Dele Momodu accuses Tinubu of repackaging Abiola’s manifesto - Newstrends
Connect with us

Politics

Dele Momodu accuses Tinubu of repackaging Abiola’s manifesto

Published

on

Dele Momodu, publisher of Ovation magazine, has accused Bola Tinubu, presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), of repackaging the manifesto of MKO Abiola.

The APC’s presidential candidate released his 80-page manifesto tagged ‘Renewed Hope 2023’ on Friday.

The ruling party promised to solve Nigeria’s security and economic problems if reelected next year.

Momodu — who is the director of strategic communications of the PDP presidential campaign — criticised the document in an article published on Sunday.

In the article titled ‘APC: Renewed hope or forlorn hope?’, he said the document is filled with “half-thoughts, poor reasoning, and copied notes” from Abiola’s ‘Hope ’93’ manifesto.

Abiola was the presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the 1993 election.

He was adjudged to have won the presidential poll before it was annulled by Ibrahim Babangida, then head of state.

Momodu emphasised the difference between Abiola and Tinubu, describing the latter’s presidential bid as a “forlorn hope”.

He said the manifesto was “an insult to the sensibility and needs of Nigerians” and accused the authors of “copy and paste”.

 

The full article:

“After carefully reading through the much-awaited APC Presidential Campaign Manifesto that was released over the weekend, we cannot but conclude that the elephant has given birth to an ant. After such a long delay, what the APC Presidential candidate has come up with is a series of platitudes, half-thoughts, poor reasoning, and copied notes packaged and presented as “Renewed Hope”. The APC and its Presidential candidate, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, could not even come up with something original: “Renewed Hope 2023.” Really? This is again, another attempt by the APC candidate to appropriate Bashorun MKO Abiola’s Legacy. It would be more salutary if he were to run on his own steam instead of copying the memory of a man whose life trajectory was uncommon and whose hope for Nigeria was noble. And the APC candidate should be reminded that 1993 is far different from 2023,” the Ovation publisher said.

“The late MKO Abiola was known for industry and brilliance. Shall we ask what the APC candidate is known for? Whereas MKO’s Hope ‘93 was a genuine course; for the APC and Nigerians, it’s a forlorn hope ~ and that’s the message of Bola Tinubu and the APC campaign in 2023

“In all honesty, the 80-page document that the APC has put together comes across as a little more than an insult to the sensibility and needs of Nigerians.

“At a time when the country is in dire need of clear leadership with vision and courage, all the APC seems capable of doing is to generally copy and paste regurgitated ideas of others with nothing original or breathtaking. Asiwaju says he “knows the way”. With due respect, he does not. On more than one occasion, he has advertised himself as the architect of the victory of the APC in 2015. Their party’s slogan then was “Change.”

 

“In eight years, they have not been able to change anything positively. They have led Nigeria into a ditch. Inflation is close to 21%. Unemployment rate is 33%. The Naira is one of the worst-performing currencies against the dollar in the world. The suicide rate in the country has risen terribly, because the people have lost hope. Divorce rate too because the APC and its leaders have castrated families, and ruined “the other room:”. Thus, they have worsened the condition of Nigerians. Now, in 2022, Tinubu says he wants to take Nigerians on a journey. A journey to nowhere, most certainly; or, to be precise – to perdition. A week ago, he promised that he would ensure the continuity of the current administration. What does he want to continue? If I may ask: the poverty, agony and cluelessness that the APC have imposed on Nigerians?

 

Advertisement

“Like a crafty student trying to avoid being caught in the act of plagiarism, the authors of the document have tried to rewrite some unoriginal ideas. The authors of the document do not only offend Nigerians with their collection of cliches and pedestrian ideas but they offend, expose and indict the APC candidate Chief Bola Tinubu. I urge you in the spirit of fairness to interrogate what the APC calls a manifesto. You will see that they are promising exactly what they have not been able to achieve in eight years.

“Chief Bola Tinubu is not new to Nigerian politics. It is sad that he allowed some people to copy and repackage, without tact or grace, the Abiola Hope ’93 manifesto and mixed it with the 2015 APC/Buhari manifesto for him. They even have the impudence to tag it ‘Renewed Hope’. Nigerians do not need a copy and paste manifesto. They want details and original ideas. The way this country is right now, offering the people empty promises would not take us forward. The question for every Presidential candidate is how? How will you solve the problem? We all know what the problem is. Tell us how? For eight years, Bola Tinubu has projected himself as the power behind the throne. His party has failed to lead Nigeria forward. They must stop blaming the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). They must stop blaming the world and COVID 19. The duty of government is to provide leadership and solve problems. Leadership is about managing people and resources. Nigeria urgently requires a leader with exemplary capacity and ability to lead a nation in confusion with distinction and never with untested experimentation. We’ve already gone through calamitous experiments in the last eight years. The APC government is the only government that blames others and the past for its lack of innovation and creativity.

 

“I insist that the authors of the APC manifesto exposed and indicted both APC and Chief Bola Tinubu. The authors of the document, whoever they are, seem so disrespectful of Nigerians that they do not seem to care or know that Nigerians will ask where was Chief Bola Tinubu and his running mate when the current administration was getting things wrong with a similar game plan and manifesto? What did they and other APC members say or do in private or public to warn the government about their underperformance? What did they say or do in private or public to remind the outgoing APC administration that they failed to keep the promises they made in 2015? What advice or suggestions did they offer the outgoing administration to keep the lives and properties of Nigerians secure? What advice or suggestions did they give to grow our economy, create wealth and jobs? What strategies did they offer the outgoing administration to fight corruption? Were they just patiently and cynically waiting for the current administration to fail so they can say “I can do it”? Were they too scared or too engrossed with their ambition to tackle the government for the sake of Nigeria?

“I have used the phrase “authors of the document” advisedly because the APC is well-known to dial back, even on its own promises and it is one party whose candidates may not even know the content of their own manifestoes. After the 2015 general elections, the APC openly rejected some of the promises in the party’s manifesto, and that was long after they had been declared winner. This is probably why their 2023 manifesto this time around is long on promises and short on details. As a concerned citizen, I don’t think Nigerians should be taken on another bad ride.

“No other election in recent Nigerian history can be more important than the 2023 elections. The time for progress has come, and 2023 must be a referendum on the APC. My appeal is that voters must vote wisely. And I hope that going forward, Chief Tinubu would make himself available to attend debates and respond to questions that would be raised to do so, and when he does so, he should please refrain from his predilection to reduce serious conversations to vague proverbs and metaphors. Nigerians are not looking for a ‘dibia’. They want a leader with a clarity of purpose and vision.”

 

Loading

Politics

2027: Atiku Vows to Reopen Borders, Develop Southern Ports if Elected

Published

on

2027: Atiku Vows to Reopen Borders, Develop Southern Ports if Elected

2027: Atiku Vows to Reopen Borders, Develop Southern Ports if Elected

The ADC presidential candidate says border closures have crippled transborder trade, pushed young Nigerians into bankruptcy, and worsened insecurity.

Former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC)Atiku Abubakar, has pledged to reopen Nigeria’s land borders and develop port infrastructure in the southern part of the country if elected in the 2027 general election. He made the promise while addressing supporters in a video shared online on Friday by ADC chieftain Dele Momodu.

Atiku argued that the closure of Nigeria’s borders with neighbouring countries, initially implemented in August 2019 under former President Muhammadu Buhari, has dealt a devastating blow to transborder trade and contributed to widespread unemployment, particularly among young Nigerians. He noted that several northern states share borders with Cameroon, Chad, Niger Republic, and Benin Republic, making cross-border commerce a vital part of the region’s economic activities. “The Northern states is bordering Cameroon, Chad, Niger, Benin Republic. And you close all those borders. All our young men who are doing trading between these countries, they carry goods across, they do this and that, all what we call transborder trade is a legitimate business,” Atiku said.

He painted a stark picture of the economic consequences, claiming that many young entrepreneurs who had built businesses with capital running into millions of naira, and who employed others, had been forced into bankruptcy following the border restrictions. According to him, this loss of livelihoods has directly contributed to the country’s security challenges. “All the upcoming young men and women who used to have a capital of 10 million, 20 million, and they were employing two, three other people, and then all of them went bankrupt and unemployed. How can there be security?” he asked. He then declared, “So I said I am going to reopen the borders and I will.”

READ ALSO:

Beyond reopening land borders, Atiku also outlined plans to improve port facilities in the South and South-East to create a better balance in the handling and transportation of imported goods across the country. He said he had already begun exploring this by engaging shipping and port development companies in Europe during his last campaign. “During the last campaign, I went across to Europe to discuss with shippers and ship development companies how we can together develop South and South-Eastern ports so that there is balance as far as importation of goods and transportation of goods are concerned,” he stated.

The former vice president argued that developing ports in places like Calabar, Uyo, and Port Harcourt would significantly reduce the time and cost of transporting goods to the North-East. He used his own experience as an example, noting that he has a factory in Yola, Adamawa State, and currently faces significant logistical hurdles because his containers must come through Lagos. He illustrated, “So when, if I drop my container in Calabar or in Uyo or in Port Harcourt, it will just take me 24 hours to take the container to Yola. But right now, it takes me not less than two months to take my container from Lagos because you have to cross over from South-West, you go to North-East, and then there is even no road.”

Atiku’s proposal has sparked mixed reactions online, with some Nigerians supporting the plan as a practical economic strategy that could boost trade and create jobs. However, critics have raised concerns about security implications and the potential threat to local investors from increased imports, while others dismissed the promise as familiar campaign rhetoric. The border closure policy, initiated in 2019, was justified by the Federal Government as a measure to curb large-scale smuggling of rice, poultry, petroleum products, and other commodities, as well as the movement of illegal arms and drugs. It was also aimed at encouraging domestic agricultural production. Economists, however, have noted that the policy failed both efficiency tests, enriching a handful of manufacturers while leaving consumers poorer and the wider economy weaker. The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) also attributed renewed inflationary pressure to the border closure, with food inflation hitting record highs during the period.

Although the administration of President Bola Tinubu has partially reopened some strategic corridors, such as the Kamba and Tsamiya border posts linking Kebbi to Benin and Niger Republics in February 2026, several land borders remain restricted or under tight controls. The reopening of the Kamba and Tsamiya routes was described as a stroke of economic diplomacy that restored economic life to border communities, with over 2,000 stranded trucks beginning to move freely. However, concerns remain over smuggling and the sustainability of the policy.

2027: Atiku Vows to Reopen Borders, Develop Southern Ports if Elected

Loading

Continue Reading

Politics

Fuel Subsidy: Atiku’s Third U-Turn in One Week Exposes Political Posturing, Presidency Says

Published

on

Fuel Subsidy: Atiku's Third U-Turn in One Week Exposes Political Posturing, Presidency Says
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar

Fuel Subsidy: Atiku’s Third U-Turn in One Week Exposes Political Posturing, Presidency Says

The Presidency has again taken a swipe at former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, over what it describes as his third policy U-turn on petrol subsidy within one week, accusing him of political posturing and lacking understanding of petroleum economics. In a statement by the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the Presidency questioned whether Atiku was seriously proposing an economic policy or simply playing politics with the temporary discomfort Nigerians face.

The Presidency detailed what it described as three conflicting positions emerging from the Atiku camp within days. The first position came from Atiku’s spokesperson, Paul Ibe, who stated that the former vice president would restore petrol subsidy if elected and later phase it out, describing it as a temporary intervention to give Nigerians and businesses room to recover. The second position emerged when another senior aide, Phrank Shaibu, dismissed Ibe’s statement as an “unauthorised and misleading characterisation” of Atiku’s position. According to Shaibu, Atiku would not set a predetermined date for ending the subsidy, which would remain until domestic refining expanded, supply stabilised, competition deepened, and the market could deliver affordable prices without government support. The third position came when Atiku himself intervened hours later, insisting his position “has not changed” and that he would restore what he called a “targeted subsidy” if elected. He stated, “I will restore targeted subsidy and put purchasing power back in the hands of Nigerians.”

The Presidency argued the differing explanations amounted to more than semantics, describing it as “a serious policy contradiction.” Onanuga asked that if Atiku’s position has not changed, why did one of his principal aides say the subsidy would be temporary and phased out, why did another senior aide have to publicly disown that explanation and introduce a completely different framework based on market conditions, and why did Atiku then step in to reaffirm the original position? He added that Nigerians deserve clarity, not policy by trial and error.

READ ALSO:

The Presidency challenged Atiku to explain precisely what he means by “targeted subsidy,” including how much it will cost, who will benefit, how beneficiaries will be identified, how it will be funded, and what objective economic conditions will determine its eventual termination. The statement said that Nigerians cannot afford another opaque and potentially costly subsidy regime dressed up in new language.

Atiku has sought to draw a distinction between his proposal and the previous import-subsidy regime. According to his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, the former vice president is proposing “a targeted, capped, transparently budgeted and independently audited intervention” to support domestic refining and production, with measurable performance-based exit conditions. Shaibu explained that you do not remove scaffolding because the calendar says so; you remove it when the building can stand securely on its own. Atiku himself stated on his X platform that he would not restore the import racket but would restore relief.

The Presidency also faulted Atiku’s argument that competition and subsidy would automatically reduce petrol prices, noting that several factors influence pump prices, including international crude oil prices, exchange rates, refining costs, transportation, and distribution. The statement said that competition can improve efficiency and margins, but it cannot magically insulate Nigeria from global crude oil prices or other input costs.

The Presidency also rejected what it described as an oversimplification of the relationship between petrol prices and food inflation. While acknowledging that energy and transportation costs affect food prices, it argued that petrol prices alone have never caused food inflation. Onanuga said that agricultural productivity, insecurity, exchange rates, logistics, storage, flooding, input costs, money supply and supply constraints also matter. He added that a serious economic programme must address these factors, as President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been doing for the past three years, rather than reduce the entire cost-of-living crisis to petrol prices.

The Presidency further questioned Atiku’s suggestion that subsidy would “follow the barrel of crude,” pointing out that petrol accounts for only about 45 per cent of products from a refined barrel. According to the statement, diesel, which was deregulated in 2004 under the Obasanjo-Atiku administration, accounts for roughly 25 per cent of a barrel, while aviation fuel and kerosene make up about nine per cent. Onanuga asked whether Atiku would also subsidise these other products, since kerosene is used by the underprivileged to cook, and many homes and factories use diesel to power generators.

The subsidy debate has returned to the centre of the 2027 presidential contest, with Atiku seeking to position himself as the candidate who will make life more affordable for Nigerians. According to Shaibu, the choice is not removal of subsidy versus restoration of subsidy; it is Expensive Nigeria versus Affordable Nigeria. The Presidency, however, warned against what it called “policy somersaults, incoherence, destructive populism and election gimmicks,” saying the economy is too serious for such approaches.

Fuel Subsidy: Atiku’s Third U-Turn in One Week Exposes Political Posturing, Presidency Says

Loading

Continue Reading

metro

Probe Me Over $16bn Power Spending If You Have Evidence – Atiku Dares FG

Published

on

2027: Atiku Vows to Reopen Borders, Develop Southern Ports if Elected

Probe Me Over $16bn Power Spending If You Have Evidence – Atiku Dares FG

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has thrown down the gauntlet to President Bola Tinubu’s administration, demanding that it substantiate allegations linking him to alleged wrongdoing in the controversial $16 billion power sector expenditure or cease what he describes as a campaign of political distraction. In a statement released on Wednesday, August 26, 2026, by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku insisted that he should be investigated and prosecuted if the government possesses credible evidence against him, stressing that political accusations cannot replace proof. The former Vice President accused the Tinubu administration and its supporters of reviving decades-old allegations to divert public attention from pressing questions surrounding the management of government revenues following the removal of petrol subsidy.

Atiku noted that the National Assembly had previously investigated the power projects, but he was never invited to respond to any allegations of misconduct. “The National Assembly investigated the power projects. I was never invited to answer any allegation of wrongdoing,” he stated. He acknowledged that he chaired the National Council on Privatisation while serving as Vice President but clarified that he did not oversee the implementation of the power project. “Yes, I chaired the National Council on Privatisation as Vice President. But on the power project, I disagreed with its concept and did not preside over its implementation. The responsible minister did. The same applies to the Aluminium Smelter matter,” Atiku explained.

READ ALSO:

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate for the 2027 election declared that he had repeatedly made himself available for investigation since leaving office in 2007. “I have repeatedly asked to be investigated. I left office in 2007 and have spent much of the period since then opposing governments in power. If there is evidence that I stole public money, why has no government produced it before a court?” he queried. Atiku challenged the authorities to reopen the matter if they believed there was a genuine case against him. “It is still not too late. Investigate me. Invite me. Produce the evidence. Prosecute me if you have a case. But propaganda cannot substitute for evidence,” he said.

The former Vice President linked the renewed allegations to his persistent criticism of the Federal Government’s handling of the economic consequences of petrol subsidy removal. He argued that Nigerians had been promised that eliminating the subsidy would free funds for development, but citizens had instead faced higher costs of transportation, food, and other essentials. “Today, petrol is more expensive, transportation is more expensive, food is more expensive and the purchasing power of the Nigerian worker has been devastated,” he said. Atiku further questioned how additional government revenues were being deployed, alleging that tax incentives, waivers, credits, and concessions continued to benefit powerful economic interests. “So our question remains brutally simple: where is the people’s money?” he asked. He accused the government of hypocrisy for withdrawing economic relief from ordinary Nigerians while maintaining interventions that benefited major corporate interests. “You cannot take relief away from the poor, celebrate the resulting revenue and then tell the same impoverished citizens that government intervention on their behalf is economically irresponsible while interventions benefiting powerful interests are called incentives. That hypocrisy is precisely what we are challenging,” Atiku stated.

Atiku dismissed what he described as sponsored social media attacks, insisting they would not prevent him from demanding transparency over public finances. “The people who removed subsidy from the poor cannot frighten us into silence by resurrecting allegations that governments with all the investigative machinery of the Nigerian state have had nearly two decades to establish,” he declared. He challenged the government to either substantiate the allegations or address questions over the use of funds generated after subsidy removal. “If you have evidence against Atiku, bring it. If you have a case, prosecute it. But if you have neither, stop manufacturing distractions and answer Nigerians: You removed the subsidy. You collected the savings. Where is the money?” he demanded.

Probe Me Over $16bn Power Spending If You Have Evidence – Atiku Dares FG

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending