Peter Obi’s claim that he left no debt as Anambra governor has been found misleading. Verified DMO records show both domestic and external debt at the time of his exit
[dropcap]F[/dropcap]ormer Anambra State governor Peter Obi’s assertion that he left office in 2014 without owing any contractor, supplier or agency has been found to be misleading, according to official records from the Debt Management Office (DMO).
Also read: Peter Obi denies secret meeting with Tinubu in Rome over alleged Fidelity Bank debt
Obi, who served as governor from 2006 to 2014, made the claim during a June 2025 interview on Arise TV. He stated:
“The day I left office, I was not owing one contractor, one supplier who had executed his job… I was not owing gratuity. I was not owing pension. I left salary enough to pay salary for three months.”
The statement, widely circulated on X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, was presented by his supporters as evidence of his fiscal discipline.
However, a detailed fact-check comparing his claim against verifiable public financial data shows a different picture.
According to the Debt Management Office’s Subnational Debt Profile, Anambra State owed a total external debt of \$30.32 million and domestic debt of ₦3.02 billion as of 31 December 2013—just three months before Obi left office on 17 March 2014.
These figures, verified and published centrally by the DMO, represent the most reliable measure of subnational debt in Nigeria and do not rely on state-level declarations.
The day I left office, I was not owing one contractor, one supplier who had executed his job… I was not owing gratuity. I was not owing pension. I left salary enough to pay salary for three months.
Budgetary and fiscal strategy documents from Anambra State for 2013–2014 also confirm the existence of loan obligations and debt servicing arrangements.
While Obi may have prioritised contractor payments and salaries, the records show that the state still carried debt during his administration.
Analysts point out that Obi’s claim appears to conflate contractual obligations with formal debt.
While he may have cleared some operational liabilities such as pensions or invoices, DMO data confirms that formal debts—such as loans and credit lines—were outstanding under his leadership.
Obi’s statement leaves little room for nuance. His categorical claim that he was “not owing anybody” and that “you can call the person” fails to distinguish between contractual liabilities and government debt, both of which fall under the broader umbrella of public financial responsibility.
“A more accurate claim would have acknowledged that while short-term obligations may have been settled, Anambra State still maintained a debt portfolio,” said a Lagos-based public finance analyst.
Peter Obi’s image as a frugal and transparent leader is supported by his record of cash reserves and project execution. However, his claim that he left Anambra State completely debt-free is not supported by evidence.
Also read: Peter Obi’s Rome visit linked to ₦225bln Fidelity Bank debt, not religious pilgrimage
Debt Management Office figures confirm the presence of both external and domestic debt at the time of his departure, rendering his absolute denial factually inaccurate.
