Atiku Abubakar

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has raised concerns over an unauthorised payment made into one of his private bank accounts by an unidentified person.

Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), said the transaction was described as a “Contribution Electioneering Campaign” but was neither requested nor approved by him or his campaign organisation.

His Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, disclosed this in a statement issued on Friday.

The statement described the circumstances surrounding the transaction as “deeply troubling” and questioned how an unknown person obtained details of an account whose information is not publicly available.

“The transfer originated from a person totally unknown to His Excellency,” the statement reads.

“Neither His Excellency nor his campaign solicited, authorised or has any knowledge of the individual or entity behind the unauthorised payment.”

Atiku questioned the source of the information used to make the payment, particularly because the affected account is a private one.

“The account is a strictly private one whose details are not in the public domain. This raises a fundamental question: How did unknown persons obtain the confidential banking details of a private citizen?” he asked.

‘NO NIGERIAN’S FINANCIAL PRIVACY IS SAFE’

The former vice-president said the incident raised concerns that could extend beyond his personal circumstances.

He argued that unauthorised access to the banking information of a former vice-president and presidential candidate could indicate a broader threat to the financial privacy of Nigerians.

“If the private banking information of a former Vice President and a leading presidential candidate can be accessed and deployed for reasons yet unknown, then no Nigerian’s financial privacy is safe,” he said.

Atiku also warned about the potential consequences if the information had been obtained through people with privileged access to banking records.

“If established, this would amount to a grave abuse of power capable of exposing the account holder to kidnappers, terrorists, bandits, fraudsters and other criminal elements,” the statement added.

The ADC presidential candidate linked the development to what he described as a series of “suspicious activities” ahead of the 2027 general election.

Despite the incident, Atiku said he would remain focused on his political objectives and would not allow the development to distract him.

“As political activities gather momentum, Nigerians should not be distracted by these tired tactics that smack of character assassination,” he added.

“Such desperate antics have failed before and will fail again. The Waziri Adamawa remains focused on offering Nigerians credible leadership and practical solutions to the nation’s challenges.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has criticised the Tinubu administration’s defence of its economic policies, insisting that government statements cannot hide the hardship many Nigerians continue to face.

Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), made the remarks in a statement issued on Monday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu. The statement followed recent exchanges between the Presidency and the former vice president over the government’s economic reforms, borrowing, tax policies and the impact of the removal of petrol subsidy.

The Presidency, through Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, had defended the administration’s policies. Onanuga argued that one of the major gains of fuel subsidy removal was the significant increase in allocations to states and local governments through the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC).

Responding, Atiku accused the administration of focusing on what he described as public relations and “statistical manipulation” instead of addressing the country’s economic challenges.

He questioned the government’s positive assessment of the economy.

“If the economy is doing so well, why are Nigerians getting poorer?” he asked.

According to him, the government’s emphasis on favourable economic indicators does not reflect the realities facing ordinary citizens.

“The State House celebrates macroeconomic indicators while ordinary Nigerians struggle with microeconomic realities,” he said.

“It speaks glowingly about GDP growth while families skip meals. It boasts of debt ratios while businesses shut their doors. It trumpets reforms while millions of citizens slide deeper into poverty.”

Atiku maintained that the true measure of any government should be the welfare of its people rather than economic figures.

“Governments are not elected to improve spreadsheets. They are elected to improve the lives of their people,” he said.

“Nigerians cannot eat GDP. They cannot cook with debt-to-GDP ratios. They cannot pay school fees with statistical projections.”

The former vice president also rejected the Presidency’s position that critics rely on outdated information. He argued that the effects of the administration’s policies remain evident across the country.

“The Tinubu administration is asking Nigerians to forget the very policies whose consequences they continue to endure every day,” he said.

“Economic policy is not a light switch. The consequences of reckless decisions linger long after the announcements have faded.”

Atiku further questioned why the government continues to borrow despite its claims of improved revenue generation and stronger tax collections.

“If revenue has improved so dramatically, if subsidy has been removed, if tax collection has increased, and if debt servicing has supposedly become more manageable, why does this administration continue to borrow at record levels?” he asked.

He also argued that Nigerians have yet to enjoy the promised benefits of fuel subsidy removal.

“Three years later, Nigerians are entitled to ask: where are those dividends?” he said.

“Instead of relief, they have experienced the highest fuel prices in history, unprecedented transport costs, soaring food inflation, collapsing purchasing power and an economy where millions now struggle to afford even one decent meal a day.”

The ADC presidential candidate criticised the administration’s tax reforms. He said businesses are under pressure because of rising production and operating costs. He added that the government’s performance should be judged by improvements in education, healthcare and living standards.

Citing figures from the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Atiku said 767 manufacturing firms have shut down, while another 335 are operating under distress. He also said manufacturers are holding about ₦2.14 trillion worth of unsold finished goods. He noted that multinational firms such as Procter & Gamble, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi and Kimberly-Clark have exited local manufacturing operations.

According to him, those developments provide a clearer picture of the economy than official government claims.

“The true verdict on this administration’s economic policies is not written by government spokespersons,” he said.

“It is written in the silent factories, the abandoned production lines, the shuttered warehouses, the unemployed workers and the empty pockets of millions of Nigerians. No amount of propaganda can erase that reality.”

He urged the Presidency to focus on improving the living conditions of Nigerians instead of defending its economic record through public statements.

“Governments are not judged by the elegance of their press statements or the sophistication of their economic theories,” he said.

“They are judged by whether families can afford food, whether businesses can survive, whether young people can find jobs, whether communities are secure, and whether citizens have hope for tomorrow.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has dismissed former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s criticism of him, insisting that he remains proud of opposing what he described as the former president’s third-term agenda.

Atiku’s response followed remarks made by Obasanjo during a fireside chat with activist Charles Oputa, popularly known as Charly Boy, in Lagos on Friday. During the event, the former president said he regretted choosing Atiku as his deputy while they served together from 1999 to 2007.

Obasanjo said: “The man I picked as my running mate, my number two, if I had known as I came to know him later, I would not have picked him.

“I mean my vice-president. What I know about him later makes me… thank God because God did not allow his actions and reactions to overwhelm me or to divert my focus from Nigeria or to harm Nigeria.”

In a statement released on Saturday through his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said he received Obasanjo’s comments with sadness rather than anger. He argued that the remarks reflected “the disposition of a man who has allowed personal resentment to cloud historical truth.”

The former vice-president maintained that his opposition to the proposed constitutional amendment was based on his commitment to Nigeria’s democracy.

“I am proud that I stood against the third-term agenda. I am proud that I stood by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” Atiku said.

“I have no apology whatsoever for frustrating every attempt to subvert our democracy for personal ambition.”

He added that no individual is greater than Nigeria. He said if Obasanjo’s resentment arose from his opposition to what he described as the “unconstitutional third-term” bid, he would accept it with pride.

The controversy over the third-term agenda dates back to the 2005–2006 constitutional amendment process, when lawmakers considered a proposal that would have allowed presidents and governors to serve three four-year terms instead of the existing two-term limit. The Senate eventually rejected the amendment bill on May 16, 2006.

Atiku was widely reported to have played a key role in mobilising opposition to the proposal through engagements with lawmakers and other political stakeholders.

Reflecting on the episode, Atiku said the battle was about protecting democratic principles rather than settling personal scores.

“The Nigerian people won that battle. Democracy won that battle. History has already delivered its verdict,” he said.

The former vice-president also referred to comments credited to former Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who recently praised the economic management team that operated during the Obasanjo administration.

“Chief Obasanjo may choose not to appreciate my role in building one of Nigeria’s most prosperous economic eras, but history has been far kinder,” he said.

“The record speaks for itself, and so do the testimonies of those who worked closely with that administration.”

Atiku also recalled the role he claimed to have played during Obasanjo’s imprisonment and political return.

“History records that while Chief Obasanjo was in prison, I stood firmly by him,” the former vice-president recalled.

“I supported his family, worked tirelessly with other patriots for his release and never wavered in my belief that he deserved his freedom.

“When he eventually regained his freedom, he had little to his name. I received him, clothed him, ensured he was properly cared for and extended every support necessary to help him regain his footing.”

He further stated that he “mobilised political structures, built alliances and made enormous personal and political sacrifices that culminated” in Obasanjo’s emergence as president after his release from prison.

“Do I regret helping Chief Obasanjo? Absolutely not. When God gives you the opportunity to lift another human being, you do so without expecting repayment. Acts of kindness are matters of conscience, not commercial transactions,” he said.

“If the true history of Chief Obasanjo’s political journey is ever written—free from selective recollection and personal bitterness—Atiku Abubakar will feature prominently as one of those whom God used to change the course of his life and political career,” Atiku said.

The former vice-president also expressed disappointment that the former president had chosen to revisit past political disagreements at a time when Nigeria faces economic hardship, unemployment and insecurity.

“The 2027 election should be about rebuilding Nigeria, restoring security, reviving the economy and giving hope to the next generation—not reopening old political wounds,” he added.

He concluded by saying that although Obasanjo has the right to hold personal opinions, “he is not entitled to his own facts”.

The latest exchange adds to a long-running public feud between the two leaders. Since leaving office, both men have repeatedly accused each other of corruption, abuse of office and political betrayal. Their dispute intensified recently after Obasanjo alleged that Atiku gave the late former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Ghali Umar Na’Abba, N5 million to initiate impeachment proceedings against him during his first term. Atiku denied the allegation and accused the former president of making false claims to advance political interests ahead of the 2027 general election.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has called on President Bola Tinubu to suspend his Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, to allow what he described as an “unfettered” investigation into corruption allegations against the presidential aide.

In a statement released on Tuesday through his media aide, Paul Ibe, Atiku said the allegations against Gbajabiamila should not be ignored, adding that “silence and indifference” would not erase the “unfolding” claims.

The former vice-president said the situation should be handled in the same manner as the case of former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Babachir Lawal, who was suspended by former President Muhammadu Buhari while investigations were ongoing.

Atiku said he was disturbed by allegations that Gbajabiamila “illegally corner[ed] tens of billions of naira in oil and gas royalties from petroleum regulatory commission, citing a fake law for presidential approval.”

He also accused the Tinubu administration of applying different standards in its anti-corruption campaign.

“Tinubu’s administration can’t pretend to be prosecuting opposition figures for corruption, while corruption is growing like weed under its own nose,” Atiku said.

“You can’t preach the rule of law when your own officials are awarded with the trophy of untouchability.

“Gbajabiamila must be held accountable like every other public official and independently investigated to give him full opportunity to defend himself against the brazen act of corruption as detailed in the Gazette report.

“Former President Buhari suspended his SGF Babachir Lawal from office in order to allow for unfettered investigation against him and Gbajabiamila shouldn’t be treated differently.”

Gbajabiamila has recently faced allegations from Adeniyi Adeyemi, Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), who accused him of collecting a N400 million bribe in exchange for an appointment letter.

The PFIPC has also attracted scrutiny after operating like a government agency despite the absence of any legal framework or presidential approval establishing it. The body reportedly received funding in the 2026 budget, occupied office space at the Federal Secretariat, and recruited staff.

Babachir Lawal was suspended in April 2017 over allegations of breaches of due process and violations of the law in the award of contracts under the Presidential Initiative on the North-East (PINE). Buhari later removed him from office after the investigation, and Boss Mustapha was appointed as his replacement.

Lawal and Atiku also disagreed publicly in June after the former SGF resigned from the ADC. Lawal alleged that the party’s primary election was manipulated in favour of Atiku and his allies.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

A member of the United States Congress, Riley Moore, has said the administration of President Donald Trump will closely observe Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.

Moore, a Republican lawmaker from West Virginia, stated this during an interview with NoireTV, which was later shared on the platform’s social media pages on Sunday.

Speaking on the credibility of Nigeria’s next elections, the congressman said Washington would pay serious attention to how the exercise is conducted.

“What I’d say is that we’re certainly going to be watching these results and how these elections unfold and how they’re executed. And that’s something that myself and the administration are going to be paying very close attention to,” he said.

The lawmaker also revealed that the US House of Representatives was working on an appropriations bill that contains provisions concerning Nigeria. He said the proposed legislation focuses on issues surrounding religious freedom and American security assistance.

“We’re working on Chris (Smith)’s bill, which obviously I’m a co-sponsor of that bill. But I’d say, more importantly, what people need to pay attention to is the appropriations bill that we’re going to have on the floor today,” Moore stated.

According to him, the bill includes strong measures that could shape future relations between both countries.

“There’s a lot of language that I put on that bill that’s inside of it that relates to Nigeria and the persecution of Christians and restrictions on security assistance to the government of Nigeria, and steps that they have to take.

“That bill’s likely to become law. We’re about to, hopefully, pass that here today. And so there’s some pretty strong and aggressive language in that bill that’s going to be binding as it relates to our relationship to Nigeria moving forward,” he added.

Moore further disclosed that he would continue discussions with the Trump administration on matters relating to Nigeria. He also said he was expected to meet the US president.

“I continue to work with the administration on next steps that we’re going to take. I’m actually going to see President Trump tonight. I’ll be having dinner with him and some other members, so yeah, I continue to talk to him about these issues, and it’s very important to him,” he said.

Moore is also a co-sponsor of the Nigeria Religious Freedom and Accountability Act of 2026. The bill was introduced in February alongside Congressman Chris Smith.

The proposed legislation seeks to compel the US Secretary of State to provide regular reports to Congress on efforts aimed at addressing religious persecution and mass killings in Nigeria.

The bill also proposes reviews of Nigeria’s compliance with international religious freedom obligations. It covers US security support, sanctions, humanitarian assistance, and steps taken by the Nigerian government to protect vulnerable communities and prosecute attackers.

In April 2026, the US House Appropriations Committee approved provisions in its annual State Department funding bill that introduced stricter conditions for financial support to Nigeria.

The proposal, which has been forwarded to Congress, states that half of the funds allocated to Nigeria under foreign assistance programmes would remain withheld until the Nigerian government is certified to be taking “effective steps” to tackle religious violence.

The bill also demands support for investigations and prosecution of violence linked to Fulani militia groups. It further requires measures that would ensure the safe return of displaced persons.

By Uzair Adam

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has strongly rejected a Federal High Court judgment ordering its deregistration, describing the ruling as a dangerous development capable of undermining Nigeria’s democracy and political stability.

In a statement issued on Monday by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the ADC alleged that the judgment reflects what it called the growing desperation of the ruling party to retain power at all costs, even if it means compromising democratic principles.

The party maintained that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is the only constitutional body empowered to register or deregister political parties and vowed to challenge the judgment through all available legal channels.

“The African Democratic Congress wishes to warn, in the strongest terms, against any attempt to use the judiciary as a tool to weaken democracy and drag the country into a political crisis,” the statement said.

The party expressed concern over the judgment reportedly delivered by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja in a suit filed by the National Forum of Former Legislators seeking the deregistration of the ADC and four other political parties.

According to the ADC, the plaintiffs argued that the affected parties had failed to meet constitutional requirements for continued registration.

However, the party noted that INEC, in a counter-affidavit filed in May, clearly stated that the ADC had not violated any registration conditions and that no constitutional basis existed for its deregistration.

The statement further noted that INEC reaffirmed that political parties can only be deregistered on constitutionally recognised grounds and not based on political pressure or the interests of certain individuals.

The ADC also faulted the trial judge for proceeding with the matter despite a Court of Appeal order issued on May 22, 2026, directing a stay of proceedings.

“Apart from INEC’s clear position in support of the party, the ADC finds it troubling that the trial judge disregarded a subsisting order of the Court of Appeal. Such action raises serious questions about adherence to established judicial procedures and traditions,” the party stated.

The opposition party described the development as more than a legal disagreement, insisting that it represents a dangerous escalation that could affect Nigeria’s democratic process.

The ADC further alleged that individuals linked to the ruling party played key roles in advancing the case. It also questioned the involvement of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, who reportedly joined the matter as a plaintiff in April.

According to the party, the timing of the judgment is particularly suspicious, coming after it had completed its primaries and prepared candidates for all elective positions ahead of the next general election, including the presidential contest.

Despite the ruling, the ADC called on its members to remain calm and law-abiding while awaiting further directives from the party leadership. It reiterated its commitment to pursuing all lawful options to overturn the judgment.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has selected ex-Minister of Transportation, Chibuike Amaechi, as his running mate for the 2027 presidential election under the platform of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Confirmation of the development came from Leader Sampson, the immediate past chairman of the ADC in Rivers State, who spoke on the matter on Saturday.

Amaechi was among the aspirants who contested the party’s presidential primary. However, he lost the ticket to Atiku.

Before the primary election took place, Amaechi had publicly stated that he did not obtain the ADC presidential nomination form with the intention of later accepting a vice-presidential position.

The former Rivers State governor also rejected the outcome of the primary election after it was concluded. His position aligned with complaints raised by some dissatisfied party members who alleged that the exercise was manipulated in Atiku’s favour.

Despite his earlier stance, indications now suggest that the two politicians have reached an agreement ahead of the general election.

When asked whether Amaechi had accepted the vice-presidential slot, Leader Sampson responded briefly, saying, “yes.”

By Abubakar I. Hamisu

There is a peculiar cruelty in self-inflicted wounds. The African Democratic Congress entered the 2026 political season as perhaps the most consequential opposition force Nigeria has seen in years. Buoyed by the defection of high-profile figures, widespread disillusionment with the ruling establishment, and a genuine public appetite for an alternative, the party had accumulated a reservoir of goodwill that most Nigerian political parties can only dream of. Then came the primaries.

What unfolded in Kaduna State on 25th May 2026 — and in the disputed conduct surrounding it — offers a sobering case study in how a political party can, in a single act of institutional recklessness, begin to squander the very things that made it credible. The ADC must reckon with this honestly, because the consequences of continued evasion are not merely uncomfortable — they are potentially catastrophic.

I.  The Weight of Expectations

To appreciate the gravity of what is at stake, one must first understand what the ADC represented to millions of Nigerians before these primaries. Here was a party that loudly and repeatedly distinguished itself from the culture of impunity that has long characterised Nigerian party politics. Its guidelines for the conduct of primaries — detailed, comprehensive, and impressively structured — reflected an institutional seriousness rarely seen. Its rhetoric promised transparency where there had been opacity, fairness where there had been manipulation, and internal democracy where there had been imposition. Nigerians, understandably exhausted by the status quo, believed it.

That belief is now under acute stress. And the stress was entirely preventable.

II.  What Went Wrong in Kaduna

The documented record is damning. A formal petition filed by Prof. Muhammad Sani Bello, a cleared governorship aspirant, alleges the deployment of armed thugs at voting centres, systematic compromise of accreditation procedures, multiple voting by the same individuals, deliberate delays that disenfranchised legitimate party members, and partisan conduct by electoral officials. These are not vague grievances — they are specific, numbered allegations supported by agents’ reports, documentary evidence, and video recordings.

More significantly, none of this was unforeseeable. Malam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, the Kaduna State ADC leader, wrote an urgent letter to the party’s national leadership five days before the election, specifically warning that the composition of the Electoral Committee was compromised, that it included individuals aligned with particular interests, and that proceeding on that basis would produce rejection, division, and avoidable conflict. He recommended a restructured committee with equal representation of all aspirants and a neutral chairman. The party leadership ignored him.

This is not a mere procedural lapse. It is an institutional failure of the highest order — the failure to heed a timely, well-reasoned, written warning from a senior leader. When the predicted crisis materialised, the party had no defence of ignorance to fall back on.

III.  The Structural Contradictions

Beyond the specific allegations, the post-primary period has revealed structural contradictions that compound the problem. The ADC’s own Guidelines, issued under document reference ADC/NWC/PE/001/2026, prescribe a five-member Governorship Election Appeal Committee. The committee actually constituted for Kaduna State has only three members. This means the very body now tasked with adjudicating the petition may itself be improperly constituted under the party’s rules — a fact that could render any decision it makes susceptible to further challenge.

The Guidelines also specify that the Appeal Committee chairman must be a legal practitioner. Whether this requirement was met is a matter that deserves scrutiny. And critically, the Electoral Committee, whose conduct is under challenge, and the Appeal Committee now hearing the challenge, were both appointed by the same National Working Committee whose judgment El-Rufai had already called into question. The structural independence that credible adjudication requires is, at minimum, compromised in appearance, even if not in fact.

These are not technicalities. In a party whose entire brand proposition rests on institutional integrity, such contradictions between prescribed standards and actual practice are deeply corrosive.

IV.  The Broader Danger: Goodwill Is Not Infinite

Political goodwill operates on a logic similar to financial credit — it takes considerable time and consistent behaviour to build, and can be destroyed with alarming speed. The ADC’s current wave of support is real, but it is also fragile, because it is largely aspirational. People have not yet seen the ADC govern; they have invested hope in what it promises to be. That makes its conduct of internal processes not less important but more so, because right now, how the party treats its own members and aspirants is the only tangible evidence voters have of how it will treat citizens if it wins power.

A party that deploys thugs at its own primaries, that ignores the warnings of its own leaders, that constitutes committees in violation of its own guidelines, and that then routes complaints through an Appeal Committee of questionable constitution — that party is not offering voters an alternative to what they already know. It is offering them a more eloquently packaged version of the same thing.

If this perception takes hold, and it is already forming, the consequences will be severe. The ADC’s most valuable assets — the defectors from other parties, the civil society goodwill, the international attention, the young voters mobilising for the first time — are all conditional on the party remaining what it claims to be. Many of these stakeholders have alternatives. They can return to where they came from, or simply disengage entirely. A mass exodus triggered by disillusionment is not a dramatic possibility; it is a rational response to evidence.

V.  The Kaduna Dimension

Kaduna State deserves particular emphasis because it is not simply one state among many. It is a bellwether. It carries the political profile of El-Rufai, whose national name recognition and credibility were among the factors that drew attention to the ADC in the first place. A perception that his influence was marginalised — or worse, that the primary was conducted in a manner designed to sideline his preferred candidates — goes far beyond Kaduna. It sends a signal nationally about who actually controls the ADC’s machinery and whose interests it truly serves.

Kaduna is also a fiercely contested political environment where the ADC had genuine prospects for 2027. Those prospects depend entirely on the party presenting a united, credible front. Disputed primaries, unresolved grievances, and aspirants who feel wronged do not produce united fronts. They produce parallel campaigns, strategic withdrawals of support, and the kind of internal sabotage that Nigerian political parties know all too well.

VI.  The Legal Quagmire

If the internal appeals process fails to deliver justice — either because the Appeal Committee is improperly constituted, or because its decisions lack credibility, or because aggrieved parties escalate externally — the ADC risks entering a web of litigation that will dominate its pre-election period. Court injunctions against the use of a candidate’s name, challenges to the validity of the primary itself, and INEC-related complications arising from disputed results could paralyse the party’s 2027 campaign machinery at the state and national level simultaneously. Nigerian political litigation moves slowly enough that cases filed today can remain unresolved on election day — and an unresolved cloud over a governorship candidate is a gift to opponents.

The ADC’s own Guidelines warn against this explicitly, noting that internal disputes that escalate to court will distract from the electoral mission. That warning is now prophetic.

VII.  What the ADC Must Do

The path forward is not mysterious. The Appeal Committee must act with courage and genuine independence, not as an instrument of ratification for a flawed outcome. If the evidence supports the allegations — and the documented record suggests it substantially does — the committee must say so, clearly and without equivocation. A fresh, properly supervised primary must be ordered.

Beyond Kaduna, the NWC must conduct an honest national audit of how primaries were conducted across other states, and address systemic lapses before they become the subject of additional petitions, legal challenges, and media narratives. The party’s monitoring teams, whose reports must exist, should be scrutinised to understand how these irregularities were either missed or not acted upon.

Most fundamentally, the party must demonstrate — through action, not rhetoric — that its institutional promises are real. Every grievance left unaddressed, every irregular committee decision left standing, every warning from senior leaders left unheeded, chips away at the one thing that no political party can afford to lose and easily regain: the presumption that it is different.

Conclusion

The ADC is at a crossroads that is more consequential than it may yet fully appreciate. The 2027 general elections represent a genuine opportunity to reshape Nigerian politics in ways that matter. But opportunities of this kind are not permanent. They expire. They expire when the public concludes that a party promising change is, in its internal conduct, indistinguishable from what came before.

The clumsy handling of the Kaduna gubernatorial primary is not merely an administrative embarrassment. It is a test of institutional character. Nigerians are watching — not just the outcome of the petition, but how the party responds to it. The ADC still has time to show that its guidelines are not decorative documents, that its leaders’ warnings are not ignored, and that its members’ votes are not disposable commodities. But that time is not unlimited, and it is running.

Sources & References

This essay is an independent commentary based on the following documents: ADC Guidelines for the Conduct of Primary Elections (April 2026, Ref: ADC/NWC/PE/001/2026); Petition by Prof. Muhammad Sani Bello against the conduct of the Kaduna State Governorship Primary Election (27th May 2026); Urgent Message to ADC National Leadership by Malam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai (20th May 2026, ICPC Detention Day 94); ADC Process and Procedure Guide to Electoral Committee Members issued by the National Organising Secretary; State Electoral and Appeal Committees for Kaduna State issued by the ADC National Publicity Secretary.

By Uzair Adam

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has lamented the worsening insecurity and economic hardship in the country, saying ransom payments have become as common in many Nigerian homes as rent and school fees.

Atiku, in a statement issued on Thursday by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, criticised the administration of President Bola Tinubu for celebrating Nigeria’s debt profile while citizens continue to battle hunger, insecurity and rising living costs.

The former vice president was reacting to recent remarks by the Presidency defending the country’s borrowing level in comparison with other African nations.

According to him, the government’s position showed a disconnect from the realities faced daily by ordinary Nigerians.

“It is both astonishing and insulting that at a time when millions of Nigerians can barely afford one meal a day, when parents are withdrawing children from school because of crushing hardship, when businesses are collapsing under unbearable electricity tariffs and inflation, and when entire communities are being overrun by terrorists, bandits and kidnappers, the Presidency is celebrating debt figures,” he said.

Atiku said insecurity had made travelling by road dangerous in many parts of the country, while families now live in fear of kidnappings and attacks.

“In many parts of Nigeria today, travelling by road has become a gamble with death. Families go to bed praying not to receive midnight calls announcing the abduction of loved ones,” he stated.

He also linked the country’s worsening food crisis to insecurity, noting that many farmers had abandoned their farmlands because of attacks by armed groups.

“Food production has declined sharply because rural communities now live under constant threat of attacks, abductions and killings. The inevitable result is what Nigerians are currently witnessing — astronomical food prices, widespread hunger and rising anger among citizens,” Atiku added.

The Waziri Adamawa maintained that borrowing is not necessarily wrong if funds are invested in projects capable of improving infrastructure, boosting productivity and creating jobs.

However, he argued that Nigerians had seen little improvement in their living conditions despite the government’s increasing debt profile.

He accused the administration of focusing on propaganda rather than addressing the country’s economic and security challenges.

Atiku further recalled that the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, in which he served as vice president, implemented reforms that helped Nigeria exit the Paris Club debt burden and restore international confidence in the economy.

“Nigerians do not care about statistical gymnastics from government spokespersons. They care about whether food is affordable, whether their children are safe, whether businesses can survive and whether the future still holds any promise,” he said.

He urged the Tinubu administration to confront the country’s challenges with sincerity, urgency and compassion before the situation worsens further.

By Aremu Haroon Abiodun

Let me begin with clarity and sincerity. I write this not as a partisan actor, not as a loyalist of any political party, and certainly not as a hired megaphone for any candidate. I write from the standpoint of an analyst, a student of democratic behaviour, and a public relations strategist who understands that politics is not only about power; it is also about perception, timing, trust, and structure.

This piece is not designed to insult President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, attack the ruling APC, mock the opposition, or discredit any politician. Rather, it is an honest attempt to interrogate one of the most defining questions of Nigeria’s approaching democratic race: Is the new coalition a movement of salvation or merely a market of ambition?

In every democracy, coalitions can either rescue nations or ruin trust. In Africa, where democracy is still battling poverty, elite capture, and personality politics, the answer matters deeply. Across the continent, from Kenya to South Africa, Senegal to Zimbabwe, fragmented opposition groups often unite to challenge incumbents. Sometimes they succeed; sometimes they collapse under the weight of ego and suspicion.

Coalitions are usually built on five promises: to rescue the nation, restore democracy, defeat bad governance, unite the opposition vote, and provide a better alternative. But behind these promises often lie hidden motives: personal ambition, ticket negotiation, political survival, revenge against former allies, and access to state power. This is why many coalitions look holy in public but bleed distrust in private.

Nigeria may now be entering that exact season. The African Democratic Congress (ADC), once a relatively minor platform, is suddenly being discussed as a possible shelter for heavyweight politicians dissatisfied with their former homes. But before Nigerians clap, they must ask a dangerous question: Do the coalition members even trust themselves? 

Parties are not built by logos; they are built by loyalty, and loyalty cannot be photocopied overnight.

Nigeria’s politics has become a railway station where leaders keep changing platforms while asking voters to stay loyal.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu did not emerge by accident. His journey moved through the AD, AC, ACN, and finally the APC. He mastered a core truth that many others underestimated: structure beats noise.

While others chased headlines, Tinubu built networks, state influence, and grassroots machinery. Whether loved or criticised, he represents a masterclass in long-term political engineering.

Atiku’s route has been equally dramatic, moving from the PDP to the APC, back to the PDP, and now toward discussions with ADC. No politician in modern Nigeria has contested the presidency with as much persistence. 

Supporters call it resilience; critics call it endless ambition. But as time moves on, the ADC coalition may represent strategic urgency rather than just ideology, a final gamble in a house where the inheritance is uncertain.

Peter Obi’s path from APGA to the PDP, the Labour Party, and now ADC tells the story of a reformer searching for a machine. Obi proved in 2023 that popularity can shake systems, but popularity without nationwide structure has limits. 

If Obi brings credibility and a coalition brings machinery, the equation is powerful. However, can a reformist brand coexist with old political warlords? Movements are powered by hope, but coalitions are powered by compromise.

Moving from the PDP to the APC, the NNPP, and now the ADC, Kwankwaso commands a loyal bloc in the North. He has what every coalition needs—a dedicated voter base—but he also has what coalitions fear: independent ambition. The success of any merger will depend on whether arithmetic can overcome ego.

The urgency for a coalition is often driven by the stark reality of election data. In Nigeria’s 2023 presidential election, the opposition’s fragmentation was clear. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu won with 8,794,726 votes (36.6%), while the combined votes of the three main opposition candidates, Atiku Abubakar (6,984,520), Peter Obi (6,101,533), and Rabiu Kwankwaso (1,496,687), totalled 14,582,740.

Mathematically, the opposition held over 60% of the total vote, but their inability to unite resulted in a win for the incumbent’s structure. This “voter math” is the primary engine behind the current migration toward the ADC; politicians realise that without a unified front, sentiment rarely defeats a settled structure.

Having that in mind, can Atiku trust Obi? Can Obi trust establishment figures? Can Kwankwaso trust a ticket arrangement? Coalitions often fail not because they lack votes, but because they lack trust.

Sooner or later, the “Ticket War” arrives. If Atiku wants one last shot, Obi believes his momentum was stolen, and Kwankwaso believes northern arithmetic favours him, the smiles will disappear. A coalition before a primary is romance; a coalition after a primary is war.

Furthermore, many underestimate the “Tinubu Factor.” Hatred of an incumbent is not a development plan. Tinubu remains a formidable strategist because he controls incumbency power and understands coalition management better than many of his rivals. To defeat a strategist, anger is insufficient, but superior organisation could be the way out.

From a strategic communication perspective, the narratives are already forming. APC’s narrative centres on stability, continuity, and ongoing reforms. ADC represents a force for “Rescue Nigeria,” unites the opposition, and restores hope.

Both parties face a risk. The ADC risks being seen as a shelter for serial defectors, while the APC risks seeming disconnected from economic pain.

Lastline 

Nigeria does not merely need a coalition of politicians; it needs a coalition of ideas, competence, and national healing. If the ADC becomes a real reform movement, it can change history. If it becomes only a marketplace of ambition, it will prove that parties change names faster than systems change realities.

The real contest of 2027 may not be APC vs. ADC. It will be structure vs sentiment, trust vs suspicion, and nationhood vs ambition. On that day, Nigerians, not politicians, will deliver the final verdict on who rules in the next four years.

Haroon Aremu is a public relations strategist and wrote in via exponentumera@gmail.com.