Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has challenged the Federal Government to investigate and prosecute him if it has evidence linking him to the alleged $16 billion spent on power projects during the Olusegun Obasanjo administration.
Atiku accused the Bola Tinubu-led government of reviving old allegations to distract Nigerians from questions about how the additional revenue generated after the removal of petrol subsidy is being used.
In a statement issued on Wednesday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said the renewed focus on power projects, privatisation and public assets was an attempt to divert attention from the economic difficulties facing Nigerians.
The controversy over the Obasanjo administration’s power-sector spending, often put at about $16 billion, dates back to a House of Representatives investigation after Obasanjo left office in 2007.
The Umaru Yar’Adua administration raised further questions about the expenditure in 2008. The figure was initially reported at about $11 billion before the $16 billion estimate became widely associated with the controversy.
Atiku, who served as Vice President under Obasanjo, said allegations against him had been raised repeatedly over the years without resulting in prosecution.
He acknowledged that he chaired the National Council on Privatisation but maintained that he disagreed with the concept of the power project and did not oversee its implementation.
Atiku said successive governments had enough time and investigative institutions to establish any wrongdoing against him if evidence existed.
He challenged the Federal Government to investigate him, produce evidence and prosecute him if a case could be established, rather than rely on what he described as propaganda.
The former Vice President also demanded greater transparency over the funds saved through the removal of petrol subsidy, asking the government: “Where is the people’s money?”
He argued that Nigerians have endured higher petrol, transport and food prices following the subsidy removal and should be able to see clear benefits from the increased government revenue.
Tinubu announced the removal of petrol subsidy shortly after his inauguration in May 2023. The Federal Government defended the decision as necessary to ease pressure on public finances and redirect funds towards infrastructure and social programmes.
Atiku, however, alleged that while ordinary Nigerians continue to bear the cost of the policy, powerful interests benefit from fiscal incentives, waivers, tax credits and concessions.
He said the government could not remove relief from poorer Nigerians and justify it on the basis of development while describing interventions benefiting powerful interests as economically necessary.
Atiku also dismissed what he called sponsored social-media attacks, insisting that they would not stop him from demanding accountability ahead of the 2027 elections.
Presidency attacks Atiku over subsidy position
The Presidency has meanwhile criticised Atiku over what it described as contradictory positions on the issue of petrol subsidy.
Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said Atiku’s position had been explained differently three times within one week.
In a statement titled, “Atiku confused on petrol subsidy; third U-turn in one week shows he is simply playing politics,” Onanuga said Atiku’s spokesperson, Paul Ibe, initially stated that the former Vice President would restore petrol subsidy if elected and eventually phase it out.
Another aide, Phrank Shaibu, later described that position as an unauthorised and misleading representation of Atiku’s proposal, saying the subsidy would remain until domestic refining expanded, supply became stable and market competition improved.
Atiku subsequently said his position remained unchanged and pledged to restore what he called a targeted subsidy.
The Presidency challenged him to explain exactly how the proposed subsidy would operate, including its cost, beneficiaries, funding source and conditions for its eventual termination.
Onanuga also argued that the cost of living is influenced by factors beyond petrol prices, including insecurity, exchange rates, logistics, storage, flooding and agricultural input costs.
He questioned Atiku’s proposal to link subsidy to crude oil prices, noting that crude oil is refined into several other products, including diesel, aviation fuel, kerosene, lubricants, plastics-related materials, asphalt, propane and butane.
The presidential aide recalled that diesel was deregulated in 2004 during the administration in which Atiku served as Vice President, while kerosene and aviation fuel were deregulated at different times.
Onanuga therefore questioned whether Atiku’s proposed subsidy would also cover other petroleum products used by households and businesses.
He accused the ADC candidate of focusing too narrowly on petrol and said Nigeria needed a broader economic strategy to address the factors driving inflation and the cost of living.
APC tells Atiku to go to court
The All Progressives Congress, APC, also challenged Atiku to go to court and provide evidence for his allegations that “thieves” are responsible for Nigeria’s political and economic problems.
The party’s response followed comments attributed to Atiku in a video shared on his social media accounts, where he reportedly described the 2027 presidential contest as a battle against people who had “stolen” the election and the economy.
APC Director of Publicity, Bala Ibrahim, urged the former Vice President to seek legal redress if he had evidence supporting his allegations.
Ibrahim questioned whether Atiku had lost confidence in the judiciary, arguing that as a former Vice President and presidential candidate, he should know the appropriate legal channels for presenting such claims.
He said Atiku should take the evidence to court and allow the judiciary to determine whether those accused had committed any offence.
NANS rejects proposal to restore subsidy
The National Association of Nigerian Students, NANS, has also criticised Atiku’s proposal to restore petrol subsidy if elected President in 2027.
NANS President, Akinteye Babatunde, described the proposal as a political response to economic hardship rather than a sustainable solution to Nigeria’s fiscal challenges.
Babatunde argued that returning to the previous subsidy system without addressing its structural weaknesses could recreate the problems that led to its removal.
He said the former subsidy regime consumed trillions of naira, disproportionately benefited heavy fuel consumers, encouraged smuggling and limited government investment in critical sectors.
However, he stressed that the success of subsidy removal should not be measured only by the money saved, but also by how those resources are deployed.
According to him, increased government spending on education, healthcare, infrastructure and agriculture should ultimately translate into improved living conditions and a stronger economy.
The NANS president said an outright return to the old subsidy arrangement without a clear framework for fixing its weaknesses would amount to a political response to a genuine economic problem.
