Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the All Progressives Congress Presidential Campaign Council (APC PCC) of distorting the outcome of the Mambilla arbitration, saying the party took a tribunal award and presented it to Nigerians as a corruption verdict against him, despite no such verdict being delivered.
In a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, on Friday, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate said the APC’s claims rested on a flawed assumption — that because he served as Vice President under the Obasanjo administration, every action taken by that government must be attributed to him. He cited his public opposition to the controversial third-term agenda pursued during the same administration as evidence that this logic does not hold.
Atiku said he was not part of the technical process that evaluated proposals and recommended Sunrise Power and Transmission Company for the Mambilla contract, nor did he sit on the procurement panel or award the contract. He challenged the APC to show any instruction or intervention linking him to the process, or point to any paragraph in the tribunal’s award where such influence was found.
He denied the specific allegations being circulated — that he collected a $500,000 bribe, instructed former Power Minister Olu Agunloye to award the contract to Sunrise, abused his office, or took part in a corrupt conspiracy — stating plainly that no such finding exists in the tribunal’s award.
According to Atiku, the tribunal reviewed a $500,000 transfer from Leno Adesanya, through China Castle Investments, to Jennifer Douglas, and rejected Adesanya’s explanation that the funds arose from a foreign-exchange transaction due to lack of documentary evidence. However, he argued that rejecting Adesanya’s explanation is not the same as finding that he received a bribe or used his office to secure the contract for Sunrise.
He also disputed claims that he ignored a tribunal summons, stating he was neither a party to the arbitration nor a witness who testified before it. He noted that while former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari, along with former ministers Babatunde Fashola and Suleiman Adamu, took part in Nigeria’s defence, their participation does not mean he was summoned and failed to appear.
Atiku pointed out that the arbitration was strictly between Sunrise, Adesanya and the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The tribunal dismissed Sunrise’s claims and ordered the company and Adesanya to reimburse Nigeria for 75 percent of its legal costs, with no damages or liability imposed on him personally.
Drawing a comparison with President Bola Tinubu’s 1993 U.S. court case, Atiku noted that matter progressed from allegation to a formal forfeiture ruling by a federal judge, unlike his own situation, which he says remains at the level of unproven allegation.
He called on the APC to publish the exact portions of the tribunal award it claims support its accusations, insisting that Nigerians deserve to see the actual record rather than political interpretations of it.
Atiku added that the controversy should not distract from issues he considers central to the 2027 election — the cost of living, jobs, security, and the economic record of the Tinubu administration.
READ ALSO:
- Tinubu, Macron Renew Nigeria-France Ties at Élysée Dinner
- Atiku Slams APC PCC, Says Mambilla Tribunal Never Found Him Guilty
- ADC Demands Probe Into Deaths Of 37 Miners In Niger Custody
- Joseph Momodu Lists Requirements for Joining US Army, Warns Against Scams
- Charly Boy celebrates as daughter Adaeze gets engaged to female partner
