Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Former Anambra State governor and prominent opposition figure Peter Obi has sharply criticised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s perceived absence from Nigeria, framing public concern over the president’s mobility and lack of direct engagement as a “critical demand for accountability in a national emergency.” Obi’s remarks, made in a statement on his verified social media account, reflect growing frustration among Nigerians as the country grapples with deepening economic hardship, insecurity and a leadership silence that many feel has left citizens without clear direction at a time of crisis.
Obi, the Labour Party’s presidential candidate in the 2023 general election, questioned Tinubu’s visibility and responsiveness as Nigeria faces a confluence of daunting challenges across its socio-economic landscape. In his statement, Obi highlighted projections suggesting that by year’s end Nigeria could have around 140 million people living in extreme poverty, the highest such figure globally, alongside worsening hunger, insecurity, and staggering unemployment among the nation’s youth.
Central to Obi’s critique is the assertion that President Tinubu spent an estimated 196 days abroad in 2025, a period that Obi argues eclipsed the time the president spent within Nigeria during that calendar year — even as the nation confronted intensifying internal pressures. Obi also asserted that Nigerians “have not heard a word from their President” since December 2025, noting the absence of a New Year’s address or national broadcast to offer reassurance or outline government priorities at the start of 2026.
“In the midst of this chaos, where has our President been?” Obi asked, framing the question as both a rhetorical and substantive challenge to the president’s leadership during what he describes as a period of national emergency. He highlighted concerns that critical information about unfolding events — including security developments and international matters involving Nigeria — was relayed to citizens via foreign media or commentary from foreign officials rather than directly from Nigeria’s presidency.
Obi also claimed that President Tinubu opted for a holiday in Europe during a period of heightened national anxiety, further deepening public perception of a leadership vacuum. Although the presidency occasionally defends international travel as part of diplomatic responsibilities or official engagements, Obi’s remarks underscore a broader debate about the timing, purpose and communication surrounding such trips when Nigeria confronts pressing domestic challenges.
Beyond questions of physical presence, Obi’s statement delved into the stark realities confronting ordinary Nigerians. He described a nation struggling with widespread poverty, food insecurity and one of the world’s worst infant mortality rates — conditions he said contribute to Nigeria being judged “one of the worst places to be born.” He also cited unemployment figures that underscore the depth of socio-economic strain, particularly among the youth demographic.
These issues have heightened public anxiety and underscored calls for urgent leadership visibility. Obi stressed that Nigerians deserve direct communication from their head of state, particularly during periods of hardship — not just press releases issued through aides. He maintained that governance requires presence and direct engagement with the people, rather than remote management of national affairs.
Obi’s critique has resonated with many citizens already grappling with daily economic challenges and a pervasive sense of insecurity. His commentary taps into a broader undercurrent of dissatisfaction with governance and calls for greater transparency, accountability and leadership responsiveness. While opposition figures have amplified these concerns, reactions among political elites and segments of the public vary, with some defending the president’s strategic engagements abroad as necessary for Nigeria’s diplomatic and economic interests.
Political analysts note that the tension between expectations of domestic leadership presence and the demands placed on heads of state in international arenas is not unique to Nigeria, but it is particularly acute against the backdrop of soaring hardship indicators and simmering insecurity. The contrast between global diplomatic obligations and domestic anxieties has framed a central theme in contemporary political discourse.
President Tinubu’s international engagements, including visits to European capitals and attendance at regional and global summits, have previously sparked debate. Critics have argued that extended stays abroad, particularly when tied to holidays or prolonged working breaks, risk conveying an image of disengagement from pressing national issues. At various points in 2025, the president’s extended presence overseas attracted public scrutiny, prompting responses from government spokespersons emphasizing that official business continued uninterrupted and that directives to security agencies and other branches of government were maintained during his absence.
However, the current uptick in criticism reflects a broader sentiment among some Nigerians that physical leadership presence — coupled with regular, direct communication — is critical to sustaining public confidence in governance during times of economic strain and rising insecurity.
Obi’s overarching message is that leadership without presence undermines national unity and public trust, making it harder to implement reform agendas or secure popular buy-in for government policies. He argued that leadership should not be equated with issuing statements via intermediaries, but requires direct engagement with citizens to explain policy decisions, confront fears and articulate a path forward.
As Nigeria continues to confront its complex socio-economic and security challenges, the debate over presidential visibility and accountability is likely to remain a central feature of political discourse. For many ordinary Nigerians, the call for leadership presence — especially from the highest office in the land — echoes a deeper yearning for reassurance, active governance and tangible connection with the struggles of everyday life.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments