OPINION… Dr. Nonye Soludo: What exactly were you clarifying?

There are political interventions that clarify issues. There are others that confuse them. And then there are interventions so spectacularly unnecessary that, by the time the supposed clarification is finished, one is left wondering what exactly needed clarifying in the first place. Welcome to the curious case of Dr. Nonye Soludo and Peter Obi’s apparently dangerous use of the word godparents.

Peter Obi recently spoke about his relationship with Governor Chukwuma Soludo. His purpose was straightforward: to dispel the impression that political disagreements between the two men had turned into personal hostility. He described Soludo as someone with whom he shares a close family relationship and said: “People might not know, my wife and I are godparents to Soludo’s children. Yes, we are that close. So, we are not quarreling, and we will never quarrel.” That was the substance of the statement reported at the Nigerian Guild of Editors conference in Enugu. One would have thought that was that.

Apparently not. The Office of the First Lady of Anambra State deemed this statement sufficiently serious to warrant a public clarification. Through her media aide, Dr. Nonye Soludo told Nigerians that Peter Obi is not formally the godfather of any child in the Soludo family.

Then came the clarification that made it even more curious: Nonye Soludo is the confirmation godmother of Peter Obi’s daughter, and Margaret Obi is the baptismal godmother of one of the Soludos’ daughters. These are not my claims. They are facts from the First Lady’s own clarification, according to Punch Newspapers.

So, Madam First Lady, what exactly are we fighting about? Perhaps the easiest way to understand this controversy is to ask a few simple questions that help clarify it. Who is the baptismal godmother of your daughter? Is she merely Margaret Brownson Usen, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Usen of Akwa-Ibom, considered entirely apart from her marriage and family? Or is she Mrs. Margaret Brownson Obi, Peter Obi’s wife?

And who is the confirmation godmother of Peter Obi’s daughter? Is she simply Frances Chukwunonyelum Ezenwanne, the daughter of Chief Emmanuel Chukwuma Ezenwanne and the late Gloria Uzoamaka Ezenwanne of Isuofia in the Aguata Local Government Area of Anambra State, considered independently of the family she later built? Or is she Dr. Nonye Soludo, the wife of Professor Charles Chukwuma Soludo?

Those distinctions matter because Peter Obi was plainly talking about family intimacy, not filling out a parish sacramental register. He was not testifying before a canonical tribunal. He was not presenting baptismal certificates. He was not giving a lecture on Canon 873. He was explaining why Nigerians should not interpret political disagreements between himself and Governor Soludo as evidence of personal enmity between two families.

Remarkably, the First Lady’s clarification provides evidence of the very closeness Obi described. Margaret Obi is godmother to a Soludo child. Nonye Soludo is godmother to an Obi child. What an extraordinary way to prove Peter Obi’s broader point while attempting to correct his wording.

Yes, if we want to be technically precise, Peter Obi’s wording was broader than the formal sacramental record described by Mrs. Soludo’s aide. That is fair enough. The First Lady’s statement says that Margaret Obi – not Peter Obi – is the baptismal sponsor of a Soludo daughter, and that Nonye Soludo – not Governor Soludo – is the confirmation sponsor of an Obi daughter. There. Clarified.

But ordinary human beings understand something else too: husbands and wives routinely speak collectively about relationships formally attached to one spouse. “My wife and I were invited.” “Our niece.” “Our goddaughter.” “Our family.” “Our in-laws.” “Our grandchildren.” Madam Soludo, language is not always a sacramental register. In your world, a man cannot say, “we are expecting a baby.” That would go against your logic, because only the pregnant mother is expecting a baby.

Peter Obi described the relationship between two families. The First Lady’s office response essentially confirmed that an unusually intimate, reciprocal spiritual relationship does, in fact, connect those families. That is why the ferocity of the correction raises a legitimate question about proportionality. What important public misconception was being prevented? Did Nigerians believe Peter Obi personally stood at the baptismal font holding a Soludo baby? Was there a national emergency over who held the candle? Were television stations preparing documentaries about the baptism?

The First Lady’s statement says her office received inquiries and therefore considered a correction appropriate. Fair enough. But public figures are also entitled to be judged on whether the response matches the significance of what is being corrected. Here, the response risks making a minor imprecision look like an accusation of dishonesty. That was unnecessary.

The most important part of Obi’s statement wasn’t “Godparent.” That is what makes the episode especially unfortunate. Obi’s central message was conciliatory. He was effectively saying: Soludo and I may disagree politically, but this is not personal. Our families are close. The First Lady could have simply let that gracious sentiment stand. Indeed, her own account reinforces it.

Think about what these two families entrusted to each other. Margaret Obi was chosen for a sacred responsibility in a Soludo child’s spiritual life. Nonye Soludo was chosen for a sacred responsibility in an Obi child’s spiritual life. These are not Facebook friendships. They are not two politicians who merely exchanged Christmas cards.

Despite their later political differences, the two families once shared enough intimacy and trust to establish reciprocal godparent relationships for their children. Peter Obi invoked that history to preach friendship despite political disagreement. Somehow, Nonye Soludo felt compelled to correct that officially. Why?

There is another peculiar implication worth examining. Margaret Obi did not become godmother to a Soludo child in a universe completely detached from Peter Obi. Mrs. Obi is not some random woman named Margaret. She was Peter Obi’s wife. Likewise, Nonye Soludo did not become the confirmation godmother to Obi’s daughter as an unrelated woman whose husband happened to be named Charles Soludo. She was Governor Soludo’s wife.

No, marriage does not automatically make one spouse the canonical godparent merely because the other formally holds that role. That distinction should be respected. But marriage is not irrelevant when someone explains the closeness between two families. That is the distinction this entire controversy seems determined to miss.

Peter Obi spoke relationally. Nonye Soludo answered technically. Obi spoke of family affinity. Nonye Soludo offered the equivalent of sacramental fine print. Despite all that fine print, the underlying proposition survived intact: The Obi and Soludo families are connected through reciprocal godparent relationships involving their wives and children. That is precisely the closeness Obi was trying to communicate.

There is another reason, Madam First Lady, that I find this intervention particularly unfortunate. You, of all people, should understand the danger of dragging marriage and family relationships into political combat.

Not long ago, Senator Uche Ekwunife made deeply personal allegations about you, your marriage, and even the paternity of your children. You responded forcefully, calling the allegations fabricated and malicious and accusing her of trying to destroy your family. You were particularly outraged that your children had been dragged into a political quarrel. I understood that outrage, which is why I am puzzled that you would now voluntarily introduce a wedge – however semantic – between husbands and wives in these two families.

Peter Obi said, affectionately and collectively, that he and his wife were godparents to your children. Your response was essentially: No, Peter, not you. Your wife. And regarding your own relationship with Obi’s daughter: Not my husband. Me. Really? After everything you went through when politics trespassed into the intimate territory of marriage and family, why rush to draw these oddly unnecessary lines between husband and wife?

Nobody is suggesting that marriage magically makes Peter Obi the canonical sponsor because Margaret Obi is one. Nobody is suggesting that Governor Soludo acquires your formal sacramental role through marriage. The question is simpler: why was it so important to publicly separate the spouses when Obi’s entire point was the closeness of the two families?

There is a bitter irony here. When Ekwunife dragged your marriage into politics, you protested that your family was being attacked. Now, in a conciliatory statement, Peter Obi invokes the closeness of your two families, and you reach for the scalpel and begin dissecting husband from wife: Margaret, yes; Peter, no. Nonye, yes; Chukwuma, no.

Madam First Lady, haven’t you had enough of politicians trying to put husband and wife asunder? You know from experience how ugly politics becomes when it starts rummaging through marriages. That experience should make you more protective of the language of family unity, not less so. Some doors, once painfully closed, are best left closed.

And there is an irony here too delicious to ignore. Madam First Lady insists on a breathtakingly literal accounting: Margaret Obi is the godmother, so Peter Obi must keep his hands off the term godparent. Nonye Soludo is the godmother, so Chukwuma Soludo must likewise remain outside the linguistic perimeter. No marital association allowed. No familial shorthand permitted. Everybody must remain strictly within his or her officially assigned sacramental lane. Fine. Let us play by those rules. But why are we still calling the person a godparent? If husbands don’t count, why does God?

After all, if Peter Obi cannot colloquially share in his wife’s relationship because he was not the person formally designated at the sacrament, perhaps we should apply this hyperliteralism consistently. Was God standing beside Margaret Obi and signing the parish register? Did God present an identification card? Was His name entered on the certificate as the other parent? If not, perhaps the next press release should urgently clarify that God, too, is not technically a “parent” of the child and must immediately vacate the term godparent. Absurd? Of course it is. And that is precisely the point.

Words describing human relationships often carry meanings broader than their most literal components. A godparent is not literally God plus a biological parent. A father-in-law is not your father practicing law. A mother country did not give birth to you in a maternity ward. And when a husband says “our goddaughter” about a child for whom his wife serves as godmother, most reasonable listeners understand the familial affection without demanding that the Vatican dispatch a canon lawyer to hold a press conference.

Peter Obi was not attempting to amend the baptismal certificate. He was describing the closeness between two families. Yet somehow we have arrived at the point where a former governor’s affectionate use of “my wife and I” requires a public communiqué that distinguishes husband from wife with the precision of a laboratory centrifuge. Madam First Lady, please. Nobody was auditing the parish register.

The irony is that the harder this clarification tries to separate Peter Obi from Margaret Obi’s relationship with your daughter – and Chukwuma Soludo from your relationship with Obi’s daughter – the more ridiculous the exercise looks. Marriage does not make either husband the formal sacramental sponsor. Granted. But neither does marriage disappear merely because someone has produced a baptismal certificate. At some point, common sense should be permitted to attend the ceremony too.

A correction can be accurate yet unnecessary. This distinction is important. The First Lady’s office may be perfectly entitled to insist on the technical fact that Peter Obi is not formally recorded as a godfather to Soludo’s child. But accuracy alone does not answer the more interesting question: Why did this particular imprecision require such a public rebuttal?

Politics is full of statements that genuinely deserve correction – budgets, contracts, debt figures, attributing federal loans to a state governor, $123.77b instead of $123.77m, unemployment statistics, security claims, infrastructure claims, public expenditure, and campaign promises. These things affect people’s lives. Whether Peter Obi affectionately used “my wife and I” when referring to a godparent relationship formally held by Margaret Obi seems considerably less consequential. Especially when the supposed correction confirms that the families actually possess the spiritual relationship he invoked. The response therefore achieved something remarkable: it corrected Peter Obi literally while substantially corroborating him in context. And that is where and why the intended “gotcha” fell flat and backfired in this case.

Perhaps the First Lady’s office merely wanted precision. Its statement acknowledged that Obi “simply misspoke.” That charitable possibility should not be ignored. But neither should the political context. Obi and Governor Soludo have recently been engaged in highly public disagreements, including disputes over the financial record of Obi’s administration. Against that backdrop, a public statement declaring Obi’s account “false” inevitably carries sharper political resonance than a quiet correction of family terminology would.

And that is precisely why restraint would have been wiser. Once the full explanation is given, the supposedly devastating correction becomes: Peter Obi said his family and the Soludo family were close enough to be godparents to each other’s children. Nonye Soludo’s response: Not exactly. Your wife is godmother to our daughter, and my wife is godmother to your daughter. Madam, that is not quite the demolition you may think it is. Not only does it sound petty, but it also sounds remarkably like confirmation that these families were, indeed, very close.

There is almost something comical about it. Obi gave the abbreviated version. The First Lady supplied the annotated edition. Obi said, essentially: Our families are spiritually connected. Nonye Soludo said: Correction! Your wife is spiritually connected to our daughter, and I am spiritually connected to your daughter. Thank you, Madam, for the footnotes. Peter Obi claimed the relationship; you supplied the footnotes.

If anything useful emerged from this episode, it is that Nigerians now know more about the depth of the relationship between these two families than Obi’s original statement revealed. We now know the relationship runs in both directions. A Soludo child has Margaret Obi as godmother. An Obi child has Nonye Soludo as godmother. That is an extraordinary family connection. And it came to public attention because Peter Obi was trying to say something decent in an increasingly poisonous political environment: political disagreement need not become personal hatred. That message deserved commendation and encouragement, not hairsplitting.

Madam First Lady, leave the mud to the politicians. There is nothing wrong with a First Lady correcting an important, existential falsehood about her family. But discernment matters. Not every verbal imprecision warrants a press statement. Not every sentence needs an aide. Not every opportunity to correct a political opponent – or the political opponent of one’s husband – needs to be seized. Sometimes wisdom lies in recognizing the spirit behind what was said.

Peter Obi’s statement was not an attack on Nonye Soludo. It was not an attack on Governor Soludo. It was almost the opposite. He was publicly refusing to turn political disagreement into personal warfare. He was invoking family ties to say, in effect, that whatever happens in politics, this man and I are not enemies. A former governor could say worse about a sitting governor. Far worse.

So, Madam First Lady, having clarified that Peter Obi’s wife is godmother to your daughter and that you are godmother to Peter Obi’s daughter, perhaps the clarification has now clarified itself. The families are close. The wives have reciprocal godparent relationships with each other’s children. The husbands are not formally the sacramental sponsors. Fine. The parish register may now rest peacefully.

But Nigerian politics would benefit from something far more important than perfect terminology: the generosity to recognize when an opponent is extending a hand rather than throwing a punch. Peter Obi told a story about friendship surviving politics. Your office responded with a technical correction. In correcting him, you inadvertently provided evidence of the very closeness he described.

Sometimes the most devastating rebuttal is the one that should never have been issued. And sometimes, Madam First Lady, the wisest political intervention is simply no intervention at all.

By: Vitus Ozoke