Atiku, Tinubu’s War of Words Escalates as Ex-VP Counters Presidency Over China Jibe, Revives US Forfeiture Scandal

• Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has rejected the Presidency’s criticism over his efforts to revisit President Bola Tinubu’s US civil forfeiture case.

• His response came after the Presidency claimed that, under China’s legal system, Atiku would have been imprisoned over similar allegations.

• Atiku argued that the comparison had backfired, saying China’s strict legal standards would instead invite greater scrutiny of Tinubu’s record.

• The latest exchange marks another escalation in the political battle between the two rivals as debate over accountability and governance intensifies.

July 25, () — Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has dismissed the Presidency’s latest attack over his efforts to revive scrutiny of President Bola Tinubu’s decades-old US civil forfeiture case, arguing that its decision to invoke China’s legal system has instead intensified questions about the President’s record.

The latest exchange follows a statement by presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga, who criticised Atiku for engaging a Washington-based lobbying firm to circulate documents relating to Tinubu’s 1993 US civil forfeiture case to members of the administration of US President Donald Trump, the US Congress and other officials. The Presidency described the move as an attempt to internationalise Nigeria’s domestic Politics and undermine the country’s sovereignty.

Onanuga also took a swipe at the former vice president, saying that “if Atiku were Chinese, he would be rotting away in jail”, while accusing him of pursuing a long-running presidential ambition through foreign lobbying rather than presenting policy alternatives to Nigerians. The Presidency maintained that Tinubu was never criminally convicted in relation to the US forfeiture proceedings and argued that the matter had long been settled.

Responding in a statement issued on Saturday, July 25, through his spokesman, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku described the Presidency’s remarks as a “monumental own goal”, arguing that the comparison with China had backfired.

According to Atiku, invoking China’s criminal justice system inevitably invites scrutiny of the country’s strict penalties for narcotics offences and its uncompromising approach to public accountability.

“Perhaps the spokesman did not realise that the maximum penalty under Chinese law for the most serious drug trafficking offences is death,” the statement said, adding that the Presidency had inadvertently encouraged Nigerians to examine the standards it sought to invoke.

The former vice president insisted that he had never been indicted or convicted of corruption, narcotics offences or any other criminal offence in Nigeria or abroad, describing that as “an incontrovertible matter of public record”.

He also renewed criticism of Tinubu over the long-running US civil forfeiture proceedings involving $460,000 allegedly linked to narcotics trafficking and money laundering, arguing that diplomatic correspondence between governments should not be portrayed as equivalent to a judicial declaration of innocence.

“The United States Government’s reply to diplomatic correspondence is neither a court judgment nor a declaration of innocence,” Atiku said.

Atiku Shifts Focus to Governance

Beyond the legal dispute, Atiku accused the Tinubu administration of failing to address Nigeria’s worsening economic hardship, insecurity and governance challenges.

He also cited controversies surrounding the federal budget and allegations involving senior government officials as evidence that the Presidency should focus on governance instead of political exchanges.

“The Tinubu administration would do better to devote its dwindling political capital to confronting the economic hardship, rising hunger, insecurity and institutional decline afflicting Nigerians instead of manufacturing diversions,” the statement added.

The exchange marks the latest escalation in the increasingly bitter political rivalry between Tinubu and Atiku ahead of the 2027 general election, with both sides continuing to trade accusations over past records, governance and accountability.

The Presidency maintains that the US forfeiture case has been conclusively addressed and has accused Atiku of seeking to revive settled issues through overseas lobbying, while the former vice president insists that questions surrounding the matter remain in the public interest.