By (WALBE OGAK)
In recent days, social media, particularly Facebook, has been awash with posts circulating old comments attributed to Shabul Mazadu, in which he was critical of the political activities and camp surrounding Professor Nentawe Yilwatda.
While the posts are being presented by some as evidence of inconsistency, a closer understanding of Shabul Mazadu's personality, political philosophy and convictions suggests a different interpretation.
Those who know Shabul closely describe him as a man who does not pretend, sit on the fence or conceal his opinions for political convenience. He is known to speak his mind, even when doing so is unpopular or politically inconvenient.
For Shabul, political loyalty has never meant abandoning personal conviction. His supporters argue that he has consistently demonstrated the willingness to defend what he believes is right and to challenge what he considers to be wrong.
One of the defining characteristics attributed to Shabul is his unwillingness to compromise his principles, particularly on issues concerning Plateau State.
At the time he expressed reservations about Professor Nentawe Yilwatda and some members of his political camp, his position was shaped by concerns arising from previous political engagements. In particular, there were individuals around the political structure whom he did not trust because of their past actions and relationships.
It is therefore important, in assessing his earlier statements, to understand the political circumstances under which they were made rather than simply reproducing isolated comments from the past.
Political positions are often shaped by prevailing circumstances, relationships, experiences and available information. As circumstances change, individuals are entitled to reassess their positions.
The evolution of Shabul Mazadu's position is also consistent with the broader reality of Nigerian politics, where political alliances and opinions frequently change.
Across the country, individuals and groups who once vehemently opposed President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, including those who criticised the Muslim-Muslim presidential ticket, have subsequently become supporters of his administration and, in some cases, beneficiaries of government programmes.
This does not necessarily mean that their earlier positions were dishonest. It may simply demonstrate that politics is dynamic and that political actors can change their minds when circumstances, policies or perceptions change.
The same principle should therefore apply to Shabul Mazadu.
Shabul's current support for Professor Nentawe Yilwatda should, therefore, not automatically be interpreted as a betrayal of his earlier convictions.
Rather, it can be viewed as a position arising from a reassessment of the Professor's leadership qualities, humanitarian interventions and approach to political relationships.
Supporters of the Professor point particularly to what they describe as his humanitarian disposition, forgiving spirit and willingness to engage across political divides.
For many Plateau people who once criticised Nentawe but now support him, the argument is simple: leadership should ultimately be judged by actions and character rather than by yesterday's political disagreements.
Shabul's position, therefore, may be less about abandoning his principles and more about responding to what he now considers a different political reality.
The political journey of Professor Nentawe Yilwatda itself provides an interesting backdrop to this development.
A figure who once faced significant political opposition and criticism has continued to build a broader political profile, with supporters increasingly portraying him as a leader capable of transcending previous political divisions.
For those who now support him, his journey represents the familiar political metaphor of “the rejected stone becoming the cornerstone.”
The lesson from the unfolding political narrative is that political opinions should not necessarily be permanently frozen in time. People can disagree, criticise, reassess and ultimately support the same person they once opposed.
Beyond the controversy surrounding old Facebook posts, the more important question should be whether political actors are willing to put the broader interests of Plateau above personal grievances and historical disagreements.
Shabul Mazadu's current position provides an opportunity to reflect on the changing nature of Plateau politics. If his support for Professor Nentawe Yilwatda is genuinely based on conviction arising from what he now considers positive leadership attributes, then it should be understood within that context.
Political maturity is not necessarily demonstrated by refusing to change one's mind. Sometimes, it is demonstrated by the courage to reassess one's position when circumstances and evidence change.
For Shabul Mazadu, the message appears clear: he is not pretending, he is not sitting on the fence, and he is not selling his conscience. He is making a political choice based on his present conviction.
And in the ever-changing theatre of Nigerian politics, yesterday's critic can become today's supporter—not necessarily because principles have been abandoned, but because perceptions, circumstances and convictions have evolved.
SHALOM
Walbe Ogak
07036573313
