Breaking: Atiku Accused Tinubu of Politicising ICC Tribunal Ruling
- Atiku Abubakar accused the APC Campaign Council of misrepresenting the outcome of the Mambilla arbitration ruling
- His spokesman, Phrank Shaibu, issued a press statement on September 18, 2026, demanding APC cite exact tribunal paragraphs
- Atiku also drew a contrast between the Mambilla claims and the 1993 US court forfeiture decree against President Tinubu
PAY ATTENTION: Find it fast with our new search feature at Legit.ng!
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the All Progressives Congress (APC) Campaign Council of twisting the outcome of the Mambilla arbitration to fabricate a corruption verdict that the tribunal never actually delivered.
In a statement released on September 18, 2026, by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku called on the APC to identify the specific paragraph in the tribunal's final award where he was found to have collected a bribe, directed former Power Minister Olu Agunloye to award the Mambilla contract to Sunrise Power and Transmission Company, or abused his office in any way connected to the project.
Source: Twitter
"There is no such finding," Atiku said in the statement.
What the tribunal actually found
Atiku acknowledged that the tribunal examined a $500,000 transfer made by Leno Adesanya through China Castle Investments to Jennifer Douglas, and that the arbitrators rejected Adesanya's explanation that the payment arose from a foreign-exchange transaction. However, he argued that dismissing Adesanya's account is a far cry from concluding that Atiku personally received a bribe or used his position to secure the contract for Sunrise.
He added that the arbitration proceedings involved Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited, Adesanya and the Federal Republic of Nigeria as parties. The tribunal dismissed Sunrise's claims and ordered Sunrise and Adesanya to reimburse Nigeria for 75 per cent of its legal fees. No liability, damages or costs were imposed on Atiku.
Atiku also pushed back against claims that he "chose to stay away" after being summoned by the tribunal, saying the reported contents of the award do not show that the tribunal ordered him to testify or that he disobeyed any such directive. He noted that former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Muhammadu Buhari, as well as former ministers Babatunde Fashola and Suleiman Adamu, appeared on behalf of Nigeria, but said their participation could not be used to suggest he was called and refused to attend.
Atiku turns focus to Tinubu's US court record
Atiku drew a sharp contrast between the Mambilla allegations and President Bola Tinubu's 1993 case in the United States. He noted that on October 4, 1993, Judge John A. Nordberg of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ordered the forfeiture of $460,000 held in an account in Tinubu's name, with the court stating the funds "represent proceeds of narcotics movement or were involved in financial transactions" in violation of federal law.
Atiku was careful to note the legal boundaries of that case, acknowledging it was a civil forfeiture against property and not a criminal conviction. But he said the contrast with his own situation was telling.
He challenged the APC to apply the same legal precision to the Mambilla award that its officials demand when discussing the President's US record.
He said the 2027 election should ultimately turn on issues such as the cost of living, jobs and security, not on campaign distortions.
Source: Legit.ng
