Chris Ngige Challenges Peter Obi’s Narrative: “I Left ₦13.8 Billion and No Debt”
The political landscape of Anambra State has been reignited with a fresh round of verbal sparring between two of its most prominent political figures — Dr. Chris Ngige, former governor and immediate predecessor to Peter Obi, and Peter Obi himself, former governor and 2023 presidential candidate.
In a statement that has sent ripples through political circles, Dr. Ngige categorically rejected Peter Obi’s oft-repeated claims that Anambra State was in a poor state when Obi assumed office in March 2006. Ngige insists he left behind a well-managed treasury, no outstanding pensions or salaries, and ongoing infrastructure projects that have stood the test of time.
“When people come and say Anambra was bad when they took over from Ngige, and that they were paying pensions and outstanding gratuity, I don’t know where that’s coming from. I had no outstanding gratuities and salaries. I left ₦13.8 billion in all the accounts of Anambra State, which was equivalent to $170 million at that time,” Ngige declared.
The comments, delivered during a media interaction in Awka, have reignited debates about historical accuracy, political legacy, and the long-standing tensions between these two men whose careers have deeply shaped Anambra’s trajectory.
Chris Ngige, a trained medical doctor and career politician, served as Governor of Anambra State from May 29, 2003, until March 16, 2006, when the Court of Appeal declared that Peter Obi had won the 2003 gubernatorial election. Ngige’s time in office was marked by both notable infrastructure development and intense political drama — most famously, the 2003 political crisis involving a botched attempt to remove him from office, allegedly orchestrated by powerful political godfathers.
Peter Obi, a businessman-turned-politician, took office following that court verdict, inheriting Ngige’s projects, policies, and financial position. From the beginning of his tenure, Obi painted a picture of having inherited a state with financial challenges and unpaid obligations, claims he has repeated over the years as part of his political narrative, especially when contrasting his own fiscal prudence with that of predecessors.
Ngige has never fully accepted this version of events, and his latest comments are a direct rebuttal to Obi’s account.
According to Ngige, when he left office in March 2006, the state’s accounts contained ₦13.8 billion, an amount he says was equivalent to $170 million at the prevailing exchange rate. In his telling, these funds were not tied up in debt servicing or committed projects but represented a healthy financial reserve for the incoming administration.
“There was no financial mess. I left money in the state’s coffers. I didn’t owe salaries, I didn’t owe pensions, and I didn’t owe gratuities. This is verifiable. Let anyone check the records. The problem is that some people want to rewrite history to suit their political agenda,” Ngige said.
The assertion directly challenges Peter Obi’s past statements that he met an Anambra struggling with arrears and in need of immediate financial discipline.
YOU MAY READ
I Was Removed as Governor for Refusing to Make Chris Uba My Deputy – Ngige
Beyond the treasury figures, Ngige defended his infrastructural record. He argued that the roads he built during his tenure remain intact nearly two decades later, a testament, he says, to the quality of the work done under his watch.
“The roads I constructed are still there without potholes. Any Anambra person living in the state today can attest to this. We didn’t do cheap or substandard jobs. We built with durability in mind because governance is about lasting impact, not temporary fixes,” he asserted.
Indeed, several of Ngige’s road projects — such as the Enugu–Onitsha Old Road rehabilitation and key township roads in Awka and Onitsha — are often cited by residents as some of the more enduring infrastructure works in the state’s history. However, critics argue that maintenance and subsequent administrations’ upgrades have also contributed to their current state.
While Peter Obi has not yet publicly responded to Ngige’s latest comments, his long-standing position has been that he inherited a financially mismanaged state. Obi has frequently referenced having to clear debts, pay backlogged pensions, and impose stricter fiscal controls.
For Obi, this narrative has served as a springboard to demonstrate his management style: conservative spending, debt avoidance, and large financial savings. His supporters point to his claim of leaving ₦75 billion in combined cash and investments for his successor in 2014 as evidence of his stewardship.
However, Ngige’s new statements directly challenge the starting point of that success story, suggesting that Obi may have had a far better foundation than he has acknowledged.
The clash between Ngige and Obi is not merely about who gets credit for fiscal prudence — it has broader political undertones. Both men belong to different political traditions and have had different career trajectories since leaving the Anambra governor’s seat.
- Ngige went on to serve as a Senator for Anambra Central (2011–2015) and later as Minister of Labour and Employment under President Muhammadu Buhari (2015–2023). His political affiliations have often leaned toward the All Progressives Congress (APC), Nigeria’s ruling party since 2015.
- Obi transitioned from his tenure as governor to becoming a vice-presidential candidate in 2019 and then a presidential candidate in 2023 under the Labour Party, championing anti-corruption, fiscal discipline, and economic reform.
Their differing political affiliations mean that any public disagreement between them is often interpreted through partisan lenses, with each side’s supporters amplifying their preferred narrative.
The central question is: what do the records actually show? Former state finance officials, budget documents, and bank statements from 2006 could provide clarity. However, Nigerian politics is often characterised by selective memory and incomplete public record-keeping.
Some analysts argue that both Ngige and Obi are partly correct — that Ngige may have indeed left funds in the treasury but that there could have been other outstanding obligations not immediately visible in the raw account balances. Others suggest that Obi’s emphasis on debt repayment may have been politically motivated to draw a sharper contrast between himself and his predecessor.
The absence of a fully transparent, publicly accessible audit for the handover period makes definitive resolution difficult.
Reactions among Anambra residents are split, often along political and generational lines. Older residents who recall Ngige’s tenure — particularly his road projects — tend to give him credit for tangible improvements. Younger residents, whose political consciousness was shaped during Obi’s governorship, often view Obi as the gold standard for fiscal discipline.
In Awka, Onitsha, and Nnewi, informal debates have sprung up in markets, social gatherings, and even religious meetings, as people compare the two men’s legacies.
Mrs. Amaka Eze, a retired teacher from Awka, told reporters:
“I remember Ngige’s time; we got our salaries on time. But Obi brought more financial discipline. Both did well in different ways, but I think Ngige is right to defend his name.”
Political observers note that Ngige’s comments come at a time when Peter Obi’s political relevance remains high following his strong performance in the 2023 presidential election. By challenging Obi’s foundational political narrative, Ngige could be seeking to shape public memory before the 2027 election cycle, when Obi may once again be a major contender.
Additionally, the broader Nigerian political climate is one in which former leaders increasingly feel compelled to defend their records against historical revisionism. Ngige’s remarks may also reflect personal frustration at being overshadowed in public discourse about Anambra’s development.
This war of words underscores the importance of meticulous record-keeping and transparent handover processes in Nigerian governance. Without publicly accessible and independently verified audits, political narratives can shift depending on who tells the story.
Civil society groups have renewed calls for Nigerian states to adopt open financial reporting standards, including publishing full annual budget performance reports, audited statements, and detailed handover notes. Such measures, they argue, would make it harder for political figures to distort or selectively present historical facts.
Whether or not Peter Obi responds directly to Ngige’s challenge remains to be seen. If he does, it could set off a new round of political back-and-forth that might dominate headlines for weeks.
For now, Ngige’s message is clear: he rejects any suggestion that he left Anambra State in disarray, insists he handed over a financially sound government, and believes history should reflect that.
“Let him be man enough to say it,” Ngige concluded. “I handed over a state with no debt, good roads, and money in the bank. That is the truth.”
As the debate continues, one thing is certain: the legacies of both men will remain intertwined in the political history of Anambra State — and the struggle over how that history is told will shape how future generations understand their contributions.