2027: APC RAISES FRESH QUESTIONS OVER ATIKU’S RECORD, SAYS NIGERIA’S TREASURY MUST NOT BECOME POLITICAL EXPERIMENT

Party challenges ADC candidate over Mambilla controversy, subsidy proposal and past financial allegations

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has intensified its scrutiny of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar ahead of the 2027 presidential election, raising questions over his record in public office, the controversies surrounding his past financial dealings and his proposed economic policies.

The APC Presidential Campaign Council recently called on Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), to withdraw from the 2027 presidential race, following revelations arising from the arbitration proceedings over the long-running Mambilla Hydroelectric Power Project dispute.

The ruling party’s intervention has reopened a broader debate about whether Nigerians should entrust the former vice-president with the management of the country’s vast public resources.

At the centre of the latest controversy is a $500,000 payment made in January 2003 by Leno Adesanya, promoter of Sunrise Power, to Jennifer Douglas, Atiku’s then-wife, through an offshore company.

The payment was examined during proceedings before an International Chamber of Commerce arbitration tribunal in Paris in connection with the Mambilla dispute.

The APC has interpreted the circumstances surrounding the payment and the Mambilla contract as evidence of serious questions about Atiku’s conduct while serving as vice-president under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

The party has therefore challenged Atiku to explain his role and account for the circumstances surrounding the transaction.
Atiku, however, has rejected the APC’s interpretation, insisting that he did not influence the Mambilla contract and was not indicted by the arbitration tribunal. His position is an important part of the public record and should be considered alongside the APC’s allegations.

For the APC, the Mambilla controversy cannot be viewed in isolation.
Questions surrounding Atiku’s years in government have previously featured in investigations and public controversies involving the Siemens bribery scandal, offshore financial transactions and the William Jefferson case in the United States.

A 2010 US Senate investigation examined more than $40 million described as “suspect funds” that moved into the United States through offshore entities associated with Jennifer Douglas and related parties.
The investigation became part of the long-running public debate over Atiku’s financial dealings.

The important distinction, however, is that such investigations and allegations should not be presented as equivalent to a criminal conviction against Atiku.
That distinction notwithstanding, the APC argues that Nigerians have a right to examine the entire record of anyone seeking the presidency.

The party’s argument goes beyond the Mambilla controversy.
It says the 2027 election is ultimately about who Nigerians can entrust with the country’s finances, natural resources and economic institutions.
The APC has also challenged Atiku over his proposal to introduce a production subsidy for petrol refined in Nigeria.

Atiku has said his proposed intervention would provide crude to qualifying domestic refineries at discounted prices, with the subsidy capped, budgeted and audited. He has argued that the proposal would reduce production costs and make petrol more affordable.

But the APC Presidential Campaign Council has demanded details of the proposal, particularly its legal and fiscal basis.
The party has questioned how the proposed subsidy would operate under the Petroleum Industry Act and has asked Atiku to provide Nigerians with a properly costed policy framework showing how the intervention would be financed and audited.

That debate is significant because subsidy policy has historically involved enormous public expenditure and has remained one of Nigeria’s most contentious economic issues.

The APC’s campaign against Atiku is therefore attempting to frame the 2027 contest around a simple question:
What happens when the person seeking control of Nigeria’s treasury is confronted with unresolved questions from his years in public life?

The party argues that Nigerians should not dismiss such questions merely because they emerge during an election season.
Atiku has maintained that he was never convicted over the various corruption allegations previously made against him. In September 2026, he also challenged those raising the allegations to produce evidence, while responding to a fresh petition seeking the reopening of corruption-related investigations against him.

That response places the burden of the 2027 debate where it belongs: on evidence, documentation, transparency and accountability.

The 2027 presidential election will place several competing visions of Nigeria before voters.

Atiku and the ADC will have the opportunity to defend their candidate’s record and explain their economic programme.
The APC, as the ruling party, will equally have to defend its own record in government and answer questions about the economy, public spending and the impact of its policies.

For Atiku, however, the latest Mambilla controversy has ensured that his political history will once again be placed under intense scrutiny.

For the APC, the message is clear: Nigeria’s treasury cannot be separated from the character, record, policies and accountability of whoever seeks to control it.

The 2027 election will therefore not merely be a contest for political power. It will also be a contest over competing records, competing economic prescriptions and competing claims about who can be trusted with the country’s resources.

And as the APC has repeatedly argued, Atiku must answer the questions surrounding his record before asking Nigerians to hand him the keys to the nation’s treasury