Presidential media adviser Daniel Bwala has defended his performance during the widely discussed interview, insisting he remains ready to face any journalist anywhere in the world to promote and defend the administration of Bola Tinubu.
In a statement issued from the State House, Bwala said he accepted the role of Special Adviser on Media and Policy Communication with full awareness that it would attract criticism and intense scrutiny.
According to him, defending the government is a responsibility he carries “with ease and joy,” adding that he does not intend to avoid difficult interviews.
He revealed that the programme producers had initially informed him that the discussion would focus on issues such as security, the economy and corruption.
However, he claimed the interview took a different turn when the host confronted him with past statements he made while he was in the political opposition.
Bwala argued that such political statements were made during a different phase of his career and should be understood within the context of partisan politics.
He noted that political realignments are common worldwide, citing examples from international governments where former critics later joined the administrations they once opposed.
The presidential aide also criticised what he described as “opposition-style research journalism,” alleging that some of the quotes attributed to organisations during the programme were either inaccurate or misleading.
Despite the controversy, Bwala praised Mehdi Hasan’s debating skills and expressed willingness to appear again on the programme if invited.
The response from the opposition came swiftly.
Phrank Shaibu, an aide to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, dismissed Bwala’s defence and described the interview as embarrassing for the government.
In a press release titled “Weep Not for Bwala, Weep for Nigeria,” Shaibu accused the presidential adviser of attempting to rewrite history and masking political opportunism as courage.
He alleged that Bwala had previously asked the Atiku media team to circulate a statement claiming threats to his life from associates of President Tinubu, a request he said the team rejected at the time because it appeared politically motivated.
Shaibu also argued that the interview exposed contradictions between Bwala’s past criticism of the Tinubu administration and his current role defending it.
According to him, the interview showed a spokesperson struggling to reconcile former statements with present political allegiance.
He added that dismissing serious governance concerns as “mere politics” undermines the gravity of issues such as insecurity and loss of lives.
The opposition spokesman further criticised Bwala’s communication style, claiming the presidential aide resorted to dismissing critical reports as “fake news” rather than addressing them with evidence.
Former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Kingsley Moghalu, also weighed in on the controversy.
Writing on social media, Moghalu described the interview as deeply damaging to Nigeria’s global image, arguing that the exchange portrayed the country’s political culture in an unfavourable light.
He said the format of the programme which featured a live international audience amplified the impact of the debate and raised questions about governance standards in Nigeria.
According to Moghalu, the episode highlighted a broader problem in Nigerian politics: the absence of ideological commitment and the dominance of opportunistic political defections.
He also questioned the decision to appoint former critics of the government as official spokespeople shortly after they defect to the ruling camp, suggesting that such individuals may struggle with credibility when defending the same administration they previously attacked.
Moghalu noted that Nigeria could benefit from spokespersons whose credibility would shift discussions toward government policies rather than past political controversies.
The controversy now widely referred to in political circles as “Bwalagate”, has intensified debate about political loyalty, credibility and communication strategy within Nigeria’s government and opposition.
Analysts said the episode reflects a larger struggle within Nigeria’s political environment: balancing political realignment with public trust and credibility in governance.
For now, the debate shows no signs of slowing, as supporters and critics continue to argue over whether the interview represented a strong defence of the government or an uncomfortable exposure of political contradictions.
