Connect with us

News

Police, INEC move against early 2027 election campaigns

Published

on

As the race towards the 2027 general election gathers momentum, the Independent National Electoral Commission and the Nigeria Police Force have warned political parties against embarking on early campaigns in violation of the electoral law.

INEC Chairman, Mahmood Yakubu, lamented that parties had already kicked off subtle campaigns despite clear provisions that restricted such activities to 150 days before the polls.

The development has drawn sharp reactions across the political space. While former INEC boss Attahiru Jega called for firm measures to curb the trend, the opposition Peoples Democratic Party and African Democratic Congress accused the ruling All Progressives Congress of being the worst offender. The APC, however, defended the commission’s position, even as the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, vowed to enforce the law against violators.

INEC boss, Professor Yakubu, on Wednesday decried the increasing cases of early political campaigns across the country, labeling them a clear breach of Nigeria’s electoral laws and a threat to democratic governance.

He pledged to collaborate with the National Assembly and political stakeholders to amend the Electoral Act, granting INEC the power to sanction defaulters.

Speaking at a one-day roundtable on the challenges of early political campaigns, held at the Electoral Institute in Abuja on Wednesday, Yakubu highlighted what he described as a “disturbing trend” of political campaigning ahead of scheduled timelines, especially in relation to upcoming off-cycle governorship elections, the Federal Capital Territory Area Council elections, and the 2027 general election.

He referenced Section 94(1) of the Electoral Act 2022, which clearly prohibits the commencement of campaigns earlier than 150 days before polling day, and requires all campaign activities to end 24 hours before voting begins.

However, he lamented that political actors often disregarded this provision. “Political parties, candidates and their supporters seem to be perpetually in election mood even when the Electoral commission is yet to release the Timetable and Schedule of Activities for elections.

“Around the country, we have seen outdoor advertising, media campaigns and even rallies promoting various political parties and candidates,” the INEC Chairman noted.

Yakubu warned that these premature activities severely compromise the commission’s ability to enforce campaign finance limits.

“These actions and activities undermine the commission’s ability to track campaign finance limits as politicians, prospective candidates and third-party agents expend large amount of money that cannot be effectively monitored before the official commencement of campaigns,” he said.

He noted that while Nigerians expected INEC, as the regulator of political parties, to act, the commission’s powers were constrained by gaps in the legal framework. “The major challenge for the commission is the law itself,” he noted.

Although Section 94(2) of the Electoral Act 2022 imposes a maximum fine of N500,000 for campaigning within 24 hours of an election, Professor Yakubu pointed out that “there is no sanction whatsoever concerning breaches for campaigns earlier than 150 days to an election.

“Here lies the challenge for the commission in dealing with early campaign.”

He acknowledged that early campaigning is not a new issue, but said the failure of regulatory bodies to address it within existing legal constraints necessitated deeper reflection.

“The seeming inability of the commission and other regulatory agencies to deal with the menace within the ambit of the existing electoral legal framework calls for deep reflection,” Yakubu said.

“With the National Assembly currently reviewing our electoral laws,” Yakubu said, “the commission has also invited the leadership of both the Senate and House of Representatives Committees on Electoral Matters.

“I am confident that they will give due consideration to actionable recommendations by experts,” the INEC chairman added.

He also acknowledged the participation of regulatory agencies, including the National Broadcasting Commission, the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria, and the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria, expressing optimism that the discussions would yield practical solutions.

INEC’s warning comes as political actors are already being accused of heating up the polity ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The rising political activities across the country has raised mixed feelings among many Nigerians. This is as the 2027 general election is still more than a year away.

Nigeria’s four-year electoral cycle is increasingly marked by early campaign build-ups, often shifting attention away from governance as politicians focus more on electioneering than service delivery. This trend has become more pronounced with each cycle, raising concerns about its impact on leadership and accountability.

Historically, premature campaigns have heightened political tension and division. Ahead of the 2023 elections, similar worries emerged as political rhetoric dominated national discourse months before INEC officially commenced campaign activities, with many of those actions going unchecked due to weak legal sanctions.

Police wades in

In a related development, in Abuja on Wednesday, the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, addressed the growing tension surrounding early political mobilisation and social media-driven advocacy, insisting that the police would enforce laws guiding compliance.

Egbetokun questioned whether traditional regulations on campaign timing were still effective or necessary in today’s rapidly evolving media environment.

See also  We’ll intensify efforts to checkmate terrorism in Nigeria – CDS Oluyede

“I think there is one very important question that we need to ask, do we really need to continue to regulate campaigns in 2025?” he asked during the forum.

He further elaborated on the responsibility of the police force in upholding laws passed by the legislature, regardless of the context in which they are applied.

“Based on the fact that there is a need to bridge the gaps between our leaders and the communities and the citizens, that’s one. Then two, every law that is made, as a law enforcement agency, we have a duty to enforce these laws,” Egbetokun said.

The IGP encouraged stakeholders at the roundtable to reflect on the broader implications of these laws on national development and security.

“And then we need to ask ourselves again, what are the relevance of these laws to issues of security and development? That is the question I want to throw to speakers and participants for us to seriously look deep into.”

Despite the challenges, Egbetokun assured that the Nigeria Police would continue to perform its constitutional role in maintaining law and order during the electioneering period.

“Having said that, the Nigeria Police Force will continue to enforce every law that has been duly passed by the Senate, House of Assembly, House of Representatives as well,” he stated.

“And we will continue to do everything needed to be done to ensure that campaigns go on peacefully at any time, at anywhere it is taking place, and we also ensure to provide adequate security for every election at any location and irrespective of the time.”

Ex-INEC boss reacts

In his remarks, former INEC chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega, urged Nigerian authorities to implement stricter penalties and strengthen enforcement mechanisms to tackle the growing trend of premature election campaigns ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Speaking at an INEC Roundtable on “The Challenges of Premature Campaigns” held in Abuja on Wednesday, Jega highlighted the urgent need for reform within the electoral legal framework.

He called for clearer definitions of campaign-related offences and the imposition of firm punitive measures to deter violations.

Jega expressed concern over the increasing involvement of third-party groups often acting on behalf of political candidates and parties in campaign activities that breach the legal timeline.

According to Jega, these groups often engage in unauthorised political advertising, campaign billboards, and media promotions well before the legal campaign window opens.

He stated, “All candidates and their parties, and especially incumbent office holders and their political parties, should be vicariously held responsible and penalised for premature campaigns for them by third-parties.

“All election campaign offences, especially premature campaign offences, should be carefully defined, stiff penalties specified, and strictly applied where applicable.”

Jega also urged anti-corruption agencies, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, to intensify scrutiny of the funding behind these third-party campaigners.

He noted that many such groups are suspected of operating with illicit financing, in violation of campaign finance laws.

“EFCC and ICPC should pay special attention to third-party campaigners and thoroughly interrogate their sources of funding,” Jega urged.

Beyond enforcement, Jega emphasised the need to consider third-party spending when calculating whether candidates have exceeded legally allowed expenditure limits.

“In determining whether candidates and parties expenditures fall within approved limits, the estimated/determined expenditure by a third-party campaigner for the candidate/party should be taken into consideration,” he said.

In light of persistent violations, Jega also reiterated the need for structural reform through the establishment of a specialised Election Offences Commission and Tribunal to investigate and prosecute electoral offences.

“The recommendation for the establishment of Elections Offences Commission and Tribunal has become even more urgent and important for consideration, and should be addressed in the next/current round of electoral reforms before the 2027 elections,” he said.

Jega criticised the widespread disregard for Section 94(1) of the Electoral Act (2022), which restricts the start of campaigns to 150 days before polling day and mandates their cessation 24 hours before the election.

The former INEC chairman warned that such early campaigning not only undermines legal provisions but also distorts the political playing field, entrenches impunity, and contributes to political instability.

“Premature election campaigns are undesirable aberrations in democratic elections, posing serious challenges to the integrity of elections,” he said.

He further noted that the use of public resources by elected officials for self-promotion under the guise of project commissioning or public service achievements creates unfair advantages and fosters a cycle of illegality.

According to Jega, unchecked early campaigning stokes political tensions, fuels ethno-religious divisions, and threatens democratic stability.

He concluded by urging policymakers and electoral stakeholders to prioritise reforms that would strengthen Nigeria’s democratic processes ahead of the 2027 elections.

Meanwhile the Presidency insisted that it remained committed to lawful electoral processes and would not encourage unlawful campaigns from supporters of President Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima.

A presidential aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, referred one of our correspondents to its earlier stance on the issue.

On April 14, 2025, the Presidency disowned billboards and other materials promoting the 2027 campaign for President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima nationwide.

See also  Presidency slams Makinde over demand for UN probe on Oyo abduction

“We urgently call on individuals and groups funding this 2027 political campaign through the ongoing deployment of materials on billboards nationwide to cease immediately,” it said in a statement signed by Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga.

The statement was titled ‘Presidency Disclaims 2027 Campaign Billboards Nationwide.’

Onanuga said, “The Presidency has observed, with dismay, the increasing number of billboards in some cities.

“Worth noting is that some of these billboards with pictures of the President and his wife, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, emblazoned on them, are springing up in Abuja and Kano, in particular. The electoral law that guides the conduct of elections and political campaigns forbids any form of campaign for the 2027 general elections.

“While President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima greatly appreciate their teeming and loyal supporters across the country for their enthusiasm and continuing support, the two leaders do not support any campaign that breaches the laws of the land.”

The Presidency argued that premature campaigning can undermine the integrity of the electoral process and create unfair advantages.

“As law-abiding leaders, President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima do not support any action that undermines our institutions and the electoral process,” Onanuga said.

Until the Independent National Electoral Commission sets the timetable for the 2027 elections, Onanuga cautioned that the President had not endorsed or authorised anyone or any group to mount a 2027 campaign for him through any media channel—be it Out-of-Home, print, digital, radio, or television.

It urged supporters of the administration to cease immediately, adding that “President Tinubu and his deputy are fully committed to delivering the ongoing task of nation-building they have set for themselves.”

Reacting to development, the ruling All Progressives Congress alongside opposition parties, the Peoples Democratic Party, African Democratic Congress, and New Nigeria Peoples Party have endorsed the Independent National Electoral Commission’s plan to pursue amendments that will introduce tougher penalties for political parties or candidates engaged in premature campaigns.

In exclusive interviews with The PUNCH, the PDP and ADC accused the APC and President Bola Tinubu of being guilty of early campaigning and pressed for strict sanctions.

The NNPP, however, urged caution, stressing the difficulty in drawing a clear line between genuine party promotion and electioneering.

Responding, the APC insisted that both the party and President Tinubu uphold the rule of law, denying involvement in early campaigns and expressing support for sanctions against offenders.

Reacting, the PDP Deputy National Youth Leader, Timothy Osadolor, accused the APC and President Tinubu of engaging in early campaigns.

He maintained that the PDP is not involved in such activities and expressed support for any law that sanctions offenders.

The PDP leader stated, “President Tinubu and the APC are guilty of this. Since last year, the APC and even the President have been campaigning for 2027. You will see their billboards everywhere and in every state. So they should be sanctioned.

“For the PDP, If you go around the streets of Abuja, and other parts of this country, you will see that PDP has no single poster for 2027 because we are not only responsible in name and character but we are also responsible in our actions and in our doings.

“Unlike the APC that, out of frustration, realizes that Nigerians are going to kick them out of power and are doing everything to project and infuse themselves into the consciousness of gullible Nigerians that they knew well. And they have something to renew. The mantra upon which they campaigned the last time was hope, but now they say they will renew hope. Anything they want to renew now will not be short of the hopelessness of hopelessness and has taken us as a loop and has capitalized this geographical space called Nigeria.”

Osadolor demanded that APC and President Tinubu be sanctioned.

He continued, “The truth is that the only party that is guilty of these early campaigns is the APC, led and sponsored by the president, who has invested almost all resources and reservations into securing his regime and trying to perpetuate himself in power.

“We want to see these parties and these personalities sanctioned and brought to book. But my people have an adage that when the river or the stream gets polluted from the very source, don’t you see that there is no remedy for such pollution?

“So, the whole issue is being perpetrated by the presidency. Who is going to create checks and balances, if not the institutions themselves, that are supposed to create checks and balances? Who is violating the constitutional? And is it not the constitution that the president swore to uphold?”

Also, the National Publicity Secretary of the African Democratic Congress, Bolaji Abdullahi, asserted that the ruling All Progressives Congress is solely responsible for engaging in early campaigns.

In an exclusive interview with our correspondent, Abdullahi endorsed former INEC Chairman Attahiru Jega’s call for strict sanctions against any party or candidate involved in premature campaigning.

See also  ADC primary Atiku’s set-up, Wike explains why Amaechi had no chance

He stated, “Of course they should ne sanction. But it is only the ruling party that has been campaigning. So, they should arrest them. It’s only the ruling party that has been campaigning. You drive from Abuja Airport to the city center, you will see their billboards. If that’s not campaigning, what is it? Have you seen the billboard of APC anywhere?

“Have you seen the photograph of any ADC prospective aspirant anywhere? Have you seen our posters anywhere? So it’s only the ruling party that is guilty of violating the electoral rules or regulations of the INEC. So they are talking about people to be arrested. These are the people that should be arrested. Do you know how much it costs to put up one billboard?

“Now to line the entire road from the airport to the city center with billboards, who is paying for that? And is it time for campaigns?

“How come INEC has not asked the police to pull down those billboards? Because by putting your billboards all over the place, two years to the election, you are gaining undue advantage over other political parties. So they should be sanction,” he noted.

Meanwhile, the National Publicity Secretary of the New Nigeria People’s Party, Ladipo Johnson, urged caution, emphasizing that there is a fine line between actual campaigning and party promotion.

He stated, “Well, the first thing is, who are those engaging in early campaigns? I don’t know. He probably didn’t cite any example, but it would have been good if he had told us who was engaging in early campaigns so that we know what he means by campaign, if you understand.

“You see, when people are trying to set up a party, set up a coalition, talking about going from area to area, saying come and join our party, whatever, it’s not campaigning.

They’re selling the party. There’s a thin line between selling the party and selling an individual’s campaign programs. That thin line must be recognized.

“So it’s a very difficult one. So we just have to be careful, cautious about this.”

Reacting, the APC Director Publicity, Bala Ibrahim dismissed allegations of engaging in early political campaigns, insisting that both President Tinubu and the party remain committed to upholding the rule of law.

He stated, “What has our party and the President done to warrant any sanction? And what is the meaning of early campaign? I don’t really understand what they are talking about. We cannot be a responsible party and at the same time be engaged in acts that are against the directives of INEC.

“There is nothing our party has done that is against the provision of the law or not in tandem with the provision that INEC has provided.

“Well, our party is always in support of the law. Anything that is against the law is against the interests of our party. Is against what we stand for as a progressive party. We cannot be in support of lawlessness while we are in power. No way.”

The Labour Party’s 2023 presidential candidate, Peter Obi, speaking through his former campaign spokesman, Dr. Yunusa Tanko, dismissed INEC’s capacity to enforce the threat.

“Even INEC can’t bring out all its rules and regulations and expect to see a political party that has not erred. It is not true. Every political party must have run foul of one thing or the other about INEC rules and regulations.

“So the truth is that can INEC in all honesty come out and do due diligence in punishing all political parties and administering it accordingly? The truth about it is no. INEC is also culpable and find guilty of the rules that they put in place for political parties.

“Therefore, they are also punishable and need to purge themselves first before they go after the political parties. That is why anything they want to do now will be an exercise in futility.”

Obi further alleged that INEC depends on ruling parties for survival, describing the commission’s threats as “a thief calling somebody an armed robber.”

However, Labour Party’s National Legal Adviser, Kehinde Edun, backed the commission, saying the law allows it to punish violators.

“Looking at our electoral laws, there are punishments for such acts. There are some infringements by political parties that are actually punishable through imposition of fines and all of that.

“If they now want to enforce, it means they want to now follow the letters of our electoral laws. I think they are in order. It is important as regulators to ensure discipline and adherence to our electoral laws,” Edun noted.

He warned of possible legal pushback, saying, “What is going to happen now is whether they can just go ahead to impose those fines without getting an order of courts. There is no way there wouldn’t be any litigation on the matter. At the end of the day, the court will have to determine whether they are actually guilty of those infringements or not.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

FBI Submits Tinubu’s Records To US Judge

Published

on

The United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has submitted records relating to President Bola Tinubu’s 1993 drug-trafficking and money-laundering case directly to a federal judge in Washington, D.C., court documents have shown.

According to Peoples Gazette, the materials were delivered to Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia under seal, meaning they are currently accessible only to the court as it considers whether to make the records public.

The submission followed a prolonged legal battle over a Freedom of Information Act request filed by American transparency campaigner Aaron Greenspan, who has been seeking access to Tinubu’s records from the FBI.

Court filings indicated that the bureau delivered the documents on Friday, August 28, after Howell ordered it to explain its continued refusal to release the records.

The documents were submitted without notifying Greenspan of their contents.

According to the filing, the records were “hand delivered to the Court on August 28, 2026 in compliance with this Court’s Minute Order dated August 20, 2026.”

Greenspan had originally sought the records through a FOIA application submitted in 2023. He worked with Nigerian journalist David Hundeyin in pursuing the request.

The case later became a dispute over how quickly the FBI was processing the request, with the agency repeatedly asking for more time.

Howell reportedly gave the FBI several opportunities to explain why it was withholding the records but grew increasingly dissatisfied with the delays.

The judge eventually set August 28 as the deadline for the bureau to comply with her directive.

See also  PSC declines promotion of 179 ASPs, elevates 952 to DSP

The bureau had argued earlier that releasing the records could infringe on Tinubu’s privacy rights.

It also maintained that the Freedom of Information Act was primarily intended to promote transparency concerning government operations and records, rather than provide unrestricted access to information about private individuals.

The controversy surrounding the records dates back several years and is linked to allegations concerning Tinubu’s activities in the United States in the early 1990s.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Why My FBI, DEA Records Should Remain Secret – Tinubu Tells US Court

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu has given the United States District Court for the District of Columbia four reasons why his records with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) should not be released.

It was reports that the president gave his reasons in filings by his lawyers, Christopher Carmichael, Victor Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi.

He argued that the US Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and Privacy Act precluded disclosure and there was no public interest in the matter.

Tinubu also said there was no public interest to balance and the plaintiff had ulterior motives for demanding documents with his name on them.

The President’s submission was in response to a request by American transparency activist Aaron Greenspan, which sought disclosure of the records under the US Freedom of Information Act.

Greenspan had argued that his requests concerned the “sitting President of Nigeria…” and “a nation of over 230 million people whose daily lives are directly affected by President Tinubu’s decisions”.

Tinubu, according to filings by his lawyer, urged the US District Court to reject the bid because it amounted to an attempt to obtain private information for political purposes in Nigeria.

The President’s lawyers noted that the request sought access to information about government activities.

They specifically rejected the argument that Nigerians’ interest in Tinubu’s background constituted a public interest recognised by US law.

The team also rejected an argument on the President’s fitness for office, stating that “the asserted ‘public interest in Tinubu’s own fitness for office’ is not an interest FOIA recognises or one that needs to be balanced.”

See also  Bamidele refutes Kalu’s claims of impeachment plots against Akpabio, urges unity

The lawyers further argued that the records sought were protected by privacy provisions under FOIA and the US Privacy Act.

“The redacted information sought by the plaintiff is exempt from disclosure,” they stated, citing Exemption 7(C), which protects personal information contained in law-enforcement records.

The President’s legal team relied on a 1989 US Supreme Court decision, Department of Justice v Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, to argue that FOIA was designed to allow the public to know “what the government is up to” rather than provide access to information about private citizens.

They argued that Greenspan was seeking “disclosure of information about private citizens that is accumulated in various governmental files,” which, they said, “reveals little or nothing about an agency’s own conduct.”

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu’s FBI Records: ADC, NDC Demand Release, Say Nigerians Deserve Truth

Published

on

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s records with United States law enforcement agencies has taken another turn with opposition parties demanding that the documents be made public.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) have questioned the President’s decision to oppose the release of the records, insisting that Nigerians deserve to know the truth about his past.

Naija News reports that the fresh controversy comes as details of submissions made by Tinubu’s lawyers before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia emerged.

In the filings, the President’s legal team, led by Christopher Carmichael, Victor Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi, gave reasons why his unredacted records with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) should not be released to the public.

Tinubu’s lawyers argued that the records were protected under the US Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act.

The legal team maintained that the information being sought contained private details from law enforcement files and therefore fell under provisions that exempt such records from public disclosure.

The lawyers also argued that there was no recognized public interest under US law strong enough to justify releasing the records.

According to them, the argument that Nigerians have an interest in knowing about Tinubu’s background does not amount to the kind of public interest recognized under the Freedom of Information Act.

They further rejected the argument that the documents could be necessary to determine the President’s fitness for public office, saying such an interest was not one that the US law was designed to address.

See also  Court bars Pat Utomi from establishing shadow government

Tinubu’s legal team also questioned the motive behind the request, arguing that the documents were being sought largely for political purposes in Nigeria.

The lawyers said the filings by the American transparency activist, Aaron Greenspan, showed that his main interest was obtaining government documents bearing Tinubu’s name.

They urged the court not to allow the FOIA process to be used as a means of accessing private information about an individual simply because he is the President of Nigeria.

The legal team also dismissed suggestions that the records could expose a secret prosecution or an agreement by US authorities not to prosecute Tinubu, describing such claims as speculative and unsupported by evidence.

The lawyers further argued that the fact that some information about Tinubu’s past had previously entered the public domain did not automatically remove his right to privacy over other details contained in government files.

The President Should Come Out Clean – ADC

Reacting to the development, ADC spokesperson, Bolaji Abdullahi, described the President’s opposition to the release of the records as suspicious.

Abdullahi, who spoke with a correspondent on Saturday, said Tinubu should allow the records to be released if he wanted to put the controversy surrounding his past to rest.

“Why is the President opposing the release of his past records? That is suspicious. The President should allow them (records) to be released to clear himself.

“The President should come out clean. He should be the one calling for the records to be released if he has nothing to hide because this is not good for him and the image of the country,” he said.

See also  Why I returned to Nigeria on Ivorian jet — Jonathan

Nigerians Deserve To Know – Says NDC

The National Publicity Secretary of the NDC, Osa Director, also called on the President to allow the records to be made public.

Speaking with The PUNCH on Saturday, Director rejected the argument that the request for Tinubu’s records was simply a political move by the opposition.

According to him, the President should use the opportunity to clear the air over an issue that has remained in the public domain for more than two decades.

“When a man commits an offence and he says, please, don’t blame me because it is the devil, does that mean he should not face the consequence of his action because it is the devil? That is the question the President should answer.

“Whether it is the opposition or not, if the issue wasn’t there, the opposition would not capitalise on it. Why did the opposition not ask the FBI to release records on our presidential candidate, Peter Obi, or Atiku? That is not an excuse,” Director said.

He argued that the controversy would continue to resurface as long as the matter remained unresolved.

“Nigerians deserve to know and in the interest of the President. He deserves to clear the air. This case has been hanging on since his time as a governor. It is over 20 years.

“Even me, as an opposition, am getting bored. It is time, once and for all, that he should clear the air to allow the issue to be buried,” he added.

Naija News reports that the controversy over Tinubu’s US records dates back several years and became a major political issue during the build-up to the 2023 presidential election.

See also  Nigeria 4-1 Gabon: Eagles soar into World Cup playoffs final

At the centre of the matter are records relating to a 1993 US civil forfeiture proceeding involving $460,000 held in an account linked to Tinubu.

US authorities had alleged that the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were connected to prohibited financial transactions.

Meanwhile, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) had maintained during the presidential election litigation that the case was a civil forfeiture proceeding and did not amount to a criminal conviction.

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending