The ADC presidential candidate questions the deployment of the programme’s funds as insecurity continues to disrupt schooling in vulnerable communities

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar on Tuesday, August 11, 2026, challenged the Federal Government to account for the deployment of the ₦144.86bn Safe Schools fund as insecurity continues to disrupt education in vulnerable communities across Nigeria.

Also read: Atiku warns of worsening purchasing power under Tinubu

Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, said reports of schools being forced to close across about 40 local government areas raised serious questions about the effectiveness of the Federal Government’s approach to protecting pupils and teachers.

In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, the former vice president said the test of any school-security programme should ultimately be whether children can attend classes without fear.

“At a time when Nigeria is already battling a severe out-of-school crisis, insecurity is driving even more children from the classroom,” Atiku said.

“If schools across about 40 local government areas cannot operate because government cannot guarantee the safety of pupils and teachers, Nigerians are entitled to ask a simple question: where is the ₦144.86bn Safe Schools programme in all of this?”

The Safe Schools initiative forms part of Nigeria’s broader response to attacks on educational institutions, particularly in areas affected by terrorism, banditry and other forms of armed violence.

The Federal Ministry of Education maintains a national policy on safety, security and violence-free schools and has also developed an early-warning handbook designed to help schools identify risks, communicate warning signs and coordinate prevention and emergency responses.

The Federal Government has also sought to strengthen the link between communities and security agencies.

In a May 2026 address, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said parents, teachers, traditional rulers, community leaders, youth groups and local vigilantes all had roles to play in protecting children and urged communities to share information about suspicious movements around schools.

Atiku, however, argued that the continued disruption of schooling showed that existing measures were not delivering sufficient protection in some high-risk areas.

He demanded a comprehensive account of the Safe Schools fund, including the amount mobilised and released, the agencies and contractors that received money, the schools covered, security infrastructure provided and measurable outcomes achieved.

He cautioned, however, that financial accountability alone would not solve the security problem.

“Budgeting money is not the same thing as securing schools. Announcing programmes is not the same thing as protecting children,” he said.

“The true measure of a Safe Schools programme is whether our children can actually go to school safely. By that elementary test, the present approach is failing.”

The criticism comes against the backdrop of a renewed wave of concern over school security in northern Nigeria, where armed groups have repeatedly targeted communities and educational institutions.

Atiku’s statement referred specifically to reported abductions in Borno State, including the reported disappearance of 36 students and a staff member from Government Day Secondary School, Lassa, in Askira/Uba Local Government Area, during examinations in late June.

He also cited reports that 42 pupils remained missing after an attack in Mussa on May 15.

The incidents underscore the vulnerability of schools in communities affected by the long-running insurgency in Borno, where Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province have operated for years.

The Federal Government has acknowledged the seriousness of the threat. At a national security briefing in June, Information and National Orientation Minister Mohammed Idris described the abduction of schoolchildren and teachers as an attack not only on families and communities but also on Nigeria’s future and education system.

Atiku argued that the consequences extend beyond the immediate danger faced by pupils.

“Every school that closes creates another opening for poverty, child labour, early marriage, exploitation and radicalisation,” he said.

“Every child driven from the classroom becomes more vulnerable to the same criminal and extremist networks the government claims to be fighting.”

He therefore proposed a shift from what he described as a centralised approach to a more decentralised, intelligence-led system built around communities where vulnerable schools are located.

Under his proposed model, vulnerable schools would have functional early-warning and rapid-response arrangements, while intelligence would be shared more systematically among residents, schools and security agencies.

Atiku said local residents often know their communities and can identify unusual movements or emerging threats before information reaches federal authorities.

“Local communities know their terrain. They know when unfamiliar people enter their communities and often see the warning signs before Abuja does,” he said.

“Our security architecture will make that local intelligence part of the national response rather than leaving communities helpless until an attack has already occurred.”

The proposal echoes elements of the Federal Government’s own current emphasis on community-based intelligence.

Tinubu’s 2026 security agenda identifies intelligence gathering and community stability among the pillars of the administration’s revised national counter-terrorism doctrine.

The difference lies largely in Atiku’s argument that such mechanisms should become a more deliberate and measurable part of school protection rather than remain a supporting component of the wider security system.

He also challenged President Tinubu over reports that government forces know the locations of forests where kidnappers and terrorists operate.

“When terrorists can decide whether Nigerian children go to school, they are exercising authority that belongs to the Nigerian state,” Atiku said.

“That is not merely an education crisis. It is a surrender of state authority.”

He urged the President to deploy security forces against armed groups operating from those areas, rescue children in captivity and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.

“Intelligence that tells the government where terrorists are hiding but does not result in their capture or the rescue of their victims is of little comfort to parents whose children remain in captivity,” he said.

Atiku’s criticism also comes as Nigeria continues to confront a significant out-of-school challenge.

The Federal Government has itself identified access, enrolment and education security as major priorities, while its Nigeria Education Sector Renewal Initiative currently tracks school safety through a national digital system.

The government’s education portal reports safety information covering 156,000 schools.

The contrast between those institutional measures and the continued closure or disruption of schools in insecure communities is central to Atiku’s argument.

He wants spending on school security to be assessed not simply by the amount appropriated or released but by tangible outcomes in individual communities.

“Safe Schools will be measured by children in classrooms, not billions in government documents,” he said.

The former vice president has also connected the issue to his broader call for restructuring Nigeria’s security architecture, with greater responsibility and intelligence capacity closer to the communities facing threats.

His proposed approach combines local intelligence, early warning, rapid response and clearer emergency arrangements around schools considered particularly vulnerable.

For families in affected areas, however, the immediate concern is less about the architecture of the security system than whether their children can return to classrooms safely.

The Federal Government says protecting children requires cooperation between security agencies and communities, while Atiku argues that the scale of continuing disruption demands a more fundamental rethink of how school security is financed, organised and measured.

The debate therefore extends beyond the ₦144.86bn figure itself.

At its heart is a more basic question about whether public investment in school protection is translating into the safety, continuity of learning and confidence that parents and pupils need.

Atiku said the objective should remain straightforward: criminal and extremist groups must not be allowed to determine when Nigerian schools open or close.