The Case for Supporting Nasir El-Rufai: Why Some Northern Leaders and Nigerians Continue to Back Him

By Umar Usman Duguri

As political discussions intensify ahead of Nigeria’s next electoral cycle, former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai remains one of the country’s most prominent and closely scrutinized political figures. Supporters view him as a reform-minded leader willing to make difficult decisions, while critics continue to raise concerns about aspects of his record and leadership style. Such divergent views are a natural feature of a healthy democracy.

For those who continue to support El-Rufai, their case is largely based on his experience in public administration, his record of pursuing reforms, and his willingness to implement policies that were often politically unpopular but, in their view, necessary for long-term development.

One of the strongest arguments advanced by his supporters is his extensive experience in government. El-Rufai has served as Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, and Governor of Kaduna State for two terms. Supporters argue that these positions exposed him to the complexities of governance at both the federal and state levels, equipping him with valuable administrative experience.

His tenure in Kaduna State is frequently cited as evidence of his commitment to infrastructure development. Roads, schools, healthcare facilities, and urban renewal projects featured prominently during his administration. Supporters contend that these investments reflected a deliberate effort to improve public services and modernize the state.

Education reform is another area often highlighted by his supporters. His administration invested in school infrastructure, teacher recruitment, and curriculum improvements. While some of these policies generated controversy, supporters maintain that they were intended to improve learning outcomes and address longstanding weaknesses in the education sector.

Supporters also point to his emphasis on fiscal discipline and public sector reform. They argue that his administration sought to improve internally generated revenue, strengthen financial management, and enhance efficiency within government institutions. In their view, these reforms demonstrated a commitment to long-term sustainability rather than short-term political gain.

Another reason many supporters continue to back El-Rufai is his reputation for taking difficult decisions. They argue that effective leadership sometimes requires implementing reforms that may initially face resistance but are designed to deliver long-term benefits. To them, this willingness to make unpopular decisions reflects political courage.

Supporters further argue that El-Rufai has consistently advocated for constitutional and governance reforms, including restructuring and greater devolution of powers. They believe these positions demonstrate a commitment to strengthening Nigeria’s federal system and improving governance.

Within Northern politics, some supporters regard him as an articulate voice capable of engaging with national issues beyond narrow regional interests. They argue that his policy-driven approach and active participation in public debate distinguish him from many contemporary politicians.

That said, supporters also acknowledge that no public official has a flawless record. El-Rufai’s tenure attracted criticism over issues including security, labour disputes, and the implementation of certain government policies. These concerns remain part of the public record and should be carefully considered by voters alongside the achievements cited by his supporters.

Ultimately, whether El-Rufai deserves future political support is a decision for Nigerian voters, political stakeholders, and party members. The most responsible approach is to assess his record comprehensively—recognizing both achievements and shortcomings—rather than relying solely on partisan narratives.

Nigeria’s democracy is strengthened when political leaders are evaluated based on evidence, policy proposals, respect for democratic institutions, and their capacity to address the country’s pressing challenges. Supporters believe El-Rufai meets many of these criteria, while critics disagree. It is through informed public debate and the ballot box—not rhetoric alone—that such competing claims should be tested.