When Did Demanding Accountability Become an Offence? A Defence of Rarara’s Right to Ask Questions

By Idris Muhammad Gombe

The seeming outrage that has greeted Rarara’s latest political song says more about his critics than it does about the artist himself.

Accountability Must Apply to Everyone

For years, Sheikh Isa Ali Pantami and his supporters have made integrity, accountability and moral rectitude central themes of their political engagement. They have openly questioned the character of political opponents, challenged their integrity and urged voters to reject individuals they consider morally unfit for public office.

Whether one agrees with their conclusions or not, they have every democratic right to express those views.

It is therefore difficult to understand why the same people who insist that political actors should be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny now appear uncomfortable when similar questions are directed at someone they support.

Accountability cannot be selective. Integrity cannot be situational. Transparency cannot be a weapon used against political opponents and abandoned when the questions become inconvenient.

Rarara Has the Right to Ask Questions

Rarara has not committed a crime by composing a song that asks questions. Political music has, throughout history, served as a powerful instrument of public engagement.

Artists have used music to challenge governments, expose contradictions, question leaders and stimulate public debate. Democracy is richer, not poorer, when artists, journalists and ordinary citizens are free to interrogate those who seek public influence.

The essence of Rarara’s message is simple: if integrity is to remain a benchmark for leadership, then everyone who claims that moral high ground should be prepared to account for it.

Asking questions about how wealth was acquired or seeking clarification on publicly discussed assets is not, in itself, an act of hatred. It is an invitation to transparency. If the answers are straightforward, they should be provided. That is how accountability works in a democratic society.

Attack the Questions, Not the Messenger

What is disappointing is that Pantami’s media supporters have largely focused on attacking the messenger rather than addressing the substance of the questions.

Insults, abuse and character assassination do not answer legitimate concerns. Instead, such tactics can create the impression that some questions are acceptable only when they are directed at political opponents.

A healthier approach would be to address the issues directly, provide facts where necessary and allow the public to make its own judgment.

Gombe Deserves Issue-Based Political Debate

The electorate deserves better than personality cults. Gombe’s future should not revolve around who can shout the loudest on social media or who can silence critics.

The political conversation should be centred on facts, evidence, public records and competing ideas for the development of the state.

Ironically, the reaction to Rarara’s song may have achieved precisely what his critics hoped to prevent. Instead of focusing exclusively on allegations involving Governor Muhammadu Inuwa Yahaya and APC governorship candidate Jamil Isyaku Gwamna, the public is now asking a more fundamental question: should everyone who seeks to influence the political direction of Gombe be held to the same standard of accountability?

That is a healthy development for democracy.

Freedom of Expression Must Apply to Political Artists

Jamil Gwamna has continued to campaign on his vision for Gombe despite repeated personal attacks from political opponents. His supporters have every right to defend him, just as Pantami’s supporters have every right to defend their preferred candidate.

Equally, Rarara has the constitutional and democratic right to express his political opinion through music.

Freedom of expression does not belong only to those whose opinions we like. No democracy can flourish if artists are celebrated when they praise one side but demonised when they question another.

Freedom of expression is tested not when speech is comfortable, but when it is inconvenient.

Questions Should Be Answered With Facts

If Pantami and his supporters genuinely believe in the values of integrity and accountability that they have long advocated, then they should welcome questions, respond with facts and allow the people of Gombe to make an informed judgment.

Political disagreements are inevitable in a democracy. What matters is how society responds to criticism and scrutiny.

After all, accountability is not an insult. It is the foundation of public trust.

Disclaimer: This article is an opinion piece. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of The Bureau Journal.