One has watched with considerable dismay the increasingly intemperate, personal and politically charged attacks by Dr Adetokunbo (Tokunbo) Pearce, a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Lagos State, against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. While one must recognise that Nigeria is a constitutional democracy in which every citizen enjoys the right to criticise public officials, including the President, such freedom must not become a licence for reckless allegations, personal vilification and the deliberate distortion of established facts. Political disagreement is legitimate; the abandonment of intellectual honesty and elementary civility is not.
Dr Pearce’s latest innuendo, reportedly made between November 8 and 10, 2026, has raised questions about the President’s educational background, personal integrit
y and the credibility of the forthcoming 2027 general election. In particularly inflammatory language, he reportedly described the President as a “professional bonafide liar” and a “professional crook”, while alleging that Tinubu never attended Chicago State University, despite claiming to have graduated from the institution. These are grave allegations. They cannot simply be dismissed as ordinary political rhetoric, particularly when they are directed at the occupant of the highest political office in the country. The tantrums should never be accepted as established truth merely because they are delivered with the confidence of someone who once occupied an academic position.
y and the credibility of the forthcoming 2027 general election. In particularly inflammatory language, he reportedly described the President as a “professional bonafide liar” and a “professional crook”, while alleging that Tinubu never attended Chicago State University, despite claiming to have graduated from the institution. These are grave allegations. They cannot simply be dismissed as ordinary political rhetoric, particularly when they are directed at the occupant of the highest political office in the country. The tantrums should never be accepted as established truth merely because they are delivered with the confidence of someone who once occupied an academic position.Dr Pearce has reportedly invoked his five-year teaching experience at Chicago State University, including his alleged position as Director of the programme which President Tinubu purportedly attended, as the basis for questioning the President’s academic history. In the light of strong logic, Pearce’s argument is unconvincing, conservatively misleading and anachronistic. An individual’s former employment at a university does not automatically confer exclusive or infallible knowledge of every student who attended the institution, particularly across different periods, departments and administrative arrangements.
More importantly, there is an established institutional record that cannot responsibly be wished away by political declarations. Chicago State University confirmed that President Tinubu attended the institution between 1977 and 1979 and graduated in 1979 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration, majoring in Accounting. The University’s Registrar also testified to the relevant academic records during the 2023 legal proceedings.
These are matters of institutional documentation and sworn testimony, not merely political claims or recollections. If Dr Pearce has credible documentary evidence that contradicts the University’s official records, he should present it through the appropriate channels; but, repeatedly deploying abusive descriptions and sweeping accusations does not constitute evidence. Neither does academic seniority confer the authority to rewrite institutional history.
One is equally concerned about the increasingly personal nature of Dr Pearce’s attacks. Calling a sitting President a professional liar or crook is not an intellectual argument. It is an attempt to substitute insult for evidence and political hostility for reasoned engagement. President Tinubu is a public figure and must remain open to scrutiny. His policies, decisions, political record and public conducts are legitimate subjects of democratic debate; but criticism must be anchored on verifiable facts and responsible argumentation.
There is also a relevant personal dimension to this controversy. Professor Adebayo Williams, a respected academic who has publicly challenged Dr Pearce’ allegations, has disclosed that he personally introduced Pearce to Tinubu and facilitated their relationship during their earlier years. Professor Williams has also stated that he knows of the assistance and goodwill Tinubu extended to Pearce. Significantly, he (Professor Adebayo) has posited that the President has never sought to parade these private acts of generosity or use them as instruments of public embarrassment.
This testimony deserves consideration, not because personal assistance should purchase political loyalty, but because it raises legitimate questions about the fairness and consistency of the negative narrative now being advanced by Tokunbo Pearce. Nobody is obliged to agree politically with a former benefactor. Nobody should be compelled to support a President simply because of past personal kindness. However, political disagreement should not become an excuse for distorting history, denying established facts or engaging in gratuitous character assassination.
Dr Pearce has also reportedly suggested that President Tinubu and the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could face international legal consequences if serious electoral wrongdoing occurs during the 2027 general election. We consider it necessary to distinguish legitimate electoral vigilance from politically motivated alarmism.
Nigeria’s electoral process must be transparent, credible and accountable. Every political party, candidate, electoral institution and stakeholder has a responsibility to protect the integrity of the democratic process. Any credible allegation of electoral malpractice must be investigated, and anyone found culpable must face the consequences prescribed by law. However, the mere suggestion of possible international prosecution, without clearly established facts or a demonstrated legal basis, should not be presented as though criminal liability has already been established.
Nigeria is a sovereign constitutional democracy with established electoral and judicial institutions. Electoral disputes must be addressed through the appropriate legal mechanisms, and accountability must be based on evidence rather than political threats or speculative declarations.
Dr Pearse is entitled to express personal apprehension about the 2027 elections. He is not entitled to present conjecture as a verdict.
What makes this episode particularly unfortunate is that Dr Pearse is supposedly an educated man and a former university lecturer. His academic background should ordinarily encourage precision, intellectual discipline and respect for documentary evidence. The University classroom is a place where assertions are tested, evidence is interrogated and conclusions are reached through reasoned inquiry. Those standards should not disappear simply because the subject has become politically inconvenient. One is therefore compelled to ask: Is Dr Pearce speaking as an academic seeking historical accuracy, or as a partisan political actor seeking to discredit a political opponent?
There is nothing inherently wrong with being partisan. However, intellectual credentials should never be deployed as a substitute for evidence, nor should academic titles become instruments for legitimising unsubstantiated political attacks.
A position is to be made unequivocally clear. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is not above criticism. No elected official is. His administration must be scrutinised, his policies interrogated and his political decisions subjected to democratic accountability; but, criticism must be truthful, proportionate and responsible.
Nigeria should reject politics of personal vilification, historical distortion and reckless allegations masquerading as public enlightenment. They should equally reject any attempt to turn a legitimate debate about public accountability into a campaign of personal humiliation. Dr. Pearce should be prepared to substantiate his allegations with credible evidence. If he has documentary proof that contradicts the records of Chicago State University, he should present it. If he has evidence of electoral wrongdoing, he should submit it to the appropriate authorities. Otherwise, the Nigerian public deserves better than a succession of provocative statements, personal insults and politically convenient historical revisions.
Dr. Tokunbo Pearce’s attacks are classic traits of a forgetful person, who has been diagnosed with Psychogenic Amnesia. His emotional imbalance must be a reason for his virulent outbursts against the President. A disgruntled person like him can offer nothing better than cheap mudslinging in frantic attempts to stay relevant in the stream of things that are already thousands of miles beyond him.
Perhaps he is a beer Parlour academic person who does not get his “beer”ing right in and out of the beer parlour.
The President had better ignore his attention-seeking invitation for mud contest. One’s appeal to Dr Pearse is simple: Let facts prevail over fury, evidence over insinuation, and intellectual integrity over partisan expediency. President Tinubu can be challenged on his record, policies and performance. But he must not be subjected to a standard in which allegations become facts merely through repetition. The Nigerian people deserve truth, not theatre. Nigeria deserves responsible opposition, not opposition by invective.
Enough is enough!
Benjamin Olumuyiwa Popoola, FCIA, MNAL, is a Professor of Journalism, Communication and Media Studies
Advertisement
