By Precious Ijo

Political influence is one of the most celebrated currencies in Nigerian politics. Candidates point to relationships with governors, presidents, party leaders and other influential figures as evidence of their capacity to deliver. But political relationships, important as they may be, should not by themselves determine how citizens assess a candidate. The more important question is: What has that influence produced for the people?

This question is particularly relevant as political conversations intensify ahead of the 2027 elections in Abia State, especially the contest for Abia North Senatorial District. A recent article by Ogbonnaya James, titled “Bourdex and the Politics of Borrowed Influence,” questioned the political relevance, experience and capacity of Chief Dr. David Ogba Onuoha Bourdex, MFR, OON. Those are legitimate issues for political debate, but the same standard must apply to every candidate.

The attempt to portray Bourdex’s association with Governor Alex Otti as “borrowed influence” deserves closer examination. Bourdex and Otti did not begin their political relationship after Otti became governor. In 2015, when Otti contested the Abia governorship on the platform of APGA, Bourdex was the party’s senatorial candidate for Abia North. They were again part of the same political struggle in 2019.

There is therefore nothing unusual about Bourdex identifying with Otti and the direction of the present administration. Political parties are built around shared ideas and programmes, and candidates routinely campaign on the record of governments with which they are aligned. If Bourdex believes Otti’s administration is delivering for Abia, he is entitled to make that case to voters.

The real question is not whether Bourdex supports Otti, but what Bourdex himself brings to that political relationship.

Senator Orji Uzor Kalu has considerable political experience, having served as Abia State governor for eight years and represented Abia North in the Senate since 2019. His supporters can legitimately point to his national political relationships and experience. But those attributes should invite accountability rather than end the conversation.

The appropriate questions are straightforward: What measurable benefits have his years in public office produced for Abia North? What constituency projects were initiated, funded and completed? Which remain functional? What legislation has he sponsored or influenced? What federal opportunities have his political relationships delivered to the district?

If national influence is presented as a major strength, then the electorate is entitled to ask what that influence has produced. Political access is valuable, but access itself is not an achievement. Its value lies in what it delivers to ordinary citizens.

The argument for Bourdex should not rest entirely on his relationship with Governor Otti. He has his own record in business, telecommunications and politics. He is associated with Bourdex Telecommunications Limited and has been recognised with national honours, including MFR and OON. He has also previously contested for the Senate in Abia North.

These are relevant credentials, but they should not place him beyond scrutiny. If Bourdex is seeking another opportunity to represent Abia North, voters should demand a clear legislative agenda and specific commitments. His business experience and political history must ultimately translate into measurable public value.

The strength of his case, therefore, should be a combination of experience, independent capacity, political partnership and a credible plan for Abia North.

Constituency projects should be evaluated beyond announcements and political claims. A project appearing in a budget does not automatically mean that it has been delivered. Citizens should be able to determine what was appropriated, which agency implemented it, who received the contract, how much was released, where the project is located, its level of completion and whether it is functional.

The same principle applies to empowerment programmes. There is a clear difference between an initiative personally funded by a politician and one financed through government appropriation. Both may benefit constituents, but the source of funding should be transparent. Public money should not be presented in a manner that creates confusion about its origin.

The Senate is fundamentally a legislative institution, so senatorial performance should not be measured only by the number of constituency projects associated with a representative. Voters should examine bills sponsored, legislative interventions, motions on issues affecting constituents, committee contributions and policies influenced.

A politician who claims significant influence should be prepared to demonstrate the results of that influence. Likewise, a candidate promising to work with a governor should explain exactly how that partnership will benefit the people.

Bourdex’s relationship with Otti should therefore not automatically be treated as evidence of political weakness. A senator and governor who share a political platform and developmental objectives can potentially work together to attract federal infrastructure, investment and opportunities.

At the same time, Bourdex must demonstrate that he possesses the competence and independence required of a senator. Supporting Otti cannot substitute for a personal record or a clear legislative programme.

The same principle applies to OUK. His relationship with national political leaders can be an advantage, but voters are entitled to ask what those relationships have produced for Abia North.

The 2027 contest should be about more than personalities, slogans and political connections. Abia North deserves evidence. Candidates should publish verifiable records of their interventions and explain what they intend to accomplish if elected.

The electorate should look beyond photographs and political access to usable roads, schools that function, healthcare facilities that serve communities, electricity that supports businesses, jobs that create sustainable livelihoods, industries that generate economic activity and legislation that solves real problems.

Longevity is not necessarily performance. Access is not necessarily achievement. Appropriation is not execution, and political alignment is not necessarily borrowed influence.

Ultimately, the question before Abia North is simple: Who has the stronger evidence, clearer vision and greater capacity to deliver?
Let the candidates present their records. Let the documents speak. Let the people judge. Because influence must leave evidence.

Ijo is a social commentator who writes from Abia State.