A lot of criticism has erupted over the latest list of 32 ambassadorial nominees submitted by President Bola Tinubu to the Senate for confirmation. Prominent among those reacting is Peter Obi, the 2023 presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), who described many of the selections as “shocking.”
In a post on X, Peter Obi did not mince words. He wrote:
“Yes, some of the names being paraded to represent us as ambassadors globally are shocking.”
According to Obi, the list signals deeper problems in Nigeria’s leadership — where “mediocrity, corruption, and impunity” have become allowed to rise to the top. He argued the choice of these nominees reflects an administration disconnected from the suffering of ordinary Nigerians.
“When our people are being killed, our leaders are busy hosting dinners. When children are being snatched from their schools, the political class is celebrating and dancing.” He added
He claimed the current political elite were exchanging gifts and welcoming defectors while many Nigerians struggle to afford their next meal. To him, such appointments are not just tone-deaf — they are a betrayal.
Peter Obi is not alone in disapproval. A former top diplomat, Joe Keshi, has also condemned the list — saying some nominees “should have no business being in the diplomatic service.” He suggested that a number of those picked would have been better off behind bars rather than representing Nigeria abroad.
Similarly, the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) slammed the list as “scandalous,” “reprehensible,” and a very poor reflection on Nigeria’s diplomatic credibility. The party said many nominees are “disgraced propagandists” or politicians with tainted reputations — people they argue have no moral standing to be ambassadors.
A public relations expert, Joseph Effiong, added that the list even appeared to reward individuals with questionable records. He warned that if such people represent Nigeria abroad, the nation risks further damage to its image, especially given recurring allegations against some nominees.
On the other side, President Tinubu’s team defended the selection. Ademola Oshodi, Senior Special Assistant on Foreign Affairs and Protocol, argued that the president has the right to choose his envoys — and he believes the selected names suit the administration’s goals. Oshodi emphasized that none of the nominees has been convicted of any crime and urged Nigerians not to tarnish their reputations without evidence.
He stressed that leaders often pick people they trust or who share their vision — those they think can push Nigeria’s agenda abroad whether in economic, security, or cultural matters.
The uproar around these nominations highlights a deeper anxiety among many Nigerians: that political appointments have become rewards for loyalty rather than merit. Critics fear that installing controversial figures as ambassadors won’t improve Nigeria’s image overseas — but rather reinforce perceptions of nepotism and disregard for competence.
Supporters of the list argue that diplomacy isn’t always about spotless reputations. Instead, they say it’s about trust, political alliances, and delivering results. But many Nigerians remain unconvinced.
As the Senate prepares to begin its confirmation hearings, all eyes are on the nominees — and the potential consequences of sending controversial figures as Nigeria’s representatives abroad.
If the concerns raised by Peter Obi, Joe Keshi, the PDP, and others prove valid, Nigeria may have more than just new ambassadors to worry about — it may have a credibility crisis on its hands.
