared to take a political bullet for the president, the governor did not equivocate. Instead, he doubled down, expressing confidence that time would vindicate his position. “I can tell you today, tomorrow, and next tomorrow, that I will be vindicated,” he said.

That response was perhaps the defining moment of the interview. It conveyed a politician prepared to own his choices rather than distance himself from them when the political atmosphere becomes uncomfortable. In a climate where political alliances are frequently subjected to the pressures of public opinion, Sani’s intervention was an emphatic declaration that he intends to stand by his convictions.

To understand the intensity of Sani’s position, it is necessary to appreciate the history he invoked during the interview. The governor traced his relationship with Tinubu to 1994, when both were associated with the struggle to restore democratic governance in Nigeria. He recalled Tinubu’s involvement with the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) and his support for pro-democracy activists during the military era, a period when opposition to military rule carried enormous personal risks.

Some activists were forced into exile, while others endured intimidation and persecution. Sani’s account placed his relationship with Tinubu within this difficult chapter of Nigeria’s political history.

For the Kaduna governor, this shared experience is not merely a footnote in their political relationship. It forms part of the foundation of his confidence in the president and informs his assessment of Tinubu’s commitment to democratic governance and the devolution of power.

His argument, essentially, is that political relationships built through difficult historical experiences cannot be assessed solely through the calculations of present-day political convenience.

This appeal to shared history gave his defence a personal dimension. Rather than relying exclusively on the conventional language of party loyalty, Sani presented his support as an extension of a relationship shaped by political struggle, mutual understanding and a common experience.

Beyond their personal and political history, Sani also made a case based on what he described as the benefits Kaduna State has received under the Tinubu administration.

He pointed to four federal university initiatives: the Federal University of Applied Sciences in Southern Kaduna, the Federal University of Education in Zaria, the Federal University of Petroleum Resources in Rigachikun, and the proposed conversion of Kaduna Polytechnic into a federal university of technology.

He also cited the reconstruction of the Kaduna-Birnin Gwari road and the appointment of Kaduna indigenes to senior positions in the federal government. The governor was particularly deliberate in distinguishing benefits to Kaduna State from personal favours to him.

“The favour he has done is not to me, because he has not given me. It’s to the state,” he said.

That distinction was central to his argument. Sani sought to frame his relationship with the president not as a transaction between two politicians, but as a political partnership whose outcomes, in his assessment, should be evaluated in terms of development and representation for the people of Kaduna.

His position also reflects a broader argument about the relationship between federal and state governments. Political differences, in his view, should not prevent cooperation where the interests of citizens are concerned.

Nevertheless, the projects and appointments he cited remain part of the administration’s record that Nigerians will ultimately assess through their implementation, accessibility and measurable impact.

Perhaps the most politically consequential aspect of the interview was Sani’s challenge to those calling on northern voters to reject Tinubu in 2027.

Rather than accepting the argument that economic hardship should automatically translate into electoral rejection of the president, the governor insisted that opposition parties must offer Nigerians a convincing alternative.

“When you say don’t vote for Asiwaju, you must bring an alternative,” he argued.

It was a direct challenge to opposition politicians to move beyond criticism and demonstrate what they would do differently.

The statement raises an important question in democratic politics: beyond identifying the shortcomings of an incumbent administration, what credible policy direction, leadership approach and practical solutions are opposition parties offering the electorate?

Sani’s argument does not remove the responsibility of the Tinubu administration to address economic hardship, insecurity, poverty and other pressing national concerns. Rather, he sought to place the opposition under the same obligation to explain how it would confront those challenges.

His intervention was particularly notable because he did not dismiss the economic difficulties confronting Nigerians. Instead, he acknowledged the severity of poverty in northern Nigeria while arguing that the region’s problems predated Tinubu’s presidency.

Using the imagery of a dilapidated building that had been neglected for years, he maintained that the challenges had accumulated over successive administrations and could not reasonably be attributed to one political leader alone.

“If we had addressed this problem even before Asiwaju ever thought of becoming president, we wouldn’t be where we are,” he said.

In one of the most striking portions of the interview, Sani turned his attention to northern political leadership and the region’s historical responsibility for its development challenges.

He argued that northern leaders must be prepared to examine their records honestly instead of attributing every difficulty to the federal government or the current administration.

“The northerners have their own problems. We shouldn’t run away. The only way to help, I think, is for us to sit down and look at ourselves in the mirror, and accept that we are the problem,” he declared.

It was a forthright assessment, and one that shifted the conversation from the familiar politics of blame to the question of accountability among the region’s political and traditional leadership.

Sani’s position was that the North must confront the historical failures that have contributed to poverty and underdevelopment. This includes examining the decisions, policies and governance choices of successive administrations and leaders who have exercised authority in the region.

The argument is significant because it challenges northern political leaders to accept responsibility for the region’s development rather than allowing the debate to be reduced to opposition to the incumbent president.

The governor’s defence of the Tinubu administration, however, did not remove the pressing security concerns confronting Kaduna State.

Asked about insecurity, particularly attacks in Millennium City, Sani acknowledged that the situation remained a matter of concern. He disclosed that he had discussed the issue with military and security officials and that plans were being made to strengthen security presence in the area.

His acknowledgement is important because security remains one of the most consequential tests of governance in Kaduna and the wider North-West. The effectiveness of the proposed measures will ultimately be judged by their capacity to protect lives, prevent attacks and restore confidence among affected communities.

As the country gradually moves towards the 2027 general elections, Sani’s interview offers an insight into the political positioning already taking shape around President Tinubu’s re-election prospects.

The governor’s central message was unmistakable: he intends to stand by the president, and he is prepared to defend that position publicly.

His confidence, directness and willingness to address uncomfortable questions distinguished the interview. He did not attempt to disguise the economic challenges facing the country, nor did he present the North’s development problems as though they began with the current administration. Instead, he advanced a political argument built around shared history, federal-state cooperation, regional accountability and the need for credible alternatives.

Whether Nigerians will ultimately agree with his assessment is a matter for public debate and the democratic process. The Tinubu administration will have to answer for its economic and security record, just as opposition parties will have to demonstrate the credibility of their alternatives.

But on his own political position, Uba Sani left little room for ambiguity. His declaration that he could take a political bullet for Tinubu was more than a headline-grabbing soundbite. It was a forceful expression of loyalty, personal conviction and a determination to stand by a political choice despite the risks attached to it.

And with the 2027 contest approaching, the governor has made one thing abundantly clear: he is not preparing to abandon his position at the first sign of political pressure. He is prepared to defend it, explain it and submit it to the ultimate test of public scrutiny.

Muhammed writes from Kaduna State