Public office demands evidence, not playground insults. A serving minister who appears on national television and resorts to calling an opposition figure a “liar” — or, in the reported phrasing, someone who “lied like a fish drinks water” and “lied for fun” — lowers the standard of governance rather than elevating it.
Festus Keyamo, as Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, holds a position that requires restraint, factual precision, and institutional dignity. When the dispute centres on Peter Obi’s account of a vehicle clamping incident at Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, the proper response is not theatrical name-calling.
It is the methodical presentation of documents, CCTV timelines, FAAN protocols, parking regulations, fine schedules, and a clear chronology of events.
If the claim of selective harassment or political persecution is false, the public is entitled to the primary evidence laid out calmly and completely. Personal attacks do not substitute for that record.
Ministers are not opposition talk-show guests or party street warriors. They speak for the government and, by extension, for the authority of the Nigerian state.
Resorting to insults may generate short-term applause from partisan supporters, but it signals weakness: an inability or unwillingness to win on substance.
It also erodes public confidence. Citizens watching national television expect office-holders to model the standards they claim to enforce — equality before the law, professionalism, and respect for institutional process.
Name-calling achieves the opposite. It reduces a policy or regulatory dispute to a personality contest and invites the perception that the government prefers mud-slinging over accountability.
The distinction matters. An opposition politician may choose sharp rhetoric; a sitting minister cannot without cost. Public office imposes higher duties of decorum precisely because the speaker wields state power and controls official information.
Releasing footage, stating the duration the vehicle was unattended, citing the applicable fine, and documenting whether influence was used to avoid payment are legitimate. Framing the response as “he is a liar who lies for fun” is not. It is the language of the playground, not the language of responsible authority.
If the facts are clear, they should be allowed to speak. Timelines, timestamps, regulations, and records do more to settle public questions than any colourful insult.
Nigerians who follow politics closely can evaluate evidence; they do not need a minister to perform outrage for the camera. When officials choose the latter, they reveal more about their own approach to power than about their opponent’s credibility.
Governance is not improved by lowering the tone. A minister who understands the weight of the office wins arguments with verifiable material, not with pejoratives designed to excite the base.
Anything less diminishes both the individual and the institution he represents.
Public confidence is built on competence and restraint, not on the volume of personal attacks.
-Pamela O.
Political Analyst and Commentator.
About the Author
