There Was Precedence for a Third Term in Kwara North: Senator Sadiq Isn’t the First;
By Umar Faruk Shiya (Baruten)
There appears to be a deliberate attempt by some individuals and political interests to crucify, vilify, and smear the Distinguished Senator Sadiq Umar over his reported intention to seek another term as the representative of Kwara North Senatorial District. Their arguments are largely premised on the principles of rotation, equity, and fairness among the constituent local government areas that make up the district.
While every democratic society thrives on healthy debate and divergent opinions, such discussions must be guided by facts, historical realities, and consistency rather than selective narratives designed to advance political agendas.
Those opposing Senator Sadiq Umar’s aspiration often present the issue as though it would amount to an unprecedented violation of the unwritten rotational arrangement within Kwara North.
However, a closer look at the political history of the district reveals that this position is neither entirely accurate nor supported by historical evidence.
The truth is that Kwara North has witnessed instances where elected representatives enjoyed multiple terms in office, and such occurrences were accepted as outcomes of democratic processes and electoral choices made by the people.
A striking example was the late Hon. Ahman Patigi of blessed memory, who represented his constituency in the House of Representatives for three consecutive terms, spanning twelve uninterrupted years. During that period, Moro Local Government Area, which belongs to the same federal constituency, remained on the sidelines and was unable to produce a representative.
What is even more instructive is that, despite over three decades of political representation within that constituency, Moro Local Government is yet to enjoy what many would describe as its fair share of representation. If the principles of justice, fairness, and rotation are now being passionately invoked against Senator Sadiq Umar, it is only fair to ask: where were those same voices when Moro Local Government was repeatedly overlooked?
In fairness, those advocating for Patigi L.G today are not only selfish but also unmindful of the political ties that bind Kwara North together. Have they forgotten that Baruten, Kaiama, Edu and Patigi local government all represented Kwara North at the Red Chamber except Moro Local Government? Where’s the rotation and fairness they claim to be championing?
Again, where were their voices and fairness when two sons of Patigi local government contested against Senator Sadiq in 2023? What would have happened if one of their sons won the elections?
The selective application of the principles of equity and fairness raises legitimate questions about the sincerity of those advancing such arguments today. Justice loses its moral force when it is applied only when convenient and ignored when it does not serve particular political interests.
More importantly, no provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria prohibits a senator from seeking re-election, provided he remains qualified and enjoys the support of his constituents.
Democracy is fundamentally about the people’s right to choose their leaders through the ballot box. It is not about imposing artificial restrictions based on political calculations or sentiments.
Those who advocate zoning and rotation must also acknowledge that such arrangements are largely political understandings rather than legally enforceable agreements. While they can serve as useful mechanisms for fostering inclusion and a sense of belonging among various communities, they should never be elevated above the democratic rights of voters to assess candidates based on competence, performance, experience, and capacity to deliver.
History clearly demonstrates that the idea of serving multiple terms is not alien to Kwara North politics. Therefore, portraying Senator Sadiq Umar’s ambition as a departure from established political realities is both misleading and unfair. If previous political office holders were allowed to seek and secure additional terms without attracting similar outrage, then fairness demands that Senator Sadiq Umar be judged by the same standard.
The debate should therefore move away from emotional appeals and political propaganda to more substantive issues. The real question before the people of Kwara North is not whether Senator Sadiq Umar seeks another term. Rather, it is whether he has justified the confidence reposed in him through quality representation, constituency engagement, legislative effectiveness, and developmental contributions to the district.
These are the criteria that should guide voters in making their decision.
As the political season gathers momentum, stakeholders must exercise restraint and avoid narratives capable of deepening divisions among the people of Kwara North. Healthy political competition should be driven by ideas, achievements, and visions for the future rather than personal attacks or attempts to delegitimize lawful political aspirations.
If Senator Sadiq Umar eventually decides to seek re-election, the ultimate verdict should rest with the electorate. Democracy flourishes when citizens are allowed to freely evaluate candidates and make informed choices at the ballot box. It is through this process—not through orchestrated campaigns of resentment or intimidation—that the true will of the people is expressed.
In the final analysis, fairness requires consistency.
If history has shown that third-term aspirations and multiple-term representations have occurred before in Kwara North, then Senator Sadiq Umar cannot reasonably be portrayed as the first or only politician to pursue such a path.
The conversation should therefore focus less on manufactured controversies and more on performance, capacity, and the collective interests of the people of Kwara North.
Ultimately, the power to decide rests not with political commentators or interest groups, but with the voters themselves.
And in a democracy, their verdict remains supreme.
