Former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi has disputed the state government’s claim that his administration left about N127.4 billion in outstanding external debt, insisting that he left office in 2014 without borrowing from any financial institution or issuing bonds on behalf of the state.
Obi, a presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, spoke on Arise TV’s Prime Time programme on Thursday amid an escalating dispute between him and the Anambra State Government over loans and other liabilities allegedly incurred during his eight-year tenure.
The former governor said the facilities being attributed to his administration were largely development-financing arrangements negotiated by the Federal Government and accessed by participating states through subsidiary agreements.
He maintained that they should not be presented as conventional loans personally obtained by him or as money borrowed by Anambra from commercial banks.
“Let me categorically state again: I, Mr Peter Obi, did not approach any financial institution to borrow money or issue bonds on behalf of Anambra State in the eight years I was in government,” he said.
Obi also rejected claims that he left behind unpaid salaries, pensions, gratuities or verified obligations to contractors.
“On the day I left office, the government of Anambra State, which I headed, was not owing any salary, gratuity, or pension to those scheduled to be paid by the state government.
“We were not owing any contractor or supplier who executed his job, certified and verified—not one,” he said.
The controversy followed claims by the Anambra State Government that eight external borrowing facilities contracted during Obi’s tenure had a combined value of $123.77 million, with $92.35 million still outstanding as of June 30, 2026.
The state government said the outstanding balance amounted to about N127.4 billion and continued to be serviced from federal allocations.
The state’s Commissioner for Information and Value Reorientation, Dr Law Mefor, also accused the former governor of leaving salary, pension and gratuity arrears and challenged him to withdraw from the 2027 presidential race if he could not account for the alleged liabilities.
Obi, however, said the state government had conflated approved facilities, actual drawdowns and outstanding balances in arriving at the figures.
He said some of the programmes were supported by the World Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development and were negotiated by the Federal Government for selected states.
“There’s a difference between I went to the bank to borrow money, then the Federal Government sees, ‘Oh, this state is doing well in education.’ They selected Anambra, Ekiti, and Bauchi and said, ‘These three states are doing well. Why don’t we give them a concessionary multilateral support to help them?’” he said.
According to Obi, the State Education Programme Investment Project was among the programmes supported under the arrangement, with some of the funds drawn after he had left office.
“Yes, and the World Bank,” he said when asked whether the funding was provided as part of a Federal Government-backed arrangement.
“To support us. Not that we go to the World Bank and say give me this, not that we go to any commercial bank. And to even make it more… when it came, if you look at State Education Programme Investment Project (SEPIP), you will see that the drawdown was well after I left office.”
He argued that an approved facility should not automatically be treated as money borrowed or spent by a government where the full amount was not drawn.
“Even if I had gone to a bank and borrowed money—even if I had gone to a bank and borrowed money, but I did not spend the money, you cannot call it debt I left,” he said.
Obi illustrated the point with a hypothetical N10 billion facility, saying that if only N500 million was drawn, the government could not be described as owing the entire N10 billion.
“That’s why I said it is not proper public sector accounting,” he added.
In a separate statement, Obi further argued that the eight facilities identified by the state government were primarily World Bank and IFAD development programmes negotiated by the Federal Government.
He acknowledged that Anambra had repayment obligations under the arrangements but said each facility should be examined based on its approval, effectiveness, drawdown and repayment records.
“This does not suggest that Anambra had no repayment responsibilities; rather, each facility must be examined in light of its approval, effectiveness, drawdown, and repayment record,” he said.
Obi also questioned the figures attributed to his administration, citing data from the Debt Management Office.
He said Anambra’s total external debt stood at about $18 million when he assumed office in March 2006 and approximately $30 million when he left in March 2014.
According to him, the figure had risen to about $45.15 million by December 31, 2014, nine months after he left office.
“The Anambra State Government must therefore clarify how a state whose recorded external debt was about US$30 million in March 2014 and US$45.15 million in December 2014 could supposedly have inherited US$123.77 million from Peter Obi, who left office in March of that same year,” he said.
The state government, however, has maintained that the $123.77 million refers to the contracted value of eight external facilities linked to projects undertaken during Obi’s administration, rather than the amount outstanding when he left office.
The disagreement has also extended to claims over funds allegedly left by the former administration.
Obi had previously said his government left more than N2.13 billion in an ecological fund account.
The Anambra Government disputed the claim, saying its records showed that the account cited by Obi was an Internally Generated Revenue–Consolidated Revenue Account and that the claimed amount was not reflected in its records.
The state also challenged Obi’s assertion that his administration left no unpaid obligations, citing alleged arrears involving workers of the state Water Corporation and other liabilities.
Obi has continued to reject the allegations.
He also cited the former Director-General of the Debt Management Office, Abraham Nwankwo, whom he said publicly confirmed at his farewell ceremony that Obi was the only governor who did not visit the DMO during Nwankwo’s 10-year tenure to seek approval for a loan.
“To even confirm this: the then DG… Abraham Nwankwo, who was DG of Debt Management Office, served for 10 years. The day he left office, at his send-off party, he invited me as the chairman, and he announced to everybody at that party that the reason why he made me chairman is that I was the only governor in Nigeria who never came to his office for approval to borrow money,” Obi said.
Meanwhile, Obi has sought to distance the debt controversy from his relationship with his successor, Governor Chukwuma Soludo.
In a statement on Friday, he said he had no disagreement with Soludo or any other governor and was not interested in returning to the governorship.
“I wish to assure the public that I have no disagreement with my dear elder brother, Governor Soludo, or with any governor in Nigeria,” he said.
“I am not seeking the office of governor in any state, and I will not seek that position again, even if the Constitution is amended.”
Obi said he had remained silent over the controversy in recent days because he was mourning his late elder brother and friend, Chief Okey Ezeibe.
He appealed to governors to allow political candidates to campaign freely in their states regardless of party affiliation.
“Ultimately, voters should be allowed to determine whom they wish to serve them,” he said.
The former governor also urged political actors to focus on the economic difficulties confronting Nigerians instead of allowing political disputes to dominate public discourse.
“On the Anambra debt question, I have remained silent over the past few days because I have been grieving the loss of my very dear elder brother and friend, Chief Okey Ezeibe,” he said.
“However, the time has come for me to address some of the matters that have occupied public discussion in recent days. I respectfully urge everyone to concentrate on the existential challenges confronting Nigeria and the hardships endured by its citizens, rather than on the needless distractions that have become widespread in our politics.”
The disagreement over the Anambra debt profile comes as political activities ahead of the 2027 presidential election intensify, with the former governor’s financial record in Anambra increasingly becoming a subject of political debate.
Leave a Reply