ΦFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE.
AUG 10TH 2026≅

PRESS STATEMENT
TARABA’S DEBT: THE GOVERNMENT HAS ANSWERED A QUESTION NOBODY ASKED

The latest statement issued by the Taraba State Government on its debt profile does not resolve the fundamental questions surrounding the State’s finances. Instead, it largely attacks figures that we did not present as the official DMO debt stock while avoiding the more important questions about borrowing, disbursement, repayment, outstanding obligations and fiscal transparency.

Let us be clear:

Nobody is claiming that an undrawn facility automatically becomes outstanding debt.

Nobody is saying that an approved ₦350 billion facility should simply be added to the DMO debt-stock figure.

Nobody disputes the distinction between an approved facility, an amount actually drawn and an outstanding balance.

These are basic principles of public finance.
The question is: where are the figures?

1. THE GOVERNMENT’S OWN NUMBERS RAISE QUESTIONS

The Government says Taraba’s debt is ₦89.74 billion, relying on the DMO’s September 2025 publication.

But if the Government truly wants citizens to rely “exclusively” on the DMO, why did it ignore the DMO’s subsequent publication?
The DMO later published Taraba’s domestic debt at ₦85.51 billion as at December 31, 2025.
(Debt Management Office Nigeria)

So even the Government’s chosen benchmark is outdated.

This may appear minor, but it demonstrates the larger problem:

A government presenting a fiscal update in August 2026 should not selectively present an older DMO figure as the latest available figure when a newer official DMO publication exists.

2. THE ₦206.78 BILLION FACILITY HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED

In 2023, the Taraba State House of Assembly approved approximately ₦206.78 billion in financing from Zenith Bank, UBA, Keystone Bank and Fidelity Bank. The stated purposes included major allocations to education, infrastructure, agriculture, security and health.
(TheCable 2003)

The Government’s response now says, correctly, that the original approved facility is not necessarily the same thing as the outstanding debt.
Fine. We agree.

But then tell Tarabans:
How much was actually drawn?
How much came from Zenith?
How much came from UBA?
How much came from Fidelity?
How much came from Keystone?
How much was repaid?
How much was restructured?
How much remains outstanding?
And, most importantly:
Where did the money go?
Instead, the Government gives citizens a lesson on the difference between approval and debt without providing the underlying figures needed to independently verify its explanation.

That is not full disclosure.
3. THE DMO DEBT STOCK IS NOT THE ENTIRE FISCAL PICTURE

This is perhaps the biggest misconception in the Government’s statement.

The DMO’s published debt stock is an important and authoritative measure of recognised public debt.

But debt stock is not synonymous with every financial obligation of a government.

A serious fiscal disclosure should also enable citizens to understand:
outstanding contractor liabilities;
arrears;
guarantees;
contingent liabilities;
judgement debts;
PPP obligations;
undisbursed but committed facilities;
debt-service obligations;
refinancing obligations;
and other commitments that may have future implications for the State’s finances.

Therefore, quoting the DMO debt stock and declaring the matter closed is not sufficient.

The DMO figure tells us the recognised debt stock. It does not, by itself, answer every question about the State’s total financial commitments.

4. WHERE IS THE FULL RECONCILIATION?

The Government has actually told us what it should do.
It says:
“The proper questions are not simply the headline amount of a proposed facility, but: How much was approved? How much was actually drawn? How much has been repaid? How much remains outstanding?”

Excellent.

We agree completely.
Now publish the answers.
We challenge the Commissioner of Finance to publish a simple reconciliation of every major borrowing facility since 2023:
1. Facility Approved
2. Actually Drawn
3. Repaid
4. Outstanding
5. Purpose
6. Commercial Banks

₦206.78bn?

Capital Market Programme
₦350bn?

EBID Financing
$268m?

Other facilities?

This is the information Tarabans need.

5. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ₦206.78 BILLION?

The Government cannot simultaneously say:
“Do not count the ₦206.78bn as debt because the approved amount is not necessarily the amount drawn”
and then refuse to disclose the amount actually drawn.
Those two positions do not sit comfortably together.

If the amount drawn was small, publish it.
If it was large, publish it.
If it was fully repaid, show the repayment schedule.

If it was restructured, show the restructuring agreement and outstanding balance.
There is nothing complicated about this.

6. THE GOVERNMENT’S CLAIM ABOUT THE DMO ALSO NEEDS CLARIFICATION

The Government says the Debt Management Office has already described the ₦1.2 trillion claim as:
“misleading, inaccurate, and politically motivated.”

We challenge the Government to publish the official DMO statement containing those words.

Because the publicly available reporting we can trace attributes that language to a chartered accountant and financial analyst, Olayinka Gabriel Motunrayo, rather than to an official DMO pronouncement.

If the DMO actually made that statement, publish it.

If it did not, the Government should withdraw the attribution.

A government demanding that citizens rely on verified information should itself be meticulous about attribution.

7. THE ₦350 BILLION BOND IS NOT THE ISSUE

We have no problem with the Government stating that the proposed ₦350 billion bond should not be treated as money already received if it has not been drawn.

That is correct.

But the Government cannot use that correct point to avoid discussing actual borrowing and actual disbursements under other facilities.

A facility that has not been drawn is one thing.
A facility that has been approved and drawn is another.

A facility that has been drawn and partially repaid is another.
A facility that remains outstanding is another.
That is precisely why we are asking for the numbers.

8. “TARABA IS ONE OF THE LEAST INDEBTED STATES” IS NOT A DEFENCE

This argument is particularly weak.
A person who owes ₦10 million is not necessarily financially irresponsible because another person owes ₦50 million.

The relevant questions are:
Can you repay what you owe?
What did you borrow it for?
What did you achieve with it?
What will it cost the people in the future?
And:
Are you being honest with them about all your obligations?

Taraba being ranked 25th in domestic debt does not answer any of those questions.
Ranking is not accountability.

9. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD STOP CONFUSING “NOT DEBT” WITH “NOT A FINANCIAL OBLIGATION”

This is the heart of the matter.
Some commitments may not appear in the DMO’s headline debt-stock figure.
That does not automatically mean they have no financial consequences.

The people deserve to know the full fiscal exposure of the State.
Not just what fits neatly into a DMO table.

CONCLUSION
The Government’s response has not disproved the need for greater transparency.

If anything, it has strengthened it.

We are not asking the Government to add undrawn loans to the debt stock.

We are not asking the DMO to count proposed financing as money already borrowed.
We are asking a much simpler question:

WHAT HAS TARABA STATE ACTUALLY BORROWED, WHAT HAS IT ACTUALLY RECEIVED, WHAT HAS IT SPENT, WHAT HAS IT REPAID, WHAT DOES IT STILL OWE, AND WHAT OTHER FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS HAS IT COMMITTED THE STATE TO?

Publish the documents.
Publish the bank-by-bank disbursement schedules.

Publish the repayment schedules.
Publish the outstanding balances.
Publish the debt-service obligations.
Publish the contingent liabilities.
Publish the contractor arrears.
Publish the guarantees.
Publish the details of the projects financed.
Then Tarabans can judge the Government’s financial stewardship for themselves.

The people of Taraba are not asking for propaganda.
They are asking for the books.
And when a government responds to a demand for transparency by repeatedly telling citizens to look at the same headline figure, without publishing the underlying reconciliation, the reasonable response is not to stop asking questions.
It is to ask better questions.

Taraba deserves the numbers behind the numbers.

Simple!!!

Bwacha Media Team!!
Monday, Aug 10th 2026.