Tinubu’s Campaign Plan Sparks Debate as Nigerians, Opposition Demand Accountability
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decision not to visit every state during the 2027 presidential campaign has triggered mixed reactions, with opposition parties accusing him of avoiding scrutiny while some Nigerians defend his plan to rely on party leaders and campaign surrogates.
Tinubu, who announced the decision on Wednesday, October 14, said governance must continue and that the country’s pressing needs require his attention. He maintained that members of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council could take his message to voters across the country.
However, the decision has sparked debate over whether the President should personally defend his administration’s performance before seeking a second term.
While some residents cited his age, health and the demands of governance in support of the move, others insisted that Nigerians deserved direct answers from the President on the economy, insecurity, electricity and the rising cost of living.
Nigerians Divided Over Decision
In Enugu State, a resident, Nobert Okolie, expressed concern about Tinubu’s ability to withstand the rigours of a nationwide campaign, suggesting that governors and other APC leaders could campaign on his behalf.
But Bayelsa State chairman of the Civil Liberties Organisation, David West, urged the President to visit all 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, arguing that voters deserved to hear directly from him.
West also challenged Tinubu to clarify whether health concerns informed his decision, insisting that Nigerians needed an explanation if his physical condition would limit his campaign activities.
In Benue State, a commercial motorcyclist, Cosmos Mbatsaav, popularly known as Okader, described the decision as unfair, saying the President should personally present his manifesto and explain why he deserved another term.
Similarly, a Maiduguri resident, Aliyu Balarabe, accused Tinubu of avoiding public scrutiny over insecurity and economic hardship, although his claims reflected his personal assessment of the administration.
However, Sulaiman Abubakar, a resident of Gombe State, backed the President’s decision, arguing that campaign officials could effectively communicate the APC’s message to voters.
Residents of Ondo and Ekiti states also suggested that Tinubu’s age and physical capacity could justify the decision, while maintaining that his administration must ensure its policies benefit ordinary Nigerians.
Atiku: Tinubu Must Defend His Record
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) opposition figure, criticised the President’s plan, arguing that Tinubu could not seek another four-year mandate without personally accounting for his administration’s performance.
In a statement issued by Phrank Shaibu, Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council, Atiku questioned why the President would cite governance as a reason for missing campaign rallies after spending about three and a half years in office.
He said Nigerians deserved explanations for the rising cost of living, pressure on household incomes, difficulties accessing healthcare and concerns over employment.
According to Atiku, campaign surrogates cannot answer for decisions personally taken by the President.
“The people on his campaign council did not receive the mandate in 2023. Tinubu did. He made the promises. He took the decisions. He must face the questions,” he said.
Atiku also faulted the inauguration of the APC Presidential Campaign Council at the Presidential Villa, arguing that the seat of government should not be used for partisan political activities.
Obi: Accountability Cannot Be Delegated
Former Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, now identified in the report with the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), also faulted Tinubu’s decision, insisting that the President must personally defend his record before Nigerians.
In a statement issued by his Media Office on Thursday, Obi argued that political allies could communicate the administration’s message but could not take responsibility for its decisions.
He challenged Tinubu to explain the impact of his policies on food prices, transportation, electricity, housing and the living conditions of ordinary Nigerians.
“Nigerians are not being asked to elect your surrogates. They are being asked to assess you, your policies, your promises and your performance,” Obi said.
He maintained that a President seeking a renewed mandate must be willing to face voters and answer questions about his stewardship.
Makinde Campaign Organisation Questions Tinubu’s Fitness
The Makinde/Daura Presidential Campaign Organisation (MDPCO) accused Tinubu of avoiding voters because of public dissatisfaction with his administration.
In a statement signed by its Director of Strategic Communications, Richard Ihediwa, the organisation described the decision as a setback for democratic accountability.
It criticised the administration’s handling of electricity, insecurity, petrol subsidy removal and naira flotation, alleging that its policies had worsened economic hardship.
The organisation further urged Tinubu to reconsider his re-election bid if he could not withstand the demands of a nationwide campaign, while promoting Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde and his RESET NIGERIA Agenda as an alternative.
The allegations and claims were part of the organisation’s political criticism of the President.
Labour Party Demands Direct Explanation
The Labour Party also condemned the President’s decision, describing it as disrespectful to Nigerians who expect him to explain the results of his policies.
The party’s Publicity Secretary, Eluma Asogwa, told LEADERSHIP that Tinubu should personally explain the benefits of petrol subsidy removal, naira flotation and other major economic reforms.
Asogwa questioned why the President would skip campaign visits after returning from an extended overseas vacation, arguing that the decision raised questions about the priority he attached to defending his record.
He insisted that presidential aides could not adequately substitute for Tinubu in explaining the administration’s achievements and challenges.
The Labour Party also criticised the use of the Presidential Villa for the inauguration of a partisan campaign council and called for a clearer separation between government institutions and party activities.
As the 2027 general election approaches, the controversy highlights growing political disagreements over presidential accountability, campaign strategy and the responsibility of an incumbent seeking re-election.
While Tinubu’s supporters argue that party leaders can effectively carry the APC’s message nationwide, opposition figures insist that voters deserve direct answers from the President whose record they will ultimately assess at the ballot box.
