The critics say the ADC candidate’s legal challenge and FBI records request risk shifting the 2027 campaign away from economic and security issues
The renewed battle over President Bola Tinubu’s credentials and foreign records has opened another front in Nigeria’s 2027 political contest, with House of Representatives member Wale Ahmed and The Progressive Counsel criticising former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar for what they described as an excessive focus on the President’s past.
Also read: Presidency attacks Atiku over subsidy u-turns
Ahmed, who represents Agege Federal Constituency, and The Progressive Counsel, a group of lawyers, forensic auditors and policy analysts, issued separate statements on Wednesday, August 26, 2026, arguing that the controversy surrounding the President’s academic and National Youth Service Corps records should not overshadow the issues confronting Nigerians.
Their comments followed Atiku’s recent legal challenge seeking Tinubu’s disqualification from the 2027 presidential election over alleged irregularities involving his NYSC certificate.
Atiku personally appeared at the Federal High Court registry in Abuja on August 14 to depose to an affidavit supporting the suit against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress and the Independent National Electoral Commission. (The Telegraph Nigeria)
Atiku has also urged the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation to release, where legally permissible, records concerning Tinubu, arguing that Nigerians have a democratic right to information about the history and character of the person occupying the country’s highest political office. (Punch Newspapers)
Ahmed described the renewed focus on Tinubu’s credentials as a political distraction and urged opposition figures to present alternative solutions to Nigeria’s economic, security and social challenges.
He acknowledged that public officials could legitimately be subjected to scrutiny but stressed that allegations should not be treated as established facts while related cases remain before the courts.
“The case remains pending, and the allegations have not been established by a court,” Ahmed said.
The lawmaker argued that the 2027 contest should ultimately be a competition of ideas, with candidates explaining how they would address the concerns affecting ordinary Nigerians.
“Nigerians deserve a campaign of ideas, not an endless recycling of allegations,” he said.
“If anybody believes President Tinubu has failed, let that person tell Nigerians what he will do differently and how he will do it.”
Ahmed questioned the continued emphasis on certificates and historical controversies at a time when Nigerians are grappling with economic pressures, insecurity, unemployment and infrastructure challenges.
He also cautioned against conflating the controversy surrounding Tinubu’s Nigerian academic and NYSC records with the separate US legal proceedings involving records connected to a historical investigation and civil forfeiture matter.
“There is a difference between legitimate scrutiny and political obsession. If there is a case before a court, let the court determine it. But an election campaign cannot be reduced to litigating the same allegations repeatedly,” Ahmed said.
The lawmaker also framed the dispute within the broader political contest over regional power.
“I respect the life ambition of Atiku to be President, but for now he should know that the Presidency remains in the South. A southerner must have his eight-year tenure, just as the North did between 2015 and 2023,” he said.
Ahmed said Tinubu was seeking a second term and argued that Atiku could pursue his ambition at a later stage.
“Atiku should know that longevity belongs to God. He could still be President in 2031, only if he retraces his steps to the All Progressives Congress,” he added.
His comments reflect one strand of the argument emerging from the Tinubu-Atiku contest, with supporters of the President seeking to shift attention towards governance performance and continuity rather than controversies over his past.
The Progressive Counsel adopted a different but equally critical approach, challenging Atiku to subject his own eligibility and background to the same level of scrutiny he is demanding of Tinubu.
In a statement titled “Atiku Must Face the Constitutional Mirror”, signed by its convener, Maiyegun Oloriegbe, the group accused the ADC candidate of seeking to revive what it called a “non-existent case of drug conviction” against Tinubu.
The group argued that scrutiny should apply equally to all presidential contenders and raised questions concerning Atiku’s citizenship, referring to historical questions about his birthplace.
“Before Atiku Abubakar challenges President Tinubu’s eligibility for 2027, by digging up a non-existent case of drug conviction against President Bola Tinubu, he must first answer the citizenship question hanging over his own head,” the group said.
The Progressive Counsel cited Section 131 of the Nigerian Constitution, which sets out the citizenship requirements for presidential candidates, and argued that no candidate should be shielded from constitutional scrutiny.
“If Tinubu’s past can be investigated, investigate Atiku’s. If Tinubu’s academic and foreign records can be dissected, dissect Atiku’s. If Tinubu’s eligibility can be litigated, Atiku’s can be litigated with equal force,” it said.
The group further warned against allowing the 2027 campaign to become dominated by litigation rather than political debate.
“Litigation has its place, but it must not replace political persuasion,” it said.
The Progressive Counsel’s criticism came days after Atiku challenged the FBI over its handling of records concerning Tinubu.
The FBI has asked a US federal court for permission to submit a confidential declaration explaining why some records cannot be publicly disclosed, citing legal exemptions and concerns connected with sensitive law-enforcement information. (Punch Newspapers)
Atiku, through his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, said he was not asking the FBI to disclose confidential sources or sensitive investigative methods.
“Protect your agents. Protect your sources. Protect legitimate investigative methods. Redact whatever American law genuinely requires you to redact,” Atiku said. (Time)
He maintained that information capable of lawful disclosure should not be withheld from Nigerians simply because it concerns a politically sensitive figure.
The dispute therefore has two distinct dimensions. Atiku and his supporters are presenting the search for information about Tinubu’s record as part of legitimate public scrutiny, while his critics contend that the approach risks turning the 2027 contest into a prolonged legal battle over historical allegations.
The Progressive Counsel said Nigerians should instead be discussing the economy, security, employment, infrastructure and leadership.
“Let the Constitution speak. Let the evidence speak. Let the courts speak and let Nigerians decide at the ballot box,” the group said.
Atiku has every right to challenge Tinubu’s eligibility through lawful channels, just as the President has the right to contest the allegations and defend his qualification.
The outcome of the pending legal proceedings will ultimately depend on evidence and judicial findings rather than political assertions.
With the 2027 election increasingly taking shape, the clash over Atiku Tinubu records is likely to remain part of the political conversation.
Also read: Atiku reaffirms subsidy plan, disowns aide
But the competing arguments also expose a broader question for the emerging campaign: whether the contest will be dominated by courtroom challenges and historical controversies or by competing plans for Nigeria’s future.
David Okere is a journalist and contributor to Freelanews.com, covering business, governance, public affairs, and human-interest stories with a commitment to accuracy, balance, and public interest reporting.
