There comes a point in politics when legitimate accountability begins to look suspiciously like political obsession. For Governor Chukwuma Soludo of Anambra State, critics increasingly argue that his persistent references to his predecessor, Peter Obi, have crossed that uncomfortable line.
Rather than allowing his own record in office to define his administration, Soludo appears, in the view of his critics, increasingly determined to revisit the past in search of claims capable of diminishing the reputation of the former governor. They describe the development as an unfortunate distraction and, more seriously, an act of political irresponsibility if allegations are advanced without compelling evidence.
The question is simple: If there is evidence of wrongdoing under the previous administration, why not present it?
Government possesses institutions, auditors, investigators and legal mechanisms through which allegations of financial misconduct can be properly established. If the evidence exists, it should be documented, investigated and subjected to due process. What should not become the substitute for evidence is political rhetoric.
But beyond the political accusations lies a more fundamental question: Has Soludo maintained the standard he inherited from Obi?
This is where the debate becomes more consequential.
Obi left office with a reputation for fiscal discipline, aggressive investment in education and healthcare, visible infrastructure projects, institutional savings and an emphasis on deploying public resources to projects that could be directly identified with the welfare of citizens. Whatever disagreements may exist over individual projects or policies, his administration created a benchmark against which subsequent governments in Anambra would inevitably be measured.
Soludo therefore did not inherit an empty state.
He inherited an administration whose fiscal record, capital projects and development philosophy had already become part of Anambra’s political conversation. The responsibility of a successor was not necessarily to copy Obi but to build upon the strongest elements of that foundation and take the state further.
Critics now argue that the Soludo administration has struggled to demonstrate that continuity.
The argument is not that Anambra has witnessed no projects under Soludo. It clearly has. The more important question is whether the scale, quality, durability and economic impact of those interventions represent a convincing continuation—or improvement—of the standard associated with the previous administration.
Infrastructure provides one of the most visible areas for comparison. Roads, urban renewal and public works have remained central to successive administrations in Anambra. Yet citizens continue to judge government by whether projects are durable, properly maintained and connected to a broader economic-development strategy rather than simply by the number of projects announced or inaugurated.
The same argument applies to education.
Obi’s administration placed considerable emphasis on educational infrastructure, including investments in schools and the provision of learning materials and other support. Soludo’s government has also made education a major policy area, but critics insist that the real test should be whether the state’s education system is producing better learning environments, stronger outcomes and sustainable human-capital development rather than merely generating impressive announcements.
Healthcare presents another crucial benchmark.
A state administration cannot be judged solely by the construction or renovation of health facilities. The real measure is whether ordinary citizens can access affordable, functional healthcare; whether hospitals have adequate equipment and personnel; and whether public investment produces measurable improvements in health outcomes.
The economic argument is equally important.
Anambra has historically possessed an unusually strong entrepreneurial culture, driven by small businesses, traders, manufacturers and private investors. The responsibility of government is therefore to create an environment in which that private-sector energy can flourish—through reliable infrastructure, security, efficient regulation, access to markets and predictable government policy.
If the administration is unable to translate Anambra’s entrepreneurial strength into broad-based improvements in living standards, employment and investment, then questions about its development model are legitimate.
This is why critics believe Soludo should spend less time attempting to rewrite Obi’s political legacy and more time demonstrating that his own administration has established a superior one.
There is also a political irony.
The more frequently Obi is invoked by his successor, the more the former governor remains relevant in Anambra’s political conversation. Attempts to diminish a predecessor can therefore produce the opposite result, especially when the public is given an opportunity to compare the records of both administrations.
Obi, meanwhile, has moved beyond Anambra’s borders and emerged as the Nigeria Democratic Congress presidential candidate for the 2027 election.
Consequently, attempts to reopen his gubernatorial record are no longer merely an Anambra political matter; they have acquired a national dimension.
But the solution is not to shield Obi from scrutiny.
If there are credible allegations against his administration, they should be investigated. If there are financial questions, the documents should be produced. If there were contracts that violated procurement rules, the evidence should be presented. If public funds were misappropriated, the relevant institutions should establish the facts and prosecute where appropriate.
Accountability requires evidence.
It is therefore equally legitimate to scrutinise the administration making the allegations.
How much has Anambra borrowed? What has the state spent? What are the measurable outcomes of those expenditures? Which projects have been completed? Which have been abandoned? How much has been committed to education and healthcare? What has happened to internally generated revenue? What improvements have ordinary citizens experienced in employment, security, infrastructure and the cost of living?
These are the questions that should define the political conversation.
A governor should not need to destroy the reputation of a predecessor to establish his own.
If Soludo believes his administration has surpassed Obi’s achievements, the most powerful response is not accusation. It is performance.
Let the schools speak. Let the hospitals speak. Let the roads speak. Let the public finances speak. Let the entrepreneurs, workers, students and ordinary citizens speak. History will ultimately make the comparison. And if the central argument of Soludo’s political narrative is that Obi’s administration failed, then the burden is not merely to say so. The burden is to demonstrate that Anambra under Soludo has done demonstrably better. That is the standard every successor owes the people.
Anambra does not need a permanent political contest between yesterday’s governor and today’s governor. It needs continuity where continuity is beneficial, correction where correction is necessary, transparency in the management of public resources and leadership capable of building upon previous achievements rather than constantly fighting their authors. The ultimate verdict belongs to the people—and, eventually, to history.
Akor Christian Oche (Due Process) is a human rights activist, a publisher at COPDEM Media TV and National Youth Leader, COPDEM.
