Atiku, Obi Unite in Fresh Bid to Unseat Tinubu as 2027 Election Campaign Heats Up

As Nigeria’s economic crisis deepens, opposition leaders launch coordinated attacks on President Bola Tinubu’s policies, foreign trips, and governance record—but internal coalition fractures threaten their unity

The 2027 Nigerian presidential election is rapidly taking shape as a battle of words, with key opposition figures Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi launching coordinated attacks on President Bola Tinubu over what they describe as worsening economic hardship, misplaced priorities, and governance failures. The two former presidential candidates, who lead different political platforms—the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) respectively—have intensified their criticism of the current administration. Their latest offensive comes as President Tinubu embarks on another three-week holiday in Europe, a decision both leaders have questioned amid growing domestic challenges. Atiku and Obi are urging Nigerians to reject the incumbent administration at the polls, framing the 2027 election as a critical opportunity to change the country’s trajectory. However, their ability to present a united front remains complicated by internal political maneuvering and coalition fractures.

In a pointed statement released on Tuesday, Atiku Abubakar made it clear that his criticism of President Tinubu transcends political rivalry. The former vice president insisted that the central issue confronting Nigeria is not about personalities but about the inability of millions of citizens to afford basic necessities. “Tinubu, the issue is not Atiku. The issue is that Nigerians can no longer afford to live,” Atiku said. He accused the president of devoting a substantial portion of his recent social media statements to attacking economic positions without directly naming him. Atiku emphasized that his concern lies with ordinary Nigerians struggling with rising costs across multiple sectors, from food and transportation to education and healthcare. He insisted that the success of any economic policy should ultimately be measured by its tangible impact on the daily lives of ordinary citizens, not by macroeconomic indicators that bear no resemblance to the realities on the ground.

Atiku’s criticism centered on the government’s economic reforms, particularly the petrol subsidy removal policy. He pointed to Nigeria’s current fuel price of approximately N1,400 per litre, comparing it unfavorably with other oil-producing nations such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Algeria, Angola, the United Arab Emirates, and Libya, where petrol sells at significantly lower rates—in Libya’s case, roughly N34 per litre despite that country’s political instability. “How did your celebrated reform leave Nigerians paying vastly more for fuel while enjoying a lower standard of human development?” Atiku asked. “That is not merely a pump-price debate. It is an affordability scandal.” The former vice president argued that high petrol prices affect virtually every aspect of the economy—transportation, agriculture, food distribution, manufacturing, and household expenses—because costs are passed through various stages of the supply chain before reaching consumers. He contended that this cascading effect means that ordinary Nigerians bear the brunt of policy decisions made without adequate consideration for their welfare.

READ ALSO:

• We were offered $3m to drop Tinubu records campaign — US firm
• NDA Releases 78th Regular Combatant Course Admission List, Sets Reporting Date
• Ogogo’s N25m Surfaces After Death, Ilaro Chief Imam Returns Actor’s Money

Atiku proposed an alternative approach through his Atiku Economic Recovery Plan (AERP) , which he said would reduce costs at their source rather than allow prices to rise before government intervention through palliatives. Under his proposal, Nigerian crude would be supplied for domestic refining under a capped, transparently budgeted framework, with refined products independently audited and monitored to ensure consumers benefit directly from lower fuel costs. He argued that reduced transportation costs would lower prices for food and manufactured goods, allowing families to retain more income for essentials like rent, education, and healthcare. “The economics is straightforward,” Atiku explained. “Reduce fuel costs and you reduce pressure on transportation. Reduce transportation costs and you reduce the cost of moving tomatoes, rice, yam, livestock and manufactured goods. Reduce those costs and more of a worker’s income remains available for food, rent, education and healthcare. That is structural relief.”

The Presidency has pushed back strongly against Atiku’s proposals. Critics within the administration accused the former vice president of policy inconsistency, noting that he previously supported subsidy removal. A Tinubu support group, the PBAT Door-to-Door Movement, slammed Atiku’s criticism, describing him as a “serial presidential contestant without direction.” They argued that Atiku’s proposal to return to a form of subsidy demonstrates a “serious ignorance on governance and economy” and represents an opportunistic reversal of his own previous positions. The administration maintained that its reforms, while painful in the short term, are necessary for long-term economic stability and growth, and that any return to subsidy would undermine the progress made so far.

Atiku also rejected the government’s reliance on the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) as evidence that education has become affordable under the current administration. “Celebrating NELFUND as proof that education has become affordable under your government is like setting school fees on fire and then boasting that you lent students a bucket of water,” Atiku said. “A student loan is not a scholarship. It is a liability.” He argued that his approach would focus on reducing the underlying cost of education while providing forgiveness for qualifying student debts, insisting that “education should open doors, not mortgage the future.” He further challenged the Federal Government to publish details supporting its claim that his proposed intervention could negatively affect NELFUND, workers’ salaries, or the minimum wage, demanding that Nigerians be shown, line by line, how a transparently budgeted subsidy tied to Nigerian crude and domestic refining would suddenly empty NELFUND or workers’ pay packets.

READ ALSO:

• ‘Rich Dad Poor Dad’ Author Robert Kiyosaki Reveals He Is $1.2 Billion in Debt
• Lagos Cleric, 74, Remanded Over Alleged Defilement of 9-Year-Old Granddaughter
• 2027: Atiku vows to review NELFUND, forgive qualifying student loans

Atiku also called for a comprehensive reconciliation of nearly N30 trillion identified across Federation Account revenues, deductions, savings, and transfers, as well as transparency over Import Duty Exemption Certificate approvals covering approximately N34 trillion worth of imports in 2025. He demanded clear explanations of what measurable improvements Nigerians received in return for the sacrifices associated with subsidy removal, questioning why relief measures were only being promised “in the next few weeks” as the 2027 election approaches. He accused the administration of offering what he described as “a temporary dose of political anaesthesia” after years of economic hardship, asking pointedly: “So when you suddenly announce that relief is coming ‘in the next few weeks,’ Nigerians are entitled to ask: Why now?”

Peter Obi, the NDC presidential candidate, launched a separate but complementary attack on President Tinubu’s leadership style, focusing particularly on the president’s frequent foreign trips and vacation habits. Obi expressed concern that President Tinubu had left the country for another holiday at a critical moment when Nigeria faces serious economic and security challenges, including parents unable to afford food for their children, families struggling with transportation costs, communities ravaged by insecurity, thousands of children unable to access education, and the reported abduction of approximately 600 Nigerians, predominantly women, children, and elderly persons, during Juma’at prayers in Niger State. “Yet, at this critical moment, the President has left the country for another holiday,” Obi said, contrasting the president’s absence with the daily struggles of ordinary Nigerians who have nowhere to escape from the nation’s mounting problems.

Obi raised concerns over reported government expenditure on presidential trips and related travel expenses, alleging that between June 2023 and April 2026, government expenditure on presidential travel amounted to approximately N37.64 billion, while President Tinubu reportedly spent approximately 261 days outside Nigeria during this period. In stark contrast, he claimed that only N36 million was released to the Federal Ministry of Health in 2025 despite a capital allocation of N218 billion. “This is the calamity befalling our country today,” Obi declared, arguing that a government that can spend billions on presidential travel while critical sectors remain underfunded should not be allowed to continue in office. He insisted that leadership is fundamentally about setting the right priorities and urged Tinubu to focus on addressing the challenges confronting Nigerians rather than repeatedly travelling abroad.

READ ALSO:

• Nollywood Actress Atinuke Kareem Dies After Brave Battle with Breast Cancer
• Two Teenagers Drown in Kaduna as Heavy Flooding Submerges Communities
• Nigeria’s Opposition Coalition Faces Critical Test as Key Leaders Skip Unity Summit

Obi advocated for greater patronage of domestic tourism, suggesting that Nigerian presidents should lead by example by vacationing within the country. “I look forward to a Nigeria where our President can vacation in Kano, Katsina, Sokoto, Cross River State, Bauchi, Ebonyi, and many other destinations across our country,” he said. He argued that tourism could create jobs and support multiple sectors including hospitality, transportation, agriculture, entertainment, crafts, and small businesses, while generating investment and foreign exchange. “Tourism creates jobs. It supports hospitality, transportation, agriculture, entertainment, crafts, and small businesses. It brings investment and foreign exchange and allows communities to benefit directly from their natural and cultural assets,” Obi explained. He criticized what he described as the practice of exporting Nigeria’s wealth while importing pleasures that could be enjoyed within the country, stating that “we cannot continue to export our wealth and import our pleasures while our own enormous potential remains neglected.”

Obi also referenced his partnership with Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, whom he described as his running mate and partner in the opposition movement. “We deserve leadership that puts Nigeria first; leadership that cares and plans for a better Nigeria. That is the kind of leadership that the partnership between H.E. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso and me will bring,” Obi said, presenting their alliance as a viable alternative to the current administration.

Despite the coordinated attacks on President Tinubu, the opposition coalition faces significant internal challenges. The reported “unification” of opposition figures is more complex than it appears, with public disagreements and strategic maneuvering among leaders. As of mid-2026, there were reports of public disputes within the African Democratic Congress (ADC) coalition, with accusations of being “regional players” and a lack of cohesion affecting the coalition’s credibility. In a significant development, Peter Obi and Rabiu Kwankwaso reportedly left the ADC coalition to join another opposition platform, the National Democratic Coalition (NDC) . This new alliance, dubbed the “OK Movement,” is seen as a direct challenge to Atiku Abubakar’s influence, a bid to reshape the opposition landscape for the 2027 election, and a reflection of the feud between Atiku and his former boss, Olusegun Obasanjo, who allegedly opposed Atiku’s presidential nomination and backed Obi.

Former Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose commented on the opposition’s challenges, noting that “Atiku has lost already; Obi has lost already” unless a “miracle” brings them together. He also noted that some in the North are aggrieved that Kwankwaso is deputizing for Obi, reflecting the regional and ethnic tensions that continue to complicate opposition politics in Nigeria. The ASHE Foundation think-tank argued that while Atiku is criticized for a U-turn on subsidy policy, his stance, along with Tinubu’s and Obi’s, is rooted in “neoliberal ideology” that fails the masses, advocating instead for a “social democracy” approach that prioritizes state subsidies to protect citizens and boost the economy. These ideological differences, combined with personal rivalries, present significant obstacles to any unified opposition campaign.

The next presidential election is scheduled for January 16, 2027. As of August 2026, commentators were already expressing strong confidence in President Tinubu’s re-election prospects while criticizing the preparedness of opposition figures. The success of any opposition bid will depend on resolving internal disputes among leaders, settling on a consensus candidate and clear platform, presenting a unified front to voters, developing credible alternatives to current policies, and mobilizing voters effectively across diverse regions. The 2027 election campaign is likely to be dominated by issues of economic recovery and cost of living, the fuel subsidy debate, security challenges, education and healthcare funding, foreign policy and Nigeria’s international standing, and governance transparency and anti-corruption efforts. For Nigerian voters, the choice will ultimately be between an administration that argues its painful reforms are necessary for long-term stability and an opposition that promises immediate relief and a different approach to governance—but whose internal divisions raise questions about its ability to deliver on its promises.

Atiku, Obi Unite in Fresh Bid to Unseat Tinubu as 2027 Election Campaign Heats Up