By Yekeen Subair
Since former Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele Fayose, alleged that Oyo State received ₦50 billion from the Federal Government which Governor Seyi Makinde supposedly pocketed for a presidential ambition he has not announced, the Oyo State Government has responded in the only way a responsible government should, with facts, documents, and clarity.
The official responses, issued by the Chief Press Secretary, Sulaimon Olanrewaju, and the Commissioner for Information, Dotun Oyelade, were deliberate in tone and content. First, rather than trading insults, the State asked Fayose to provide proof that ₦50 billion was ever received. This was not evasion. It was necessary to establish whether Fayose was acting in the public interest or merely as a proxy for interests linked to the Federal Government.
That demand for proof mattered. Any document Fayose relied on would have to emanate from the Federal Government itself and would also reveal whether the Federal Government was actively or tacitly aligned with his claim. The Nigerian public needed to see that clearly.
Subsequent statements made the facts plain. Oyo State did not receive ₦50 billion. What it received was ₦30 billion, an intervention fund following the Bodija explosion. Of this amount, ₦24 billion has already been committed and expended on direct relief to victims and the rebuilding of Bodija and its surrounding areas.
As the facts emerged, the opposition shifted the framing. First, the allegation was that Governor Makinde pocketed the money. When that failed, the claim became that he was lying about how the funds were used. When that too collapsed, the narrative moved again, why did ₦30 billion not earn interest after sitting in a bank account for a year? Each shift exposed growing desperation.
To be clear, Governor Makinde did not receive funds from President Bola Tinubu or the Federal Government for personal benefit. Fayose’s claim that the money did not enter state coffers is false. Records show it was paid into Oyo State’s First Bank Infrastructure Account on 4 November 2024.
Then, there is the claim that the funds were meant solely for Bodija victims. That is also incorrect. The intervention fund was designed to rebuild what was destroyed by the explosion and mitigate its wider impact.
The Oyo State Government constituted a recovery committee led by the Deputy Governor, which produced a report detailing how recovery should proceed. The State is implementing that report. This is why ₦4.5 billion was released directly to victims and why reconstruction is ongoing in Bodija and its environs.
The explosion’s effects extended from Ground Zero to the State Secretariat, damaging even the newly built Local Government Office and forcing the postponement of its commissioning, with impacts reaching as far as Akobo.
At no point did Oyo State deny receiving federal intervention. The dispute has always been about the amount. The Federal Government promised ₦50 billion but released only ₦30 billion, and demanded inducements before releasing the balance.
Notably, since this allegation was made, neither the Federal Ministry of Finance nor the Coordinating Minister of the Economy has come forward to deny it.
Instead, there has been a deliberate attempt to manufacture a contradiction between statements by the Chief Press Secretary and the Commissioner for Information on whether the ₦30 billion has been spent. This claim collapses once basic public-finance principles are understood.
The two officials were speaking from different but complementary angles. In government accounting, funds are considered spent once they are approved, committed, and legally allocated, even if cash is released in phases.
That is the sense in which the Chief Press Secretary spoke. The Commissioner, on the other hand, was addressing the narrower question of the cash balance, which he showed remained in the designated account.
This same ignorance fuels the claim that ₦4.5 billion could not have been paid to victims if the intervention funds remain intact. In reality, States routinely pre-finance emergency relief from their own resources to avoid delays, while intervention funds are held as backing and reimbursement for phased reconstruction.
This is standard public-sector financial practice. Presenting it as a lie is either uninformed or deliberately dishonest.
As of December 31, 2025, Oyo State had not drawn down from the ₦30 billion intervention fund. This too has been twisted into suspicion. Governor Makinde has explained why.
The funds were deliberately left untouched because the Federal Government failed to release the full ₦50 billion it promised and instead demanded inducements before releasing the balance. Beginning full drawdown on a partially released intervention envelope under such circumstances would have been fiscally irresponsible.
Now that it is clear the Federal Government has chosen to stand by its demand rather than honour its commitment, the lawful and logical next step is clear.
The State can reimburse expenditures already incurred from that account. Leaving the funds untouched until this point was not duplicity; it was restraint and a refusal to legitimise extortion. Ironically, it is Fayose’s intervention that has drawn public attention to the allegation that inducements are demanded before funds are released.
The fixation on interest exposes yet another misunderstanding. Public funds do not operate like private money. Under Treasury Single Account–aligned rules and Central Bank guidelines, government intervention and infrastructure funds are not interest-bearing. This is intentional, to prevent speculation and fiscal abuse. If states could simply park public funds to earn interest, spending priorities would be distorted and accountability weakened.
What this episode ultimately exposes is not financial impropriety in Oyo State, but the growing weaponisation of misinformation and selective outrage. Documents are leaked without context, basic public-finance rules are ignored, and one governor is singled out while others escape scrutiny. Nigerians should be asking why this standard is applied selectively, who benefits from turning disaster-recovery funds into political weapons, and why federal authorities have remained silent in the face of serious allegations of inducement.
If dissenting governors are to be hounded for refusing to fall in line, then this controversy is no longer about ₦30 billion or ₦50 billion. It is about whether Nigeria is being nudged toward a system where independence is punished and conformity rewarded. That is the real issue this manufactured noise seeks to distract us from.
Subair is an Ibadan-based financial analyst.
.jpg)
