The Pantami Double Standard: When Political Convenience Changes the Narrative
By Danjuma Kala.
There is something more important than eloquence in leadership. It is consistency.
A man’s word should be his bond. In leadership, words matter because they speak to character, credibility and trust. A true leader does not say one thing when circumstances favour him and another when those circumstances change. He does not give in to double standards simply because political interests have shifted.
A leader may change his mind when circumstances change. He may revise an opinion when confronted with new facts. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Indeed, the ability to reconsider a position can be a mark of maturity.
But when the facts remain substantially the same and the political circumstances change, citizens are entitled to ask an uncomfortable question:
Did the facts change, or did the ambition change?
That question has become increasingly relevant in Gombe State following the dramatic political repositioning of Professor Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami.
For years, Professor Pantami was not merely a member of the All Progressives Congress; he publicly associated himself with the administration of Governor Muhammadu Inuwa Yahaya and spoke positively about its performance.
On 25 November 2021, while visiting Governor Yahaya, Pantami reportedly commended the governor’s “developmental strides and commitment” to Gombe State. He prayed for the governor to continue receiving wisdom as he led the state towards prosperity, unity and peace.
That was not an isolated compliment.
As recently as 27 January 2026, Professor Pantami congratulated Governor Yahaya following the conferment of an honorary doctorate on the governor and described the recognition as reflecting “measurable achievements” recorded under the Yahaya administration, particularly in education and health.
Pantami highlighted the recruitment of 1,000 teachers, improvements in students’ WAEC performance and the development of modern educational facilities, particularly in rural and underserved communities.
These are not the words of someone describing a failed government.
Then came 8 February 2026.
While revalidating his APC membership and positioning himself for the governorship contest, Pantami publicly described his relationship with Governor Inuwa Yahaya as cordial and, significantly, said he had supported the Yahaya administration since its inception.
That statement deserves to be remembered.
He did not say he tolerated the administration.
He did not say he reluctantly worked with it.
He said he had supported it from the beginning.
Even as late as April 2026, Pantami was accompanying Governor Yahaya on project inspection and commissioning visits across parts of Akko Local Government Area.
Then politics intervened.
First, Professor Pantami rejected the APC consensus arrangement that produced Dr. Jamil Isyaku Gwamna as the preferred governorship candidate.
The matter subsequently proceeded to the APC governorship primary.
And when the votes were counted, the verdict was emphatic: Dr. Jamil Isyaku Gwamna polled 247,161 votes, while Professor Isa Ali Pantami received 12,120 votes.
That was not a narrow defeat. It was a decisive rejection at the primary.
Pantami disputed the process, but the political outcome remained. The consensus he had rejected was followed by a primary election in which Dr. Jamil Gwamna overwhelmingly emerged as the APC governorship candidate.
Within days, Professor Pantami crossed over to the PDP and secured its governorship ticket.
And suddenly, the language about Gombe changed.
The administration whose “developmental strides” he had praised became the government under which he now painted a completely different picture of the state.
The administration whose “measurable achievements” he had celebrated was now being presented through an entirely different political lens.
The government he said he had supported since its inception suddenly became the government whose record formed the basis of his argument for political change.
That sequence is important.
Before the consensus: support for the administration.
After rejecting the consensus: a primary election.
At the primary: Jamil Gwamna, 247,161 votes. Isa Ali Pantami, 12,120 votes.
After the defeat: departure from the APC.
After joining the PDP: a dramatically different assessment of Gombe State.
What exactly changed? Gombe State or Professor Pantami’s political fortunes?
After receiving the PDP ticket, Pantami declared that Gombe was “the third poorest state” in Nigeria and said the people were living in “abject poverty”, citing the National Multidimensional Poverty Index.
And this is where the contradiction in his political messaging becomes particularly striking.
The same Gombe State that Professor Pantami himself publicly celebrated as Number 3 in Nigeria in ease of doing business is now, according to his new political narrative, the third poorest state in Nigeria.
Number three then.
Number three now.
But two completely different political narratives.
When Professor Pantami was in the APC and working closely with the Inuwa Yahaya administration, Gombe’s ranking was presented as evidence of progress and something worthy of public celebration.
Today, standing on the platform of the PDP and seeking to defeat the same political establishment he once supported, the Number 3 he emphasises is no longer about progress. It is about poverty.
Of course, ease of doing business and multidimensional poverty are different indices. But that is not the argument.
The argument is consistency.
The question is why Professor Pantami’s public assessment of Gombe appears to have changed so dramatically after his political fortunes changed.
Where was this description of Gombe when he was seeking the APC governorship ticket?
Where was it when he praised Governor Inuwa Yahaya’s “developmental strides”?
Where was it when he celebrated what he called the administration’s “measurable achievements”?
Where was it when he publicly declared that he had supported the Inuwa Yahaya administration since its inception?
And where was it when, only weeks before the APC primary, he accompanied the governor to inspect and commission government projects?
The timeline speaks for itself.
Before the political disagreement, there was praise.
Before the primary, there was support.
After the defeat, there was departure.
And after the departure came a radically different description of Gombe.
So the question remains:
What changed? The statistics, the state or Professor Pantami’s politics?
The questions do not end there.
Was Professor Pantami wrong when he praised Governor Inuwa Yahaya?
Was he wrong when he spoke of measurable achievements in education and health?
Was he wrong when he commended the governor’s developmental strides?
Was he wrong when he declared that he had supported the administration since its inception?
Was he wrong when he publicly celebrated Gombe’s ease of doing business ranking?
Or has his interpretation of Gombe changed simply because his political address changed?
The contradictions become even more striking when one considers his new embrace of the PDP.
After receiving the PDP governorship ticket, Pantami praised the party’s previous 16 years in Gombe, saying the state experienced major development under PDP administrations and promising to build on that legacy.
This raises another serious question of consistency.
For years, Pantami belonged to the APC and was publicly critical of previous PDP governments. More significantly, Professor Pantami himself cursed the PDP and described it as an “infidel party.” Today, the same PDP has become the platform whose 16 years in government he praises, whose record he celebrates, whose ticket he carries and upon which he seeks to govern Gombe State.
The contradiction is difficult to ignore.
How does a party once condemned and described by Professor Pantami himself as an “infidel party” suddenly become the party whose 16 years in government are worthy of celebration and whose platform is now suitable for his governorship ambition?
Again, people are entitled to ask:
What changed? The PDP, Professor Pantami’s convictions or his political interests?
Yesterday, APC was the platform.
Yesterday, Inuwa Yahaya had developmental strides.
Yesterday, his administration had measurable achievements.
Yesterday, Professor Pantami supported that administration from inception.
Yesterday, Gombe’s position in ease of doing business was worth celebrating.
Today, PDP is the platform.
Today, the party he once cursed and described as an “infidel party” is the platform whose 16 year record he praises and whose governorship ticket he carries.
Today, Gombe is presented as the third poorest state.
Today, the political vocabulary has changed.
This is why elections must be about more than speeches, academic titles or the size of political rallies. Elections are fundamentally about trust.
And trust begins with the value of a person’s word.
A man’s word should be his bond.
Gombe people must ask themselves whether they can entrust their future to a leader whose assessment of their state appears capable of changing almost as quickly as his political platform.
A true leader should not embrace double standards. The standard applied when things are going your way should remain the standard when they are not. What is celebrated as progress today should not conveniently become evidence of failure tomorrow merely because political circumstances have changed.
Consistency does not mean refusing to criticise a government one once supported. Circumstances can change. New information can emerge. Political disagreements can happen.
But credible leadership demands an explanation.
If Professor Pantami now holds such a dramatically different assessment of the Inuwa Yahaya administration, he owes the people an explanation of when he reached that conclusion, what changed, and why his earlier public assessments were so different.
Because public records do not disappear when politicians change parties.
Videos do not forget.
Newspaper archives do not forget.
The internet does not forget.
And most importantly, the people of Gombe should not forget.
Leadership requires more than knowing what to say at the right political moment.
It requires the courage to maintain the same standard when circumstances change, when political interests change, when alliances change and, especially, when the ticket does not go your way.
A man’s word should remain his bond when it is convenient and when it is not. A true leader must be held to one standard, not two.
That is the test of consistency.
That is the test of credibility.
That is the test of leadership.
And before Professor Isa Ali Pantami asks the people of Gombe to entrust him with their future, those are questions he must answer.
Kala a public affairs commentator, writes from Gombe.
