Fani-Kayode Critiques Atiku: Sorting Out the Truth

Femi Fani-Kayode has written a long piece against Atiku Abubakar. But length does not equal proof. Just because something is repeated does not make it true. There are many claims in his piece that need correction or at least some context.

The “Seven Attempts” Argument

It is true that Atiku has tried to become president many times since 1993. But Fani-Kayode mixes up some important details.

Atiku was not a candidate in Nigeria's general elections in 1993, 2011, or 2015. Those were for party nominations. He was actually on the presidential ballot in 2007, 2019, and 2023. Now that he is the ADC candidate for 2027, this will be his fourth general election, not his seventh.

This matters because Fani-Kayode compares Atiku to politicians from other countries by counting their actual presidential elections, while he counts Atiku's party primaries as presidential elections. That is not a fair comparison.

For example, Abdoulaye Wade ran in Senegal's presidential elections in 1978, 1983, 1988, and 1993 before winning on his fifth try in 2000. He won again in 2007 and lost in 2012.

More importantly, Nigeria's Constitution does not stop anyone from running just because they have tried and failed before. Section 137 only prevents someone who has been elected president two times from running again. It does not limit how many times an eligible Nigerian can contest. Whether trying many times shows experience or ambition is up to the voters, not Fani-Kayode's opinion.

By the way, it is not about how many times a man falls. What matters is how many times he gets up, brushes himself off, and keeps going.

Seven Political Parties? Not Quite So Simple

Fani-Kayode also claims that Atiku has been part of seven political parties. This seems to count the People’s Front of Nigeria (PFN) as a party. In truth, PFN was a political group formed during the Babangida transition. It was never registered as a political party. The military government rejected these groups and created the SDP and NRC instead. The PFN members later joined the SDP.

Switching parties is definitely a topic worth discussing. But Fani-Kayode is not the best person to accuse others of that. He joined the APC, then went back to the PDP in 2014, criticized the APC, and declared in 2019 that he would rather die than join them. Yet, he returned to the APC in September 2021.

Party switching can be criticized. But the same standard should apply to everyone.

What Really Happened in 2003?

Fani-Kayode talks about the Obasanjo-Atiku conflict as if there is no disagreement. The history is much more complex. Atiku has often said that PDP governors approached him before the 2003 election, urging him to challenge President Obasanjo for the party ticket. He refused, saying he believed the presidency should stay in the South-West for eight years.

He told an interviewer that the governors wanted him to run against Obasanjo, but he chose to remain his running mate.

Other reports confirm that powerful PDP governors wanted to replace Obasanjo and approached Atiku. But there are significant differences in the accounts of Atiku's actions and the negotiations that followed.

Fani-Kayode can share his memories, but he cannot turn a disputed moment in Nigeria's political history into clear proof of “treachery.”

Mambilla: What the Tribunal Actually Said

Fani-Kayode also mixes Mambilla with Siemens, Halliburton, and others to create the impression of confirmed corruption.

The recent Mambilla arbitration needs careful explanation. The ICC tribunal looked at a $500,000 transfer made by Sunrise promoter Leno Adesanya to an account belonging to Atiku’s then-wife, Jennifer Douglas. The tribunal rejected Adesanya’s explanation because he did not provide enough proof for the foreign exchange transaction. They said the situation raised serious concerns.

That part should not be ignored. But the tribunal also stated that there was no evidence that Vice-President Atiku Abubakar used his official duties to help Sunrise win the contract.

The tribunal did not find Atiku guilty of corruption, nor did it say he wrongly awarded the Mambilla contract to Sunrise. In fact, Atiku did not have the final say on that contract.

An investigation can look into any evidence there is. Investigation is not a conviction, and suspicion is not proof. Political commentary cannot create a conclusion the tribunal did not reach.

The $1.2 Million American Engagement

Then there’s Fani-Kayode’s claim about a “foreign hired gun” supposedly paid $1.2 million. There is no hidden contract here. The agreement between Atiku and the Washington-based firm Von Batten-Montague-York was registered with the US Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The filing says that the firm was hired for government affairs and strategic advice, including policy positioning, briefing materials, and engagement with Congress and government officials. The twelve-month fee mentioned in the filing is $1.2 million.

This filing also requires compliance with FARA, US ethics rules, and election laws.

People can debate the wisdom or cost of hiring a foreign strategic firm. But calling a publicly registered professional engagement proof of a secret plot adds drama, not facts.

The Subsidy Argument Also Misrepresents Atiku’s Proposal

Fani-Kayode says Atiku wants to just “restore the oil subsidy” and ruin Nigeria’s economy. But that is not what Atiku has said.

His proposal is a production subsidy for petroleum products refined in Nigeria, not a return to subsidizing imported petrol. Atiku has said that imported products would not qualify and the program would have a fixed spending limit, National Assembly approval, and independent auditing.

There are valid questions about its cost, implementation, and fit with the Petroleum Industry Act. Even the Presidency has raised these questions. That is the discussion Nigerians should be having: costs, legality, crude pricing, local refining, transport costs, and what policies can sustainably lower prices.

Saying a production subsidy is the same as the old import-subsidy system avoids that discussion instead of engaging with it.

And Then there is the Moral Sermon

Much of Fani-Kayode’s article goes beyond politics and drifts into religious claims and judgments about who God will let become president.

Those ideas are personal beliefs, not evidence. And when political disagreement turns into personal judgment, consistency matters.

Fani-Kayode’s own record has caused a lot of debate. His comments about the Igbo have led to accusations of ethnic stereotyping and hate speech. His own writings show this controversy. Studies on hate speech in politics have also noted some of his ethnic comments.

His former wife, Precious Chikwendu, accused him of domestic violence in an affidavit in court. Fani-Kayode denied her claims through his representatives. The correct way to state this is that an allegation was made and it was denied.

Similarly, when Fani-Kayode attacked Daily Trust journalist Eyo Charles in 2020 for asking who was paying for his travels, it was seen publicly. Fani-Kayode later apologized, saying his behavior was wrong and he had let himself down. The truth is, he has disappointed himself for years. That is part of why he ended up in Ghana for “dry cleaning.”

None of these events prove anything about Atiku Abubakar. That is the point. Political arguments should be based on proof, not personal attacks.

Let the Facts Compete

Fani-Kayode can dislike Atiku, disagree with his policies, and prefer President Bola Tinubu. But history should not be changed to fit those feelings.

Atiku has tried for presidential nominations many times. That is true. He has switched parties like Fani-Kayode. That is true.

The Mambilla tribunal raised serious questions about a $500,000 transaction involving his ex-wife. That is true.

But it is also true that Atiku has only been on Nigeria’s presidential ballot three times before 2027. The tribunal clearly stated there was no proof that he used his official position to help Sunrise secure the contract. His American strategic engagement is publicly registered under FARA. His current proposal for oil is aimed at supporting local production, not returning to the old import-subsidy system.

These details matter. In public discussions, opinion is free. But opinion should never replace facts.