Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has accused the Presidency of resorting to personal attacks instead of addressing questions surrounding President Bola Tinubu’s alleged forfeiture of funds to the United States government over a decades-old drug-related case.
In a statement issued on Thursday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said the Presidency’s response to his recent remarks was evidence that the Tinubu administration had “chosen diversion over disclosure and insults over accountability.”
According to him, rather than provide factual explanations on issues that have continued to attract public attention, the Presidency allegedly focused on attacking his personality.
“When governments abandon facts for insults and substitute evidence with abuse, they unwittingly admit that they have run out of convincing answers. Nigerians expected clarification. What they received instead was a barrage of name-calling and political invective,” the statement read.
The former vice president argued that asking questions about documents already in the public domain should not be interpreted as an attack on Nigeria’s sovereignty.
“No one has reported Nigeria to anyone. Nigeria is not on trial. The issue concerns questions arising from publicly available records relating to the occupant of the nation’s highest office,” Atiku stated.
He maintained that the records in question were neither created by the opposition nor the ADC, insisting that wrapping the issue in nationalism would not answer the concerns raised.
Atiku further criticised the Presidency for revisiting old political allegations against him instead of responding directly to the issues he raised.
“Nigerians can distinguish between political mudslinging and factual responses. Personal attacks do not erase public records, nor do they substitute for transparency. The Presidency should resist the temptation to personalise issues that require clear and factual explanations,” he said.
He also described as ironic what he called the administration’s condemnation of international scrutiny despite actively seeking foreign investment, loans, favourable international ratings and global partnerships.
“You cannot celebrate international validation when it is convenient and condemn international scrutiny when it becomes uncomfortable. Accountability is not foreign interference; it is a democratic obligation,” he added.
The former vice president also rejected suggestions that President Tinubu’s electoral victory had settled all questions regarding public accountability.
“Elections confer political authority, but they do not extinguish the public’s right to ask questions. A democratic mandate is not a substitute for transparency, nor does it exempt any public official from the obligation to account to the people,” he stated.
Atiku urged the Presidency to provide what he described as clear and factual explanations instead of engaging in inflammatory rhetoric.
“If the government believes that the public record has been misunderstood or misrepresented, the appropriate response is to present the facts. Abuse cannot replace evidence, and propaganda cannot replace truth,” he said.
He concluded by insisting that Nigerians deserved answers on whether President Tinubu forfeited money to the United States government in relation to alleged drug-related offences, arguing that transparency remained essential in a democracy.
Background
OSUN DEFENDER reports that the latest exchange is the newest chapter in a series of public confrontations between and the Tinubu administration over the President’s past legal records in the United States.
In recent weeks, Atiku has repeatedly challenged the Presidency to address questions surrounding publicly available U.S. court documents relating to the forfeiture of $460,000 linked to a 1993 civil case in the United States. The former vice president has alleged that the Tinubu administration was attempting to conceal the matter through political attacks rather than addressing the substance of the issue.
The Presidency, through presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, has consistently dismissed Atiku’s allegations, accusing the former vice president of pursuing a campaign aimed at undermining Nigeria’s image and recycling issues that had long been settled politically and legally.
The dispute has since become one of the major flashpoints in the build-up to the 2027 general election, with both camps exchanging statements over issues of transparency, accountability and governance.
The post Alleged Drug Case: Present Facts, Not Insults, Atiku Replies Presidency appeared first on OsunDefender.
