Former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi has rejected claims that his administration left behind unpaid debts, including a reported ₦2 billion ecological loan, contractor liabilities, salary arrears, gratuities and pensions.
Obi, who governed Anambra State from 2006 to 2014, said the claims being made by the current Anambra State Government are completely false and challenged anyone who can establish that his administration left behind such unpaid obligations.
His response followed fresh comments by the Anambra State Government that it is still servicing financial obligations inherited from previous administrations, including loans associated with the administrations of Obi and his successor, Willie Obiano.
Anambra State Commissioner for Finance, Izuchukwu Okafor, said the state continues to make deductions from its federal allocations to service loans obtained by previous administrations. He also said the Soludo administration had reduced the state’s overall debt by more than 83 per cent and had cleared several domestic liabilities, including unpaid contracts, gratuity arrears and pension arrears.
Obi has now offered a detailed response, particularly concerning the alleged ₦2 billion ecological obligation.
Peter Obi: We Left No Unpaid Salaries, Pensions or Contractors
According to Obi, his administration systematically cleared historical financial obligations inherited from previous governments.
He said more than ₦35 billion was spent to liquidate historical gratuities and arrears that had accumulated over several years.
Obi said that by the time he handed over power in 2014, Anambra State had no outstanding salaries, gratuities or pensions owed by his administration.
He also disputed claims concerning contractors.
“At the point of handover, the state owed nothing in salaries, gratuities, or pensions, nor did we owe anything to any contractor for projects duly executed and certified.”
The former governor said his administration’s position on inherited liabilities should therefore be distinguished from the broader debt obligations that may have remained in the state over the years.
The latest dispute is particularly significant because the Anambra Government has said it has cleared several legacy domestic obligations, while maintaining that some external loans inherited from previous administrations are still being repaid.
What Peter Obi Said About the ₦2 Billion Ecological Fund
The most specific part of Obi’s response concerns the ecological fund at the centre of the latest controversy.
Obi said the ₦2 billion ecological fund was not a loan borrowed and spent by his administration.
According to him, the money was released only about three months before the end of his tenure and was specifically meant to address the erosion crisis around Oko and Umuchiana.
Obi said that despite pressure to use the money before leaving office, he refused to spend it because it was tied to a specific project.
He argued that government is a continuum and that the incoming administration should be allowed to use the money for the purpose for which it had been released.
Obi says the money remained intact
The former governor said the money was left untouched in a First Bank account.
He gave the account details as:
- Bank: First Bank
- Account number: 2018779464
- Balance: More than ₦2.13 billion
According to Obi, the balance was over ₦2.13 billion at the point of handover.
Recent reporting on the statement from Obi’s camp put the figure at ₦2,139,951,400 as of March 17, 2014, describing the account as an Ecological Funds/IGR Consolidated Account. The account details and balance were presented by Obi’s media aide, Valentine Obienyem, but they have not been independently verified against the bank’s historical records in the reporting available so far.
That distinction matters because the central question in the current dispute is not simply whether an ecological allocation existed. It is whether the money remained intact at handover and what happened to it afterwards.
Obi Says the Ecological Fund Was Separate From the ₦75 Billion Savings
Obi also made an important distinction concerning the savings he said his administration left for its successor.
He said funds that had been allocated for specific projects were not included in the more than ₦75 billion in savings he says was left behind.
In his latest statement, Obi argued that the ecological fund should therefore not be presented as part of the broader savings figure.
This is consistent with his long-standing position that the money left behind at the end of his administration comprised substantial cash and investments, while certain project-specific funds were treated separately.
Historical reports have also documented Obi’s claim that he left more than ₦75 billion in savings and investments when he handed over to Willie Obiano in March 2014.
A 2026 fact-check published by Nigeria Elections 2027 similarly concluded that the broad claim that Obi left significant savings for Anambra was substantially supported by available records, although it noted important context and caveats surrounding the figure.
Anambra Government Says It Is Still Repaying Inherited Loans
The current controversy comes after Anambra State Commissioner for Finance Izuchukwu Okafor said the state is still servicing loans inherited from previous administrations.
Okafor said the deductions can be seen in the state’s monthly Federation Account Allocation Committee, or FAAC, statements.
He specifically mentioned loans obtained during the administrations of Peter Obi, Willie Obiano and other previous governors.
“Every month during our FAAC meetings, when you see the schedule of FAAC, you will notice there are substantial, significant deductions from our own FAAC because of loans previously borrowed by previous administrations.”
The commissioner, however, said the Soludo administration itself had not obtained a commercial bank loan since coming into office.
He said the administration had instead focused on reducing inherited obligations.
According to Okafor, Anambra’s domestic debt is now close to zero after the government cleared several categories of legacy liabilities, including unpaid contracts, gratuity arrears and pension arrears.
He also said some external obligations remain because of the terms attached to the loans, including facilities involving the World Bank and other institutions.
The Two Sides Are Making Different Claims
The dispute is important because the two sides are not necessarily describing the same category of financial obligation.
The Anambra Government is discussing loans and other inherited financial obligations that continue to affect the state’s finances, while Peter Obi is specifically denying that his administration left unpaid salaries, pensions, gratuities or certified contractors’ bills.
Obi is also challenging the description of the specific ecological fund as an inherited loan.
His position is that the ₦2 billion-plus ecological money was an allocation meant for a particular erosion-control project and was left intact for the incoming government.
The Anambra Government’s broader statement, meanwhile, concerns inherited loans and liabilities that the Soludo administration says it has been paying down.
This means that the strongest way to resolve the disagreement would be through documentary evidence showing the origin, classification, balance and subsequent movement of each disputed obligation or fund.
Peter Obi Challenges Anambra Government to Produce Evidence
Obi has now put the matter directly before the Anambra State Government.
He said that if anyone can establish that his administration left behind unpaid salaries, gratuities, pensions or certified contractor liabilities, he would stop campaigning.
He also challenged those disputing his account of the ecological fund to produce evidence showing otherwise.
His statement is particularly significant in the context of his current political activities ahead of the 2027 elections.
Rather than simply denying the allegations, Obi pointed to a specific bank account and a specific balance as evidence of his claim regarding the ecological allocation.
The account details now form one of the central issues in the dispute.
What Happened to the ₦2.13 Billion?
This is arguably the most important unanswered question arising from Obi’s latest statement.
If the account contained more than ₦2.13 billion when he handed over in March 2014, as claimed, the next question is what happened to the funds after the handover.
A report by Anambra Daily noted that the account information released by Obi’s camp would need to be independently checked against official banking, government and audit records to establish the complete financial trail.
That is the kind of documentation that could move the argument beyond political statements.
The relevant evidence would include the original allocation documents, bank statements, government financial records, handover documents and records showing subsequent withdrawals or transfers from the account.
Until those records are independently examined, it would be premature to present either side’s version as the final determination of what happened to the money.
Peter Obi’s ₦35 Billion Gratuity Claim
Another major claim in Obi’s response concerns historical gratuity arrears.
He said his administration liquidated more than ₦35 billion in historical gratuities and arrears accumulated over several years.
His argument is that the administration did not simply inherit financial obligations and leave them for its successor. Instead, he said it systematically cleared the outstanding liabilities before handing over power.
The present Anambra Government has separately said it inherited gratuity and pension arrears from previous administrations and has paid significant sums to clear them.
For example, the state government said in its 2026 budget presentation that the Soludo administration had cleared about ₦22 billion in gratuity arrears owed to state and local government retirees and had also been addressing other long-standing arrears.
However, the existence of arrears cleared by the current administration does not by itself establish which particular administration incurred each liability.
That is why the historical financial records matter in this debate.
Obi’s Long-Standing Claim of More Than ₦75 Billion in Savings
The latest statement also revives one of the most frequently discussed aspects of Peter Obi’s record as Anambra governor: the amount of money he said he left for his successor.
Obi has repeatedly said he left more than ₦75 billion in savings and investments when he left office.
A historical report on the dispute over Anambra’s finances said the figure comprised approximately:
- ₦27 billion in local currency investments;
- $26.5 million in foreign currency investments; and
- about ₦28.1 billion in certified state/MDS balances.
The same report said Obi’s camp maintained that certain approved obligations had been deducted before arriving at the final savings figure.
The figure has remained a major part of the former governor’s argument about fiscal discipline.
It is also why his latest statement makes a distinction between those general savings and project-specific funds such as the ecological allocation.
Why the Anambra Debt Debate Matters
The dispute is more than a political disagreement between a former governor and the current administration.
It concerns the way public finances are transferred from one administration to another.
A state government can have cash savings, investments, unpaid obligations and long-term loans at the same time.
For example, money in a government account does not automatically mean that every naira is available for unrestricted spending. Some funds may be legally or administratively committed to specific projects.
Likewise, a government can have savings while still carrying long-term obligations whose repayment continues for years.
This is why the distinction between cash balances, project-specific funds, domestic liabilities and long-term loans is important when assessing claims about a state’s financial position.
What the Available Evidence Shows So Far
Based on the statements and reporting currently available, several points are clear.
First, the Anambra Government says it continues to service some financial obligations inherited from previous administrations, including loans associated with the Obi and Obiano years.
Second, the Soludo administration says it has substantially reduced the state’s debt burden and cleared several domestic liabilities, including contracts, pension arrears and gratuity arrears.
Third, Peter Obi strongly denies that his administration left unpaid salaries, pensions, gratuities or certified contractor liabilities.
Fourth, Obi disputes the characterisation of the ₦2 billion ecological fund as a loan that his administration borrowed and spent.
Fifth, Obi says more than ₦2.13 billion remained in a First Bank account for the ecological project when he handed over power.
Sixth, the account balance and subsequent movement of those funds would need to be established through official financial records before a definitive conclusion can be reached.
Peter Obi: “If Anyone Can Prove Otherwise, I Will Stop Campaigning”
The former governor ended his response with a political challenge.
Obi said that if anybody could establish anything contrary to his account of the funds and liabilities he left behind, he would stop campaigning.
His statement adds a political dimension to an already contentious debate over Anambra’s finances.
The immediate issue, however, is the evidence behind the competing claims.
For the ecological fund, the most important documents would be the original release records and the historical First Bank account statements.
For the broader debt argument, the relevant evidence would include loan agreements, debt-service schedules, FAAC deductions, handover documents and records showing which administration incurred each obligation.
Those records would provide a much clearer picture than political claims from either side.
As someone who follows Nigerian public finance and financial management closely, I think the most useful way to examine this matter is to separate politics from accounting.
The question is not simply whether Peter Obi says he left money or whether the Soludo administration says it inherited loans.
The real questions are: What was borrowed? When was it borrowed? What was the purpose? How much had been repaid at each handover? What money was available? Which funds were earmarked? And what happened to each outstanding balance?
Those questions can be answered with documents.
Peter Obi has now put a specific figure, bank and account number on the table regarding the ecological fund. The Anambra Government has made broader claims about inherited loans and obligations.
The next step should therefore be evidence.
If the account records confirm that more than ₦2.13 billion was sitting in the stated account at the March 2014 handover, that would support Obi’s position regarding the fund’s status at that particular point.
If subsequent government records show how the money was transferred, spent or otherwise accounted for, that would complete the financial trail.
The same standard should apply to the wider debt dispute.
Public money should not be a matter of political storytelling. Nigerians deserve records that show exactly what was received, what was owed, what was saved and what was spent.
For now, Peter Obi has rejected the allegations and challenged the Anambra Government to provide evidence that contradicts his account, while the state government maintains that it inherited loans and financial obligations from previous administrations and has been working to clear them.
The dispute is therefore still unresolved, and the strongest evidence will come from the official financial records rather than competing political statements.