While many are wondering why critics of Governor Dauda Lawal appear increasingly agitated by his growing influence in Zamfara State and Nigeria’s political space, the answer may lie in the administration’s expanding visibility and engagements at both national and international levels.
Governor Lawal’s inclusion in President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s foreign trips should not be viewed through the lens of political suspicion. Rather, it should be seen as an opportunity for Zamfara to gain strategic visibility, attract investment and establish partnerships in agriculture, mining, infrastructure, security and other critical sectors.
At a time when Zamfara is seeking to move away from its reputation as one of Nigeria’s poorest states, every opportunity to expose the state to international investors and development partners should be welcomed.
It is against this background that the recent social media publication titled “ZAMFARA, Hijacked by Thieves!!” deserves scrutiny. The publication makes several serious allegations against Governor Dauda Lawal and members of his administration, but appears to present unverified claims as established facts.
Such allegations should not be allowed to become accepted simply because they are repeatedly circulated online. In a democracy, governments must be subjected to scrutiny, but criticism should be based on verifiable facts rather than speculation, exaggeration or political hostility.
Governor Lawal Is Attracting Investment, Not Junketing
One of the major allegations made against Governor Lawal concerns his foreign travels and the amount purportedly spent on them.
The question, however, should not simply be how much was spent on official trips. It should also be what Zamfara gained from those engagements.
Governor Lawal has consistently sought to position Zamfara as an investment destination, particularly in agriculture and solid minerals. One notable development cited by the administration is the launch of the $200 million Zamfara Lithium Mining and Processing Plant operated by ZAM Mining Co. Ltd in Boko Village, Zurmi Local Government Area, involving Chinese investors and other partners.
Whether every foreign engagement ultimately produces an investment is a matter that can and should be independently assessed. But dismissing international engagements as mere “junketing” ignores the importance of diplomatic and investment outreach in attracting capital to a state with enormous agricultural and mineral potential.
The administration has also maintained that its financial activities are captured in official budgets and budget performance reports. Therefore, where questions are raised about expenditure, the appropriate response is to examine the relevant records rather than rely on figures circulated on social media.
Claims About Aides’ Spending Require Evidence
The allegations concerning purportedly extravagant allocations to the governor’s aides are equally serious.
If specific sums were actually disbursed to particular officials, the burden should be to produce documentary evidence showing the approvals, beneficiaries and purpose of such expenditure.
Throwing large figures into the public space without supporting documentation does little to advance accountability.
The same standard should apply to the government: if the administration says the figures are false, it should make the relevant records available for independent scrutiny. Public accountability is best served when allegations and denials are both tested against documentary evidence.
Contracts and the ACReSAL Programme
Another major area of criticism concerns contracts allegedly awarded by the Zamfara State Government.
The accusation that rural development contracts automatically amount to a mechanism for looting is difficult to sustain without evidence showing inflated costs, non-execution, abandonment, overpayment or diversion of funds.
The Agro-Climatic Resilience in Semi-Arid Landscapes (ACReSAL) programme, for example, is designed to address environmental and agricultural challenges. The Zamfara administration has cited interventions including support for farmers, provision of improved seeds and agricultural inputs, as well as flood and erosion control projects.
Where projects are physically located, their execution can be verified. Where concerns exist over procurement, the relevant procurement documents, contract sums and completion certificates can also be examined.
That is the standard that should guide public debate.
The “Outsiders” Argument
The claim that more than 90 per cent of contracts are allegedly being awarded to outsiders also requires evidence.
There is nothing wrong with demanding that local businesses benefit from government spending. Indeed, indigenous participation should be encouraged whenever local companies possess the capacity to deliver projects to the required standards.
But indigenisation should not mean awarding multi-billion-naira projects to companies simply because they are locally owned when they lack the technical or financial capacity to execute them.
A government has a responsibility to deliver quality roads, hospitals, schools, water infrastructure and other public projects. Competence and value for money must therefore remain central considerations.
The administration has also maintained that local labour should constitute a significant proportion of the workforce on projects, thereby ensuring that government expenditure circulates within the local economy.
Security Spending Must Be Examined Fairly
Perhaps the most sensitive allegation concerns the alleged diversion or embezzlement of funds allocated to security.
Security is an area where allegations must be treated with particular caution because security personnel and institutions are operating under extremely difficult circumstances.
The Lawal administration has made security a major component of its governance agenda and has established the Community Protection Guard while also advocating greater constitutional roles for state governments in security management.
The 2025 budget, according to government figures, allocated about N32.28 billion to security interventions, representing roughly six per cent of the N545 billion budget.
Whether that money has been properly utilised is a legitimate question. But the appropriate way to answer it is through audits, budget performance reports, legislative oversight and other established accountability mechanisms—not through unsupported social media accusations.
Development Should Be Judged by Evidence
There is no doubt that Governor Dauda Lawal’s administration should be subjected to rigorous scrutiny. A government that receives public funds must be accountable to the people.
But accountability cuts both ways.
Those making allegations should provide evidence, while the government should be prepared to publish documents and allow independent verification of its claims.
Zamfara residents can see the roads, health facilities, schools, solar projects, agricultural interventions and other infrastructure being undertaken across the state. Whether these projects represent value for money is a question that can be answered through proper evaluation.
What should be avoided is reducing every government project to either “success” or “looting” based solely on political affiliation.
Governor Lawal is a former investment banker, and his administration has consistently projected financial prudence as one of its governing principles. If anyone has evidence that the governor personally owns companies receiving contracts from the Zamfara State Government, such evidence should be made public. Specific names, company records, contract documents and transaction details would provide a much stronger basis for investigation than generalised accusations.
Zamfara Deserves Facts, Not Political Propaganda
The people of Zamfara deserve a government that can be questioned and held accountable. They also deserve a public conversation anchored in facts.
The administration of Governor Dauda Lawal should not be shielded from criticism simply because supporters believe it is performing well. At the same time, critics should not be allowed to present unverified allegations as established facts.
The proper response to questions about government expenditure is transparency. The proper response to allegations of corruption is evidence. The proper response to claims of abandoned projects is physical verification.
Zamfara is too important to become a battleground for misinformation.
The governor’s supporters should therefore resist the temptation to dismiss every criticism as political, while his critics should equally resist the temptation to manufacture conclusions without evidence.
Ultimately, the administration will be judged not by social media campaigns, political propaganda or counter-propaganda, but by the quality of governance it delivers, the transparency of its finances, the sustainability of its projects and the measurable improvement in the lives of Zamfara’s people.
That is where the real argument should be settled.
By Oladapo Sofowora
