Hon. Toyin Anibire Adams, popularly known as Obailukan, has berated former presidential campaign director, Akin Osuntokun, over his criticism of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar for referring to President Bola Tinubu as “Bola” in his Independence Day address.
In a statement made and signed by his Media Executive, Comrade James Onifade, on Obailukan’s official X page, Obailukan described Osuntokun’s objection as misplaced, arguing that the former Vice President, who is 79 years old, does not require a lecture on how to address a political contemporary, especially when the issue at stake is the performance of the government he is criticising.
The question Osuntokun should answer is simple: what exactly should Atiku call Tinubu? Is “Bola” suddenly an insult because it appeared in a political speech? Is the President’s first name now so sacred that mentioning it constitutes an affront to the Nigerian state?
There is a fundamental difference between disrespecting an individual and criticising the occupant of a public office. Atiku’s address was a political intervention on Nigeria’s condition. He criticised policies, questioned government claims, and challenged the administration to account for its record. Vanguard reported that Osuntokun himself acknowledged that Atiku was entitled to criticise Tinubu but took exception to his repeated use of “Bola.” That is where Osuntokun’s argument becomes difficult to sustain.
If the substance of Atiku’s Independence Day message is wrong, Osuntokun should challenge the substance. If the figures are inaccurate, provide the correct figures. If the allegations concerning governance, the economy, public spending, or government policy are unfounded, produce evidence to counter them. Reducing the entire conversation to whether a former Vice President should call the President “Bola” only shifts attention away from the issues raised in the address.
Atiku did not deny that Tinubu is President. He did not claim that the office of the President had ceased to exist. He simply referred to the President by his name while delivering a political critique. Indeed, the same Independence Day address contained substantive criticisms of the Tinubu administration, including questions about the cost of living, public debt, the 2025 budget extension, cash transfers, and other government policies. Osuntokun should therefore tell Nigerians whether the real problem is the name “Bola” or the uncomfortable questions Atiku raised.
Nigerians are facing real issues that cannot be solved by policing vocabulary. People are concerned about the economy, the cost of living, security, jobs, public accountability, and the direction of the country. These are the issues political actors should be debating. Obailukan therefore advised Osuntokun to focus his intellectual energy on the substance of Nigeria’s political debate rather than manufacturing controversy over how an experienced statesman referred to another experienced politician.
Respect for public office should never become a shield against legitimate criticism. A President deserves respect for the office he occupies, but the office does not place the President beyond scrutiny. Calling the President “Bola” does not, by itself, invalidate an argument about governance. If Osuntokun disagrees with Atiku, Nigerians deserve to hear him dismantle Atiku’s arguments with facts and evidence — not merely complain about the name he used.
The real question is not whether Atiku called him “Bola.” The real question is whether the issues Atiku raised about Nigeria deserve answers.
Signed:
Comrade James Onifade
Media Executive to Hon. Toyin Anibire Adams a.k.a Obailukan
Founder and Convener, Obailukan Strategic Support Group for Atiku (OSSAT)
