This guy sent me a long defence of Peter Obi refusing to explain his plans, and honestly, it made me laugh because It proved the point I was making in the first place.
Basically, he was saying Peter Obi has good ideas, but he should hide them because Tinubu may copy and corrupt them.
His argument is basically this: Obi used to explain his ideas publicly, Tinubu copied one of them on subsidy removal, corrupted it, and made Nigerians suffer. Therefore, Obi is now right to hide his plans and ask us to judge only his character.
But that point is especially weak. Subsidy removal was not some secret Obi idea that Tinubu stole. It had been mainstream policy debate for years, and by the 2023 budget, subsidy was only funded from January to June 2023, signalling that the regime was already meant to end around mid-2023.
So to now frame subsidy removal as if Obi popularised it and Tinubu stole it from him is simply fan fiction.
The real issue was never whether subsidy should go. The real issue was how it should go, what would replace it, what would happen to transport, food prices, wages, exchange rate, production, and the poor.
That is exactly why people are asking Obi “how?”
If your whole argument is that Tinubu took a good idea and implemented it badly, then you have actually made the case for more detail, not less.
Because details are how we can separate a serious reformer from a slogan merchant.
You cannot say, “Tinubu copied my idea and destroyed it,” then turn around and say, “Therefore I will no longer explain my own idea.”
No.
The lesson from Tinubu’s subsidy removal is not that politicians should hide their plans.
The lesson is that Nigerians must interrogate every plan before power is handed over.
We need to know the sequencing, the trade-offs, the protection for ordinary people.
We need to know who pays the price.
We need to know what happens on day one, month six, year one, and year four.
The Dangote example he used is also very funny. Dangote did not say, “I will build a refinery, but I will not tell you how because someone may copy me.”
People knew the site. They knew the scale. They saw construction. They saw financing. They saw equipment. They saw progress. Whether they believed him or doubted him, there was something concrete to assess.
That is very different from saying, “I will give you 10,000 megawatts, but I will not tell you how. Just look at my character.”
Character is important, but character is not a power-sector plan.
And this is my problem with Peter Obi.
His supporters want us to treat scrutiny as betrayal.
If you ask how he will generate power, they say you don’t trust him.
If you ask how he will fight insecurity, they say he has commitment.
If you ask how he will survive Nigeria’s transactional politics, they say he is different.
If you ask what exactly in his track record proves he can transform Nigeria, they say you are attacking him.
That is not politics. That is devotion.
And I am not interested in devotion.
If Obi has a good idea and Tinubu copies it and uses it to make Nigeria better, then Nigeria wins. If Obi is truly not running for himself, that should not be a problem.
But if the fear is that another politician may take the idea and get credit for it, then we are no longer talking about saving Nigeria. We are talking about protecting political ownership.
Nobody is asking Peter Obi to release state secrets.
Nobody is asking him to publish military intelligence.
Nobody is asking him to expose negotiation strategy.
People are asking basic governance questions.
How will you fix power?
How will you fund it?
What will you do about transmission?
What will you do about DisCos?
What will you do about tariffs?
What will you do about gas?
What will you do about vandalism?
What will you do differently from the people before you?
If the answer is “trust me,” then I’m sorry, that is not enough.
Nigeria has trusted too many people already.