Reno Omokri, a former presidential aide, has sharply criticized Peter Obi, the former Labour Party presidential candidate, for what he perceives as the politicization of recent tragic stampedes in Nigeria. These incidents, occurring in Okija, Anambra State, and Maitama, Abuja, resulted in the deaths of approximately 39 people during food distribution events preceding Christmas. These events followed a similar tragedy in Ibadan where 35 children lost their lives. Omokri accuses Obi of exploiting these tragedies for political gain, suggesting that his public pronouncements on the matter are insensitive and opportunistic. He argues that Obi should have offered condolences and refrained from using the incidents to attack the current administration.
The core of Omokri’s criticism stems from Obi’s tweet condemning the Ibadan incident as a “stark reflection of the systemic failures that plague our nation today.” Obi linked the tragedy to broader societal issues such as poverty, inequality, and inadequate safety standards, implicitly criticizing the government’s handling of these matters. Omokri, however, contends that such tragedies are not unique to Nigeria, citing similar incidents in the United States, South Korea, Israel, and several European countries. He argues that Obi’s attempt to frame the Ibadan stampede as a uniquely Nigerian problem is disingenuous and politically motivated.
Furthermore, Omokri draws a parallel between the recent tragedies and a similar incident that occurred in 2013 during Obi’s tenure as governor of Anambra State. In that incident, 28 people died in a stampede, and Omokri alleges that Obi was present at the scene and was accused by survivors of being responsible. This historical context, according to Omokri, undermines Obi’s current criticisms of the government’s handling of similar situations. He accuses Obi of hypocrisy, arguing that someone who presided over such an incident during his own governorship lacks the moral standing to criticize the current administration.
Omokri’s critique extends beyond the immediate context of the stampedes to encompass Obi’s broader criticisms of the Tinubu administration. He questions Obi’s qualifications to critique Tinubu’s policies, citing statistics purportedly showing that poverty in Anambra State increased significantly during Obi’s governorship. He attributes this rise in poverty to Obi’s alleged mismanagement of state funds, claiming that Obi prioritized personal financial gain over infrastructural development and public welfare. Omokri asserts that Obi neglected critical areas like education, failing to build or commission any new schools during his eight years in office.
Omokri challenges the narrative presented by Obi, suggesting that his public pronouncements are not rooted in genuine concern for the victims but rather in a calculated effort to undermine the current government. He accuses Obi of lacking concrete solutions and resorting to exploiting tragedies for political point-scoring. This, according to Omokri, represents a cynical approach to politics that disregards the suffering of the affected families and trivializes the complexity of the underlying societal issues.
In essence, Omokri’s argument centers on the accusation that Obi is exploiting tragic events for political gain. He points to similar incidents under Obi’s own governance, questions his economic record as governor, and criticizes his lack of proposed solutions. Omokri frames Obi’s public statements as opportunistic and hypocritical, suggesting that his primary motivation is to discredit the current administration rather than address the root causes of these tragedies. He calls for a more sensitive and less politicized approach to such events, emphasizing the need for genuine condolences and constructive solutions rather than political point-scoring.
