By, Washington Osa Osifo (Esq),Ph.D
The interview by Peter Obi with Seun Okinbaloye of Channels Television has crafted a narrative of his time in the office as governor of Anambra State, his vision policy on various aspects of the nation in the course of his watch, and on-schedule criticism of the Tinubu government. Positioning his legacies in Anambra and his presidential aspiration in a discourse of fiscal responsibility, educational transformation, and anti-corruption, Obi wants to frame himself as a thrifty technocrat and moral contrast to the status quo in politics, who can offer hope to the nation and deliver a new Nigeria. Nevertheless, his assertions, especially those on debt, education, legacies of what has been done, and the transformation schedules in the country, ought to be looked into more closely. This counterargument takes a critical look at such assertions, which resonate with institutional statistics that are verifiable and the socio-macroeconomic milieu against the performance of the Tinubu administration and its policy inclination.
False Claims on Educational Reform and WAEC Rankings:
Obi has always touted his achievements in education in Anambra State, claiming that Anambra was top in the West African Examinations Council (WAEC) performance in his government. Nevertheless, such a statement is deceptive. WAEC has come out to assert that it does not rank states. The ranking referred to by Obi is one that is unofficially compiled by aggregating and does not reflect widespread anomalies. The official release by its spokesperson, Moyosola Adesina (October 2023) and head of the national office, Patrick Areghan (August 2022) has made it clear that WAEC does not rank the performance of states in its examination and that the reporting that it has done so is baseless and politically induced ((The Guardian, 2023; ThisDay Live, 2022).
Most importantly, examination malpractice thrived in Anambra State when Obi was the governor. According to reports made in 2014, there were more than 480 known miracle centres, secret venues where massive cheating was realised in the WAEC, NECO, and JAMB exams around this time. When Obi was succeeded by Governor Willie Obiano, he immediately embarked on closing down these centres as soon as he got into office (Vanguard, 2014). This backdrop calls into question the whole idea of a transformation in education as claimed by Obi and also indicates that the apparent gains in performance might have been the result of sham performance rather than a real change. Although Obi made some investments in educational infrastructure, such as science labs and computers, the quality and integrity of educational outcomes under his tenure remain highly disputed.
Inconsistency about the Abacha Regime Appointment:
In the interview, Obi vehemently denied that he had ever worked with or even met with the late military Head of State, General Sani Abacha. He stated that all he did was being a businessman among the individuals consulted to decongest ports in Nigeria. But in a debate in the 2023 campaign organised by the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), Obi justified that he met Abacha, and the late Head of State instructed then Finance Minister, Anthony Ani to appoint him as chairman of the port decongestion committee. This hypocrisy negates the actuality of Obi in the framework of his moral lucidity and accessibility. His unwillingness to accept even basic compliance with the Abacha government can only be taken as a political move, and it begs the question of how much he is ready to control the facts in a case of electoral advantage.
Savings and the Myth of a Debt-Free Handover:
Obi has reiterated on numerous occasions that he had handed over great savings to Anambra State, about 36 billion Naira and 150 million dollars. He uses this as evidence of his financial control and tradition of good government. This assertion is, however, contested. Governor Obiano took to correcting the story, telling the audience that obligations due to contractors and service providers were much more than the cash reserves Obi gave over. In addition, most of the so-called savings were stuck in tied investments, i.e., in shares of the SABMiller brewery, and could not be easily accessed as a source of use. Besides, the current Governor of the State, Charles Soludo in 2022, claimed that the investment is “worth next to nothing”. Soludo lamented heavily on the investment made by Peter Obi in International Breweries PLC, which was once Intafact Beverages Limited. After the press announced that the administration of Obi had put in a little over 1.96billion naira (roughly $12.6 million at the 2012 exchange rate) and had turned that stake into an allegedly $100 million worth of value, Soludo rejected the story. In an interview with the Channels Television, he said:
“With what I have seen today, the value of those investments is worth next to nothing. So, let’s leave that aside” (The Cable, 2022). This statement of Soludo is a direct contradiction to the idea Obi expresses that the investment in the brewery was a success story and a demonstration of the power of state-engendered wealth creation. It highlights the fact that the current value of equity at that point was small and arguably nothing at all, not the revolutionary asset Obi was touting.
It is also evident in the Office of Debt Management records that during the time Obi left as governor, Anambra had both internal and external debts. According to the Debt Figures from the Debt Management Office (DMO), the most authoritative data on subnational debt in Nigeria, Anambra State owed an External Debt of (as of December 31, 2013):
$30,323,574.40, while the state Domestic Debt (as of December 31, 2013) stood at, ₦3,025,797,046.67, this record shows Peter Obi was still in office as at the time frame. The data above also reflect the debt position of Anambra State less than three months before Obi left office on March 17, 2014. The DMO’s reports are not self-declared by states, but are centrally verified, lending them significant credibility.
(DMO Subnational Debt Profile, 2013).
In such a manner, he depicts a debt-free handover out of context, prudent fiscal management only has value when combined with productive investment; Obi years, though being sparing in expenditure, never provided massive infrastructure projects, industrial projects, or even economic diversification projects that would have multiplied over the years. The attitude of Obi in making governance merely cash savings is a narrow idea of fiscal prudence. The real financial management implies not the hoarding of the excess, but investing in the productive infrastructure and the long-term capital projects. Anambra was a recipient of low-level road
development, and investment in health care, and education under Obi, but the state did not experience any form of industrialisation push or job creation factor, which does not augur well with his current campaign theme of taking Nigeria beyond its consumption era to a production era.
Obi’s Security Record and IPOB Ambiguities:
Obi mentioned his effective performance in curbing such serious crimes as the bank robbery and his keenness on the community policing matter. Although crime in the urban areas was reduced during his administration, security in rural settings was still a problem. The kidnappings, armed robbery, and violent protests were common, with border towns being the major cause. More importantly, Obi is yet to assume a strict position on the separatist organisation IPOB (Indigenous People of Biafra), despite the growing violence in the southeast. His reluctance to speak out against the actions of the group categorically, as he frequently sidles into this, or that indistinct statement about systematic unfairness, poses a threat of letting extremism pass by default. Leadership in any nation should be bold enough to take unpopular but principled positions, especially on matters that concern unity in a country. A presidential candidate is not allowed to pick issues on matters concerning insecurity along ethno-regional lines.
False Claims on Borrowing under Tinubu:
Obi also claimed that Tinubu had borrowed more than all the administrations since 1999 combined, as they increased the public debt to 180 trillion naira compared to the previous amount of 80 trillion naira. This assertion is wrong in magnitude and content. In May 2023, Nigeria had a total amount of 87.38 trillion in terms of public debt, according to the DMO. The figure increased to 134 trillion by June 2025 (DMO, 2025). This was artificially high in naira terms as a result of the floating of the naira, the re-pricing of extant foreign currency-based debts. The real value of external debt in Nigeria was reduced when it dropped in dollar terms to $41.6 billion in comparison to its previous value of $43.2 billion during the same time.
In addition, the Tinubu government has placed emphasis on the concessional and programmatic loans with regard to reform plans, including the $2.5 billion World Bank facility to cushion the subsidy exit plan, social transfers, and tax reform. The nature of these reforms and the structural readjustments necessary to stabilise the fiscal direction of Nigeria are conspicuously missing in the macroeconomic justification given by Obi.
On Economic Vision and Structural Realities:
The economic plan of Obi rests on the agricultural sector, SMEs, and reforms in the power sector, which are generally good tactics. His proposals, however, are not specific in operations. As an example, one of the key points is to create all types of agricultural produce at the same time, which shows the lack of priority. The agricultural economy of Nigeria needs to actively develop the value-chain approach in main crops, which would be promoted by irrigation facilities, mechanisation, and storage. On the same note, although Obi is correct to cite Egypt’s power reforms, he does not recognise the peculiarities of Nigeria, including problems of gas supply shortages, vandalism, and regulatory hold-up. One logical solution to these structural restraints is the Siemens Power Project that came up under the Tinubu government with a 25,000 MW power generation target by 2027. Obi micromanages this situation when he vows to keep checks on power generation daily, and that is not part of the strategy of being an executive.
Unrealistic Timelines and Populist Desperation:
On many occasions, Obi has emphasised the idea that economic problems of Nigeria can be resolved within two to four years or even during a term of presidency. These are politically appealing arguments because they are economically unfeasible. Power sector dilapidation, over-reliance on oil, weak food systems and institutional inefficiency are just a few problems which have been building up in the backyard of Nigeria over the past decades. The power reforms in Egypt, frequently cited by Obi, required over five years to bring into equilibrium, that is, billions of dollars of foreign direct investment, a modern grid, and fuel diversification. Likewise, proper agricultural transformation also requires land reforms, mechanisation, extension of irrigation, as well as value chains, in addition to which the period of two budget intervals is simply insufficient.
With promises that he will fight insecurity by issuing a declaration of war against the vice and abating power cuts by overseeing the process himself, Obi is risking giving the impression that he can govern the state as a personality cult instead of as an institutionalised process of delegation and inter-agency synergy. Leadership needs vision, as well as humility before the complicatedness of structure.
Compassion, Governance Optics, and Selective Outrage:
Obi slams President Tinubu over his move to St. Lucia “when things are not going well in the country in terms of security, and injecting infrastructure works when people are going through national tragedies”. The examples so given are downright emotional and deceptive. The St. Lucia visit was a diplomatic visit and not a vacation, as it was meant to give a bilateral basis for investment. Commissioning of infrastructure is a normal aspect of governance, and it is not a sign of insensitivity. In addition, the Tinubu government has also enhanced its defence outlay to 4.9 trillion naira in its 2025 national budget (Premium Times, 2024) and deployed security programs to war-prone areas. As long as insecurity is high, the element of compassion is being overlooked in favour of seeing a simple problem of moral absolutes in complex structural failures.
Coalition Politics and the Myth of the Single-Term Messiah:
The insistence of Obi on one term of four years, which is based on an unwritten constitutional agreement to have a rotational presidency form, sounds politically expedient. The political history of Nigeria is awash with botched promises of power rotation. His being a loyal Labour Party and taking the coalition of Action Democratic Congress (ADC) also confuses his political stand more. In addition, his unwillingness to cooperate as a vice-presidential nominee or build pragmatic coalitions can make him lose possible partners and break the opposition steam. Leadership is not just a matter of virtue posing, but it is also a matter of effective coalition building.
Conclusion:
The interview with Peter Obi is an interesting story of ethical leadership and financial revolution. But a more detailed analysis shows that there is an alarming trend of misrepresentation of facts, exaggeration of successes, and exaggerated future optimism. Hard evidence against him shows that his arguments on education, fiscal legacy and security are weaker than they claim to be. His complaints against the Tinubu administration neglect economic circumstances and policy details. After failing to stir his people during a time of crisis, Nigeria does not need dreamy leadership, but realistic, effective, and evidence-based leadership, with pragmatically thought-out policies. Although the rhetoric by Obi was good at mobilising feelings, it is lacking in operational content that is needed to steer Nigeria away from its endemic problems.
Washington Osa Osifo,(Esq), Ph.D