Obi said during his tenure as governor, he did not approach any financial institution to borrow money or issue a bond on behalf of the state.
By Mmesoma Onwuka
365Daily – Former Anambra State Governor and presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), Peter Obi, has responded to the ongoing controversy over the state’s external debt, rejecting the description of about $123.77 million in multilateral development funding as “debt owed by Peter Obi.”
Obi, in a statement issued on Friday, September 25, 2026, said he had remained silent in recent days following the death of his elder brother and friend, Chief Okey Ezeibe.
He said he was addressing the issue to clarify matters that had generated public discussion, while urging Nigerians to focus on the challenges facing the country and the hardships experienced by citizens.
Obi also said he had no disagreement with Anambra State Governor, Prof. Chukwuma Soludo or any other governor, adding that he was not seeking the office of governor in any state and would not seek the position again, even if the Constitution were amended.
He appealed to governors to support their preferred presidential candidates while allowing other presidential candidates and contenders for other offices to campaign freely in their states.
On the Anambra debt controversy, Obi said that during his tenure as governor, he did not approach any financial institution to borrow money or issue a bond on behalf of the state.
He recalled that the then Director General of the Debt Management Office, Abraham Nwankwo, had at his farewell ceremony, described him as the only state governor during Nwankwo’s 10 years in office who had not approached him for a loan facility.
Obi further stated that when he left office on March 17, 2014, Anambra State had no unpaid salaries, gratuities or pensions, and that the government did not owe contractors or suppliers whose completed work had been verified and certified.
Addressing the World Bank and International Fund for Agricultural Development related financing, Obi said the funds were concessionary development support facilities secured by the Federal Government for selected states to address specific development needs.
He argued that the Anambra State Government should distinguish between the total amount approved for a multiyear development programme, the amount actually drawn by the state during his tenure and the balance outstanding when he handed over.
According to Obi, the government had combined these different categories and described the resulting $123.77 million as loans left by him, which he rejected as an incorrect application of public sector accounting.
He said the eight facilities referenced were primarily World Bank and IFAD development programmes negotiated by the Federal Government, with participating states accessing the funds through subsidiary arrangements.
Obi acknowledged that Anambra had repayment responsibilities, but said each facility should be examined based on its approval, effectiveness, drawdown and repayment history.
He also questioned how the state could have inherited $123.77 million from his administration when, according to the figures he cited from DMO records, Anambra’s external debt stood at about $30 million in March 2014, when he left office, and approximately $45.15 million as of December 31, 2014.
Obi further claimed that he left more than $150 million as the dollar component of his investment in Anambra State and said the funds, if left untouched, could have generated about $10 million annually for the state.
He used hypothetical calculations to argue that the funds could have generated substantially more over the years and could have been used to offset the debt being disputed.
Obi maintained that he left Anambra State in what he described as a strong financial position and said he would not engage in further exchanges over his tenure as governor.
He said his focus would now remain on issues affecting Nigerians, which he described as the reason for his presidential ambition.