A war of words erupts as the Presidency accuses Atiku of undermining Nigeria’s sovereignty, while the former VP insists Nigerians deserve answers on Tinubu’s past U.S. forfeiture case.

A fresh political storm has broken out between the Presidency and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, following reports that a U.S.-based lobbying group linked to Atiku submitted petitions to American authorities over President Bola Tinubu’s decades-old forfeiture case.

The Presidency, in a strongly worded response on Thursday, described the move as a direct affront to Nigeria’s sovereignty, accusing Atiku of dragging domestic politics onto the global stage.

In a statement signed by Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the government insisted that the 1993 civil forfeiture case in the United States had long been settled without any criminal conviction.

According to the Presidency, attempts to revive the matter through foreign lobbyists amount to “externalising Nigeria’s internal affairs” and undermining the country’s independence.

“It is baffling that a politician who has pursued the presidency for decades would resort to reporting Nigeria’s leader to a foreign government,” the statement read. “Nigeria is a sovereign nation, not a satellite of any foreign power.”

The Presidency further argued that Nigerians had already addressed the controversy through the ballot in the 2023 election and through subsequent rulings of the Supreme Court, declaring the issue effectively closed.

In a sharp counterattack, the government also referenced Atiku’s past legal controversies in the United States, including allegations tied to a congressional bribery scandal and findings from a U.S. Senate investigation on foreign corruption.

It questioned Atiku’s moral standing to raise such issues and alleged that his political ambitions may be driven by a desire to secure immunity from potential legal scrutiny abroad.

Despite the heated exchange, the Presidency maintained that President Tinubu remains focused on governance and is not distracted by what it described as “political theatrics.”

But Atiku fired back just as strongly.

In a statement issued by his aide, Phrank Shaibu, the former Vice President accused the Presidency of dodging the real issue and resorting to personal attacks instead of addressing legitimate concerns.

“When governments abandon facts for insults, they admit they have no answers,” Atiku said, insisting that his actions were not about undermining Nigeria but about demanding transparency.

He stressed that the controversy revolves around publicly available records and not fabricated claims, adding that raising questions about a sitting president’s past does not amount to foreign interference.

“No one has put Nigeria on trial,” he said. “The issue is about accountability and the integrity of the nation’s highest office.”

Atiku also dismissed the argument that Tinubu’s electoral victory had settled all concerns, noting that democratic mandates do not eliminate the public’s right to ask questions.

“Elections give power, but they do not replace transparency,” he stated.

He further criticised what he described as the government’s double standards—welcoming foreign investment and validation while rejecting international scrutiny when it becomes uncomfortable.

The former Vice President challenged the Presidency to provide clear, factual responses rather than political rhetoric, maintaining that Nigerians deserve full disclosure on the matter.

As both sides dig in, the controversy adds another layer of tension to Nigeria’s already charged political landscape ahead of the 2027 elections, with questions of accountability, sovereignty, and political credibility taking centre stage.