Prof. Pantami enters the political arena with a formidable national profile, shaped by his tenure as Director-General of the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) and later as Minister of Communications and Digital Economy. Widely regarded as an intellectual with strong academic and administrative credentials, his supporters often point to the digital transformation initiatives and employment opportunities associated with his time in office.
However, beyond these accomplishments lies a more layered and, at times, contentious political reality in Gombe State.
At the heart of the debate is the question of inclusiveness. While admirers highlight the opportunities facilitated during his leadership, critics argue that many of these benefits appeared concentrated within familiar family members, close associates, and individuals from relatively privileged backgrounds. This perception has fueled concerns that his impact did not sufficiently trickle down to ordinary citizens across the state.
Another recurring concern revolves around accessibility and grassroots engagement. In a political environment like Gombe, where leaders are expected to maintain consistent physical presence through condolence visits, community interactions, and participation in local events, Pantami is often perceived as distant. Observers note that his engagements, even during critical moments, were largely outside the state, reinforcing a narrative of limited local connection.
Questions have also been raised about his relationship with key stakeholders, particularly within religious and community leadership structures. Despite his reputation as a respected Islamic scholar, some argue that he has not cultivated broad-based, inclusive ties within local religious circles, an issue attributed largely to perceived inaccessibility and limited engagement.
Interestingly, this sense of disconnect is not only expressed by critics but also echoed in whispers among some former associates, who feel there has been insufficient commitment to the welfare of the broader population, especially the less privileged.
Beyond these concerns, several political commentators have advanced a more critical narrative regarding his leadership style. Some argue that Pantami’s success in public office was significantly driven by the expertise of technocrats around him. They often cite the current Director-General of NITDA, Kashifu Inuwa Abdullahi, as a key figure allegedly instrumental in many of the agency’s achievements during Pantami’s tenure. From this perspective, critics suggest that while he occupied leadership positions, much of the operational innovation may have come from those working behind the scenes.
His academic profile has also not been without controversy. When the Federal University of Technology Owerri conferred on him the rank of Professor, the decision sparked widespread debate across Nigeria’s academic community. Critics questioned whether due process and established scholarly criteria were fully observed, noting that the conferment of such a title typically follows rigorous academic progression. The backlash from segments of academia and public commentators introduced further scrutiny into his intellectual credentials, raising broader questions about standards and institutional integrity.
In the political sphere, Pantami’s past public statements have also resurfaced as a point of contention. Several commentators recall instances where he strongly criticised politics and politicians at times using harsh rhetoric, including prayers and condemnations directed at political actors and parties. For some observers, this raises a fundamental question of consistency: whether someone who once publicly denounced politics should now seek elective office within the same system.
Equally significant is the perception of his support base within Gombe, particularly among the youth. Several analysts argue that he faces notable challenges in mobilising grassroots support, with some pointing to limited enthusiasm on social and traditional media platforms. Among segments of the youth Population, there are claims of selective engagement, with individuals without elite or influential backgrounds feeling overlooked when seeking opportunities, including employment support.
These cumulative perceptions, ranging from elitism and limited accessibility to questions about consistency and grassroots appeal, have shaped a broader narrative within the state. Many political observers conclude that while Pantami may excel in technocratic or advisory roles, the demands of elective politics, especially at the state level, require a different kind of engagement: one rooted in constant presence, emotional intelligence, and deep grassroots connection.
In politics, perception often becomes reality. And in the case of Prof. Pantami, the central challenge may not lie in his national achievements, but in bridging the widening gap between reputation and relatability at home.
Ultimately, as the political landscape in Gombe State continues to evolve ahead of future elections, the question remains whether a strong national profile can effectively translate into local acceptance or whether the disconnect will prove too significant to overcome.
Kuna writes from Gombe State, Nigeria.
