APC ABIA SHOULD GET ITS FACTS RIGHT
The latest statement credited to the Abia State chapter of the All Progressives Congress raises several issues that deserve clarification. Political disagreement is legitimate, but allegations of ethnic profiling, financial wrongdoing and deliberate discrimination should be supported by verifiable evidence rather than repeated as established facts.
First, the APC claims that the present administration dismissed more than 15,000 workers and suggests that the majority were Ngwa people. What is documented is that, in September 2023, the Abia State Government issued a directive disengaging persons employed into the state public service from December 2022 onward as part of what it described as a public-service reorganisation. The figure of 15,000 and the claim that most of the affected persons were Ngwa have not been established by an independently verifiable nominal roll or other publicly available official data.
The APC statement also alleges that a commissioner who is related to Governor Alex Otti publicly admitted that most of the disengaged workers were Ngwa. Such a serious assertion requires the name of the official, the radio station, programme, date and preferably the recording or transcript. Without that evidence, it remains an allegation and should not be presented to Abians as an established fact.
It is equally difficult to reconcile the assertion that there has been infrastructural neglect throughout Ngwa land with documented public projects being undertaken in communities within the area. Whether the pace or distribution of development is satisfactory is a legitimate matter for political debate, but saying that there has been neglect across all Ngwa local governments is an absolute claim that requires evidence considerably stronger than political rhetoric.
The accusation that Governor Otti has systematically profiled Ndi Ngwa also requires proof. Political actors are entitled to criticise appointments, projects, expenditure and policies, but an allegation of deliberate ethnic discrimination should be demonstrated through appointments data, budgetary allocations, project distribution or other measurable evidence. Assertions alone do not establish discriminatory government policy.
The same standard should apply to the allegation that Governor Otti described Ngwa people as persons “without brain.” Where such a statement is said to have been made privately, the responsible course is to establish who heard it, when it was made, in what context and whether any recording or other independently verifiable evidence exists. An accusation should not become a fact simply because it has been repeatedly circulated.
The APC statement further introduces allegations of “brazen embezzlement,” “stealing of public funds” and “nonexistent projects.” These are extremely serious claims. They ought to be accompanied by the names of the projects concerned, contract sums, payment records, procurement documents, audit queries or findings by competent investigative authorities. Without such particulars, they remain political accusations rather than demonstrated facts.
Perhaps the clearest factual issue in the entire statement concerns the Umuahia–Ikot Ekpene Road. Presenting the road as though Abia State has no financial or execution role is incomplete. The project involves both the Federal Government and the Abia State Government. The Federal Government owns the federal road and has participated in its reconstruction, while the Abia State Government is also implementing a substantial section following federal approval for the intervention. The dispute therefore cannot reasonably be reduced to a choice between “Federal Government project” and “Abia State project.” Both governments have identifiable roles.
It is therefore misleading to suggest that acknowledging Abia State’s intervention automatically amounts to denying President Bola Tinubu or the Federal Government credit. The accurate position is to acknowledge the Federal Government’s ownership, approval and participation while also acknowledging the section being executed through the Abia State Government.
The APC statement also moves from factual claims into judicial prediction when it declares that an impending Supreme Court decision will “most definitely” go against a faction of the Labour Party. Courts do not decide cases by political prediction. What can presently be stated is that, on 21 April 2026, the Court of Appeal dismissed Julius Abure’s appeal and affirmed the Nenadi Usman-led leadership arrangement. Abure subsequently announced his intention to proceed to the Supreme Court. Until the Supreme Court gives a decision in any properly constituted appeal before it, nobody can responsibly present the eventual outcome as an established fact.
Similarly, campaign assertions that one party is the only organisation undertaking serious grassroots mobilisation across every ward in Abia State are claims that require comparative evidence. APC may legitimately describe its own campaign activities, but proving that no other political party is engaged in comparable mobilisation is another matter entirely.
The same distinction should be maintained regarding the 2027 governorship election. Political parties and aspirants are free to express confidence in their prospects, but statements that any named aspirant is already “coming to take over” remain campaign rhetoric until voters make their choices and the electoral process is concluded.
Abia’s political conversation will be better served when parties debate verifiable issues: roads completed, hospitals rehabilitated, schools improved, jobs created, workers paid, internally generated revenue, debt, procurement, taxation, security and measurable living conditions. Those are matters citizens can interrogate with evidence.
Ndi Ngwa deserve respect, as does every other community in Abia State. Precisely for that reason, their identity should not be turned into an instrument for unsupported political accusations. Anyone alleging discrimination against them should place credible evidence before the public so that the matter can be judged on facts.
The APC is therefore entitled to oppose the government, criticise its policies and present an alternative programme to Abians. The Labour Party and the Abia State Government are equally accountable for their records. But none of the parties should substitute allegations for evidence or political prediction for judicial fact.
Abians deserve a contest of records, programmes and verifiable facts — not a competition in inflammatory claims.
