Lagos State Governor , Babajide Sanwo-Olu has lashed out at Mr Peter Obi, of the Labour Party, regarding his recent comments on Nigeria under President Bola Tinubu.

Sanwo-Olu reacted on his X, titled ‘Factually Addressing Mr. Peter Obi’s Criticism of Nigeria at Johns Hopkins University,’ urges Mr Obi to bridle his tongue by not speaking injuriously about his country and the current leadership under President Tinubu.

The statement reads:

“On Thursday, April 24, 2025, former Governor Peter Obi, the Labour Party presidential candidate for the 2023 election, was at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, where he made several disparaging comments about Nigeria.

He made the unflattering remarks not just about the incumbent Nigerian government, but also about Nigeria.

I also find Mr. Obi’s pattern of behaviour disturbing. When prominent Nigerians go overseas, they ought to project Nigeria positively.

They do not have to do that for the government. But we all owe a duty to market Nigeria on the global stage rather than de-market her.

On Thursday, April 24, 2025, former Governor Peter Obi, the Labour Party presidential candidate for the 2023 election, was at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, where he made several disparaging comments about Nigeria.

That is what true patriotism is about. Because Mr. Obi focused on poverty and said that the current administration’s policies are making Nigerians poorer, I will concentrate on that.

Any leader can fight poverty generationally by promoting education, improving healthcare, providing credit, and granting access to land.

Now, I find it somewhat ironic that a man like Mr. Obi, who did not build a single school or a stand alone hospital throughout his eight-year tenure as Governor of Anambra or sustainably provide credit facilities, would criticise the Government of Nigeria, which is actively doing that.

I say this because the President of Nigeria, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is my predecessor, and as Governor of Lagos and now President of Nigeria, has built over 200 schools and provided student loans to more than 200,000 undergraduates of Nigerian tertiary institutions.

In less than two years, he has provided over half a billion dollars in credit facilities to small and medium-scale enterprises. While he was Governor of Lagos State between 1999 and 2007, the President reduced poverty by more than 46%.

There is every reason to believe that, based on what he did as Governor of Lagos, he will repeat the same feat at the federal level. After all, the best predictor of the future is the past.

But let us examine the messenger, not just the message, and look at the issuer as well as the issues. Mr. Obi talks a good game. But was he able to reduce poverty while he governed Anambra?

Perhaps we can let the facts speak for themselves. Under Peter Obi as a two term Anambra Governor, poverty in Anambra increased.

It did not reduce. Before Peter Obi became Anambra Governor on Thursday, June 14, 2007, the poverty rate in Anambra was 41.4%.

But after only two years in office, the poverty rate in Anambra jumped to 53.7%.

But the interesting thing is that five years after Peter Obi left office, his successor, Willie Obiano, reduced the poverty rate in Anambra from almost 60% to 14.8%.

As such, I am not sure that Mr. Obi is morally well placed to make the alarming claims he made about Nigeria at Johns Hopkins.

Mr. Obi contributed to the increase in poverty in Nigeria. Governor Tinubu, as he then was, was responsible for lifting millions out of poverty.

Being that that is the case, who should criticise who?”

WHAT PETER OBI SAID AT JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

At Johns Hopkins University, USA, Peter Obi was invited to speak on “Politics and Change in Nigeria” from Professor Peter Lewis, the famous author of “Growing Apart: comparing Indonesia and Nigeria”.

Peter Obi commented on his X: In discussing this very critical issue, which directly impacts the direction of a nation, I pointed out that the failure of a nation depends largely on its Political Leadership. Competent, capable and compassionate political leadership, with integrity, will help nations to achieve sustainable growth and development.

In my speech, I tried to assess 3 of our comparable nations – China, Vietnam and Indonesia, from 1990 till date.
In 1990, the year the measurement of the Human Development Index (HDI) was started, these 3 comparable nations, including Nigeria, were all classified under the medium category of the HDI measurement. 35 years later, 3 of these nations have moved up to the High category of HDI while Nigeria has fallen into the low category.

Within the same period of 35 years, from 1990 to 2025, the GDP Per Capita of these comparable nations have all improved. As of 1990, while Nigeria had a GDP per capita of $556, China had $317, Indonesia had $578, and Vietnam had only $99.

Nigeria, obviously, had higher GDP per capita than China, while Vietnam had less than one-fifth of Nigeria’s per capita.

Today, Nigeria’s per capita is about one-fifth of Indonesia’s ($5000) and Vietnam’s (4400) GDP per capita and below one-tenth of China’s (1300) GDP per capita.

In the area of poverty, Nigeria with about 50 million poor people, had the least number of people in poverty in 1990 than any of the three countries.

While China had about 750 million people living in poverty, Indonesia and Vietnam had 85 million and 60 million poor people, respectively.

China alone had about 15 times the number of poor people than Nigeria.

Today, however, Nigeria has more poor people than these 3 countries combined.

The question then is, what exactly did these countries do to be able to achieve the desired growth and development?

That is where political leadership comes in. These comparable nations, and indeed other progressive nations, unlike Nigeria, have competent leadership with character, capacity and compassion, committed to prioritizing investment in critical areas of developmental measures; Education, Health, and pulling people out of poverty.

A New Nigeria is POssible. -PO ”

Atiku Abubakar, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) flag bearer in the 2023 presidential election wrote today on his official Facebook page :

“I have been overwhelmed with inquiries from concerned Nigerians, all eager to understand my position on the latest political shifts, particularly the defection of some PDP members to the ruling party.

Let me be unequivocal: freedom of association and expression are not optional in a democracy — they are fundamental rights.

Alongside these stand the pillars of a just and functional democratic society: the people, the rule of law, credible elections, and accountability. Undermine any of these, and democracy itself begins to crumble.

As someone who holds fast to these values, I bear no grudges against anyone for exercising their right to political alignment.

Defections, alliances, and realignments are part and parcel of democratic politics.

We’ve seen them before, and we’ll see them again.Some have resorted to insults because I visited former President Muhammadu Buhari.

Let’s not rewrite history: Buhari is not only a former leader but a significant statesman in the Nigerian political landscape.

During the 2013 opposition merger, the leaders of the time consulted widely — including visits to Obasanjo and Babangida.

So why is it now sacrilegious for me and other leaders to visit Buhari in Kaduna? If you truly believe in freedom of association, then you must respect the rights of all political actors to engage, regardless of party lines.

Defections, alliances, and realignments are part and parcel of democratic politics.

When PDP leaders are busy sipping tea and brokering power deals with President Tinubu, it’s called strategic alliance.

But the moment I greet Peter Obi, el-Rufai, or visit Buhari, it becomes a national emergency. Hypocrisy and the politics of selective outrage have never been this fashionable!

Let us be clear: the coming political battle is not APC versus PDP or LP versus APC. It is Nigerians versus an administration that has plunged the nation into untold suffering.

The economy is in freefall. Inflation is choking the masses. Jobs are vanishing.

Youth restiveness is surging to terrifying levels. Nigerians are not just tired — they are angry, and rightfully so.

This moment is about collective survival. The real enemy is not one another — it is the Tinubu administration’s abysmal failure.

We must reject every attempt to distract us with ethnic, regional, or religious sentiments. These are tools of manipulation, designed to divide and conquer, used by those with nothing else to offer.

The Tinubu administration has no achievements to stand on and no credible record to defend. Its only strategy is chaos and division because that’s the last refuge of the incompetent.

And make no mistake— an incompetent captain does not only wreck his ship; he endangers the lives of everyone on board. -AA”

Sole Administrator Ibok-Ete Ibas has requested more time from the House of Representatives Ad hoc Committee on Rivers State to properly brief the lawmakers on developments in the state.

Ibas made the request at a meeting with the committee in Abuja on Friday. He had earlier failed to appear before the committee on April 17 and 24.

He expressed regret over his failure to honour previous invitations by the committee.

Ibas held a closed-door meeting with members of the ad hoc committee on Rivers State on Friday.

The committee called the meeting as part of efforts to take over legislative duties in Rivers State.

The declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State had to the suspension of the legislature, Governor Sim Fubara and his deputy.

Speaking at the meeting with the committee, Ibas said: “I have always held the National Assembly in the highest regard.

I recognise the importance of your oversight responsibilities and your interest in the progress being made in Rivers, which is presently relatively calm, but still fragile.

“I remain fully committed to cooperating with the committee and to ensuring that all relevant information is made available in due course to support your important work.

“I only request the understanding and the indulgence of this committee to grant me additional time to adequately prepare and present a comprehensive and constructive briefing, given the complexities and sensitivities surrounding the current transitional period in Rivers.

“It is important that any engagement with this committee is done with the depth, accuracy, and clarity it rightfully deserves.

“I remain fully committed to cooperating with the committee and to ensuring that all relevant information is made available in due course to support your important work.”