Atiku Fights Back As Ex-Rep Asks EFCC To Reopen 20-year-old Case

By EJIKE EJIKE, Abuja and PATRICK OCHOGA, Benin

A former member of the House of Representatives, Hon. Ehiozuwa J. Agbonayinma, has asked the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to reopen and prosecute a financial crimes case involving former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, based on allegations contained in an EFCC report issued in 2006.

The former lawmaker, who also served as a member of the Code of Conduct Bureau, made the request in a petition dated August 27, 2026, and filed by his legal representatives, Sagitarian Law Firm.

The petition, exclusively obtained by LEADERSHIP Weekend and signed by the firm’s Principal Counsel, Hannibal Egbe Uwaifo, was received at the office of the EFCC chairman on September 1.

Atiku, in reaction, described the renewed recycling of decades-old allegations against him as the “convulsion” of political opponents cornered by their own failures, who, he said, were unable to defend the hardship Nigerians are enduring and were now desperately searching for an Atiku controversy because they could not survive scrutiny of their own economic record.

In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said the sudden return to allegations rooted in the political battles of the Obasanjo era was not a demonstration of strength but an admission that his opponents had run out of answers to hunger, declining purchasing power and the unbearable cost of living.

In the letter addressed to the EFCC chairman, the law firm requested that the commission revisit what it described as serious allegations of corrupt practices, money laundering and other financial crimes allegedly involving Atiku.

The firm recalled that sometime between 2005 and 2006, the EFCC investigated allegations of grand corruption involving the then vice-president and subsequently released a report titled “The EFCC Report on Vice-President Abubakar Atiku (Full Report)” in September 2006.

According to the lawyers, the report contained what they described as serious allegations of corrupt practices, including alleged sleaze, money laundering and other financial crimes.

The firm argued that, despite the seriousness of the allegations and what it said was an earlier commitment by the EFCC to prosecute Atiku after he left office, no prosecution had taken place.

It said the former vice-president was protected by constitutional immunity while in office but contended that the immunity should no longer prevent prosecution after he left office.

The lawyers described the continued non-prosecution of the case as a “deliberate dereliction of duty” and alleged that the situation amounted to a violation of the law establishing the anti-graft agency.

They further argued that the case had become a reference point that, in their view, portrayed the EFCC as unwilling to pursue corruption cases involving high-profile individuals.

The petition also referred to an investigation reportedly conducted by the United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which, according to the lawyers, examined the same matter and produced a report dated February 4, 2010.

Sagitarian Law Firm urged the EFCC to reactivate its 2006 report and the cited US Senate report as the basis for the immediate prosecution of the former vice-president.

“Prosecution of this case will represent one of the greatest milestone achievements of your anti-corruption body,” the firm stated in the petition.

The lawyers gave the EFCC 14 days to act, warning that failure or refusal by the commission to take action would lead their client to commence legal proceedings against the commission.

Atiku Reacts

Reacting, Atiku said that when those defending President Bola Tinubu’s government could no longer explain why food, transportation, electricity, rent, education, insecurity and healthcare were increasingly beyond the reach of ordinary families, they rummaged through 20-year-old files looking for an escape route.

“Let us not rewrite history. The Obasanjo administration did not protect me. At the height of our political disagreement, these matters travelled through the EFCC, an administrative panel, the National Assembly and the courts. The machinery of the state was fully deployed and the political hostility was public. Yet no court convicted me on these allegations. That is the record.

“So what exactly has been discovered in 2026 that Nigeria did not hear 20 years ago? A petition is not a conviction, an acknowledgement stamp is not evidence of guilt, and repetition cannot magically become a judgment of court. Anyone with credible evidence against me should bring it out and test it before the law. I have issued that challenge before, and I repeat it today without hesitation.”

Drawing a contrast with how he said President Tinubu was handling a case in the US, Atiku said that while he was challenging people to come forward with evidence against him, “Tinubu actually went to an American court to intervene in a case seeking FBI and DEA records concerning him, citing privacy interests in records he argued should not be disclosed.”

He continued: “It is like a man ordering his neighbour to empty his pockets while keeping his own firmly zipped. A man seeking protection for his own records has no business waving petitions at somebody else. My challenge is simple: let every lawful record be opened and every allegation tested. Let Nigerians see who welcomes scrutiny and who reaches for privacy arguments when the files concern him.”

Atiku, however, added that none of the political exchanges would answer the questions Nigerians were asking about food, transportation, struggling businesses and hardship.

“The EFCC belongs to Nigeria, not to any government, party or candidate. It should investigate genuine wrongdoing wherever it finds it, but state institutions must never become emergency political weapons activated whenever those in power are losing the argument on governance.

“You cannot feed a hungry family with an EFCC petition. You cannot restore purchasing power with recycled allegations, and you cannot make life affordable by shouting ‘Atiku’ whenever Nigerians demand answers.”

Atiku said that in 2027, Nigerians would judge candidates by their records, the lives they were living and the future they offered, stressing: “Those afraid of that judgment may continue rummaging through the archives. We are facing the Nigerian people.”

2027 Election Not Behind My Petition, Says Agbonayinma

When asked by LEADERSHIP Weekend why he was seeking a revisit of the case, Agbonayinma dismissed suggestions that his petition was politically motivated, insisting that the move had nothing to do with the 2027 general elections but was aimed at ensuring accountability.

He said he merely reminded the anti-graft agency of an investigation previously conducted by the EFCC following a request from the United States to the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

He said the investigation was carried out under the leadership of former EFCC chairman Nuhu Ribadu.

Agbonayinma alleged that although the investigation had been concluded, prosecution could not proceed because the then vice-president enjoyed constitutional immunity.

“I am not the one who initiated the investigation. What I have done is to remind the authorities of what happened and ask why they have not done their job. The report has remained there all these years, and I believe Nigerians deserve to know why,” he said.

Addressing claims that the petition was timed to coincide with political realignments ahead of the 2027 elections, Agbonayinma dismissed the allegations, maintaining that justice should not be tied to the electoral calendar.

“Does it matter what time? This has nothing to do with 2027. People involved should be investigated and held accountable where necessary. Justice should not be delayed because elections are approaching,” he stated.

He further claimed that individuals linked to the alleged case in the United States had already faced prosecution, questioning why those allegedly connected to the matter in Nigeria had not been subjected to similar legal scrutiny.

“Why are people in America prosecuted and jailed while those involved here are walking freely? That is what should embarrass us as a nation,” Agbonayinma said.

The former lawmaker also rejected insinuations that he was acting on behalf of any political interest, describing such claims as baseless.

“Those asking whether I am being sponsored may themselves have been sponsored to ask such irrelevant questions. What matters are the facts, the investigation conducted by the United States and the EFCC, not who is speaking,” he said.

Agbonayinma maintained that his intervention was motivated by the need to strengthen the fight against corruption, arguing that Nigerians continue to bear the consequences of what he described as alleged mismanagement of public resources.

He insisted that reopening the matter should be viewed as a pursuit of justice rather than a political exercise, stressing that accountability should apply to everyone, irrespective of status or political ambition.