7.4.2026
Presidential aspirant in the 2027 elections Peter Obi has urged President Bola Tinubu to explain to Nigerians how ₦3.3 trillion has been approved three times in a row to service debts in the power sector.
The former Anambra State governor was reacting to a recent announcement by President Tinubu’s administration, ₦3.3 trillion has been approved to settle debts.
Obi said the approval of the ₦3.3 trillion raises serious questions, noting that similar approvals had been made in the past without clear results.
“Let us reflect, sincerely and without sentiment.
“Is the ₦3.3 trillion approved on April 6, 2026, the same as the ₦3.3 trillion approved in May 2024, and how does it relate to the ₦4 trillion bond approved in July 2024?” he asked.
“This raises a fundamental question: were the previous approvals mere announcements without execution?” he asked.
Obi expressed concern over the state of electricity supply despite these interventions, recalling campaign promises made by President Bola Tinubu.
“During the 2023 campaign, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu made a clear promise that if he failed to deliver stable electricity, Nigerians should not re-elect him,” Obi said.
“Today, the reality is that power supply has worsened,” he added, noting reports that even the Presidential Villa could face disconnection from the national grid.
He criticised what he described as a pattern of policy announcements without measurable outcomes.
“Each time legitimate concerns are raised, what we see appears more like policy pronouncements than measurable progress,” he said.
Obi further linked the mounting debts to previous administrations, raising concerns about fiscal management.
“These debts were largely accumulated under successive administrations of the All-Progressives Congress between 2015 and 2025. This raises serious concerns about accountability, transparency, and effectiveness in public financial management.
“How did the debt accrue? What is the actual total debt in the power sector? Which components of the debts are due to operators’ inefficiency and should be borne by them? Why have previous approvals not translated into tangible improvements? Who are the real beneficiaries of these repeated payments?”